Other brands cannot say these things for the majority of their cameras either. Still they are sold.

Very rarely, it is about being the the best in a particular aspect.



I believe that's all people wanted to argue. Thanks for agreeing. I doubt anyone has a conspiracy theory.

I am sorry if you understand what the LL hands on was pointing out and I just was trying to illustrate. I will make a last effort.

Pana/olympus has the smaller camera and smaller lenses
Nikon has the most reliable AF system
Nikon has the best flash system
Nikon has the best High ISO camera
Nikon has the higher resolution camera (FF)
Canon has the higher resolution camera (APS-C)
Canon has the widest selection of lenses in production.

You can look for the small letter to try to make a point but these are facts.

From a Marketing point of view Pentax cant say any of this. That doesnt make the camera worst, it does it more difficult to sell.

I have seen quite a bit of people here complaining about the mistreatment of Pentax compare to others (that is a conspiracy theory). The reviewer is sloppy the content of the review was true.

Because the Pentax has a larger sensor and hence better images than some of those brands. And it has excellent prime lenses, on par with Leica. And it is an SLR not a rangefinder, with all the inherent advantages.

Go and explain that in one sentence. I will help you:
"Pentax the smallest SLR for enthusiasts with an APS-C sensor. You can have them smaller but the sensor would be also smaller."

I find that hard to sell. Try this now.

"Olympus/Panasonic: the smaller interchangeable lens camera in the market"

That is marketing gentleman (a professional would do a better job that mine). That is one of the points of the reviewer. He is talking about finding highlights in a product, you are talking about long explanations that are true in real-life but in the marketing world sounds to excuses

It should be obvious you are comparing apples with platypus.

It would be even more obvious if you took care to make an effort to understand other people point of views instead of throwing second-hand arguments to make points that dont address facts.

Pentax oversells nothing. In fact, one complaint that can consistently be leveled against them is their inability to properly sell any of their advantages. You are using hyperbole where it is least applicable.

I am talking from ignorance and I wish I had the warranty card from the camera right here. Please, if you have it, go to the warranty card and find the part where they say that malfunction due to weather inclemency is covered by the warranty. THAT, gentleman, would be selling. To say it is weather-sealed and not provide warranty against it is selling smoke.

That's right. Pentax has targeted a sweet spot where several beneficial characteristics come together in synergy. I have no idea what your problem is with that.

Should I remind you that I am not the one with problems here? You are the ones who are complaining about the lack of reason of a reviewer. You are the one who dont understand the point the reviewer was trying to make. I dont see anything wrong in the content of the review nor in the Pentax product. You seem to jump to the conclusion that I dont like the camera or Pentax. I think that it is a good camera in a good system. Nothing more nothing less. It is simply a good camera that it is not the best in anything in particular.

Any other gross generalisations you'd like to share?

At times you confound passion with hooliganism. Dont worry, it has a cure.

So after all of this you actually agree? I think there are other battles more worth fighting.

No actually I dont agree with most of the points the people were making here. The only think that i agree is that the reviewer is sloppy. He made valid points that Pentax would do well taking notes. I dont agree with reducing all the points to non-sense just because the writer is lazy. You can make a test in school and respond well to every question. But your language might be more poetic and the presentation better. Most of the people here are sticking to the later instead of understanding the essence.

Regarding the war, I have no war to fight. It seems that in your mind you do.

I am out of this. I know how this is end it is waste of energy.

God save Pentax!!!

[nostatic]

Because the Pentax has a larger sensor and hence better images than some of those brands. And it has excellent prime lenses, on par with Leica. And it is an SLR not a rangefinder, with all the inherent advantages.

What currently shipping Pentax lenses are "on par" with Leica?

Rangefinders also have inherent advantages. No perfect system or camera.

[MikePerham]

What currently shipping Pentax lenses are "on par" with Leica?

Not currently shipping, but as an aside, I recall an article many years ago where Herbert Keppler was discussing lens resolution and had a Pentax A50/1.7 and a Leica 50mm, can't remember the specs on the Leica, but I had (still have) the A50/1.7 so remembered that ...anyway, the Pentax at a fraction the price actually out resolved the Leica lens. Keppler also ranked the FA31 as one of the three best standard lenses produced.

The DA35 also seems to be creating quite a stir currently with the likes of Michael Johnson and Ctein, who often writes for TOP, anyway, I really like my copy.

[rparmar]

What currently shipping Pentax lenses are "on par" with Leica?

The FA Limiteds for a start. Plus I am sure the DFA50, DFA100, FA50, DA35, etc. I recall a review of the Leica mount FA43 that praised it to the heavens, and many say that's not even the best Pentax lens. Plus almost all the 645 and 6x7 lenses are great and would stand up to comparison with any other glass out there. (No reason to limit oneself to "currently shipping" since people still promote and use Leica items that were pulled decades ago and cost 10x or more what the Pentax items do.)

Rangefinders also have inherent advantages. No perfect system or camera.

Yes, but they have far more limitations. Personally I would never wish to use a TLR or rangefinder where I am constrained by parallax and limited in focal lengths. An SLR is far more a generalist camera system as I am sure you would agree.

[rparmar]

Should I remind you that I am not the one with problems here? You are the ones who are complaining about the lack of reason of a reviewer. You are the one who dont understand the point the reviewer was trying to make. I dont see anything wrong in the content of the review nor in the Pentax product. You seem to jump to the conclusion that I dont like the camera or Pentax. I think that it is a good camera in a good system. Nothing more nothing less. It is simply a good camera that it is not the best in anything in particular.

Gruoso, you are putting words in my mouth I never said and arguing with me over points I did not make. You go on about how the Pentax line is sold and marketed which has nothing to do with this review. You think that having a warranty card with a statement on it means Pentax is "overselling" that feature. That is incomprehensible.

I must wonder why you wish to defend a badly written article when you might instead defend the good ones. How do limited and blinkered perspectives help anyone?

God save Pentax!!!

Sorry, who's the zealot?

[MikePerham]

Yes, but they have far more limitations. Personally I would never wish to use a TLR or rangefinder where I am constrained by parallax and limited in focal lengths. An SLR is far more a generalist camera system as I am sure you would agree.

Well said ...and I just purchased a DA15 & FA77 to add to my DA35 to make up my light kit. I cogitated on perhaps buying the Pany GF1 and 20mm/f1.7 but opted to use the K-7 and limiteds instead for the reasons you stated. ...And, I don't have to switch gears as to which camera I am using.

[nostatic]

Well said ...and I just purchased a DA15 & FA77 to add to my DA35 to make up my light kit. I cogitated on perhaps buying the Pany GF1 and 20mm/f1.7 but opted to use the K-7 and limiteds instead for the reasons you stated. ...And, I don't have to switch gears as to which camera I am using.

GF1 isn't a rangefinder, and doesn't suffer from the limitations stated. So your real choice was:

OVF vs detachable EVF
bigger/heaver vs smaller/lighter
APS-C vs u4/3
higher price vs. lower price

There are certainly arguments on both sides of the fence. I still haven't bought a "medium quality" setup yet, and both of these options are on the table.

Sorry, who's the zealot?

That must be me

[MikePerham]

GF1 isn't a rangefinder, and doesn't suffer from the limitations stated. So your real choice was:

OVF vs detachable EVF
bigger/heaver vs smaller/lighter
APS-C vs u4/3
higher price vs. lower price

There are certainly arguments on both sides of the fence. I still haven't bought a "medium quality" setup yet, and both of these options are on the table.

I did not mean to suggest that m4/3 and a rangefinder had the same limitations, but both do have limitations, which though different, are not inherent in an DSLR. You are correct in the OVF vs EVF and the latter is still not at a level to compete with the DSLR OVF and I will take a bit bigger and higher price to give me the advantages of the DSLR ...the EVIL with something other than a pancake lens is really not that pocketable. I will wait for an APS-C compact with a fixed lens and priced at about 50% of the Leica.

My point is that I could not use a Canon or Nikon to substitute for a small compact camera such as the m4/3 models now appearing. They simply are too large and do not have the compact lenses to allow that. On the other hand, the K-7 and limiteds can make up a smallish compact field outfit with many advantages over the m4/3 EVIL cameras. Albeit, a bit larger, heavier and more expensive. But, sharing the same user interface as my main DSLR because the body is the same body.

[nostatic]

I did not mean to suggest that m4/3 and a rangefinder had the same limitations, but both do have limitations, which though different, are not inherent in an DSLR. You are correct in the OVF vs EVF and the latter is still not at a level to compete with the DSLR OVF and I will take a bit bigger and higher price to give me the advantages of the DSLR ...the EVIL with something other than a pancake lens is really not that pocketable. I will wait for an APS-C compact with a fixed lens and priced at about 50% of the Leica.

My point is that I could not use a Canon or Nikon to substitute for a small compact camera such as the m4/3 models now appearing. They simply are too large and do not have the compact lenses to allow that. On the other hand, the K-7 and limiteds can make up a smallish compact field outfit with many advantages over the m4/3 EVIL cameras. Albeit, a bit larger, heavier and more expensive. But, sharing the same user interface as my main DSLR because the body is the same body.

Understood, but you're being a little slanted in the analysis. You can't really say, "the EVIL with something other than a pancake lens is really not that pocketable" and then talk about K7 and ltd primes. Compare apples to apples...GF1 with 20/1.7 is significantly smaller than K7 with 35/2.8. If you put the kit zoom on both the GF1 is still a smaller.

But it is a trade-off because the K7 will give a better file than the GF1 - though it isn't as night/day as small sensor vs u4/3 or APS-C.

Agreed on having duplication of UI as an advantage. And I have argued previously that K7-40/2.8 is a pretty sweet street setup. There are tradeoffs though. The Pentax setup is almost 2x the price and is over 2x the weight. Panny has a faster lens, but no IS. Pentax has OVF, Panny has better live view implementation. I think the "dSLR advantages" are becoming less and less important, especially to a new generation of shooters.

[dylansalt]

From the mouth of the "new generation"

'Dad, compared to my my friends camera's, yours feels like a real camera, is just the right size and the pics have way better colors too" - 21 year old son

Even at his age he prefers a quality feel instead of all this dinky plastic stuff being produced.

Dylan

[Yonnie]

From the mouth of the "new generation"

'Dad, compared to my my friends camera's, yours feels like a real camera, is just the right size and the pics have way better colors too" - 21 year old son

Even at his age he prefers a quality feel instead of all this dinky plastic stuff being produced.

Dylan

Wasn't that simply music to your ears?

I had a similar experience a few years ago when my then 17-year-old son was using one of my *istDS bodies and taking full advantage of my LBA results. The school didn't have any dSLRs for the students' use--only a couple of film bodies. Eventually, one of his peers in the photography class brought in a digi reb loaned by his uncle. When my son came home, I heard: "Mom, classmate's camera is all plastic and feels cheap--like a toy camera."

[dylansalt]

Cool - nice to hear and yes definitely music to my ears that they can appreciate good camera design and build quality.

Dylan