Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-09-2009, 07:36 PM   #46

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
The only fact I see is that PENTAX not interested in FF camera.
The first of many D FA FF WR lenses to come.

Last edited by Adam; 12-09-2009 at 10:27 PM. Reason: resized
12-09-2009, 08:34 PM   #47
Veteran Member
ryan s's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,370
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Gee. Leica must be absolute crap to you guys.
Not very many lenses, and really expensive.
Agreed...and still people gladly pay $1200 for a 50mm f/2 Summicron lens...

A Pentax lens is a Pentax lens, just like Leicas are only Leicas.
QuoteOriginally posted by matiki Quote
Cheap has nothing to do with it. The issue is the value curve, which is shifting.

Which value curve is better?

That's my gripe.
You make sell charge less. Simple economics, and why our economy is in the toilet. When people won't pay $10 for something, you make it in China and charge $5. I know that I would (and do, when I can or need to) pay more for quality.

Less tech? Such as?

Has Canon made a new EF (NOT EF-S, aka "digital only" similar to a DA) lens in the last 10 years? 15? I really don't know, although I do know their EF lenses are old designs, just like your FA 50...which, consequently, is the same as your M 50. That's ironic...
QuoteOriginally posted by Ben_Edict Quote
I can understand the points the thread opener made. Yes, the choices with the Pentax system are limited, especially at the tele-end of lenses and there are fewer accessories. And we all discussed in depth the many strange business and product decisions, Pentax has made so far.

But try to step back and consider: why would you need three different lenses in the 70-300 range? I am pretty satisfied to have the choice between an affordable (55-300) and a high-end (60-250) lens. I could still go to Tamron or Sigma, to widen my choice.

For camera bodies: Yes, the K-7 has limitations, though it also has some very advanced features, which you simply do not get fromy any other manufacturer at a similar price. I am really convinced, that the K10, the later K20, the K-m and now the K-x and the K-7 always gave us more bang for considerably lower bucks, than the competition. It is no coincidence, that complaining people always muttered about the superiority of a Nikon D300 against a K20 (though even this is debatable), but somehow "forgot", that the price tage was more than 50% higher.

I wish for faster progress in building a complete Pentax system and I wish for a really pro camera. But at the end of the day, what counts is the final image - and here I cannot see any limitation induced by Pentax cameras on my results.

If I were constantly shooting under very dim light and needed high-ISO all the time, I would use Nikon. But I need ISO settings beyond 800 rarely and up to that, the K20 is good enough for my purpose.

I repeat, what I wrote above: if the final image is good enough, why complain or switch? If the final image is not good enough, improve.

For me, the only important problem, Pentax really has, is lack of customer service. At least here in Germany, the situation is extremely poor, since Pentax outsourced its service department to a company, that mainly services Canon - guess why I had to wait more than 6 weeks for a Pentax repair job... This alone will prevent any serious prospect from buying a 645D.

Great post. I suck at taking's definitely not the equipment.

I would hope that if they're going to have pro stuff that they would have a support system behind it. It would be nice if we knew what was going on, but where's the fun in that?
QuoteOriginally posted by AlexanderMayorov Quote
I dont have problems with my eyes, you can check my photos. Flickr: Alexander Mayorov's Photostream first 2 pages with Tamron 70-200 and Flickr: almaphinkg's Photostream

Main problem is that lens starts to hunt at low light. This problem is also with 50mm 1.4 and 1.7 . If you try to take photos in documentry style, trying not to create a scene but instead trying to catch the moments, AF is really important. Once you try to shoot in bar or maybe during celebration where people dont stand still and every moment is very important AF is main need for you. You cant stand with manual focus trying to catch someone.

AF is one of the cons. I can still accept Noisy photos but once they are out of focus its meaningless.
How did people take low-light pics before AF?

Same with sports/action...I see plenty of pre-AF images...
QuoteOriginally posted by pcarfan Quote
I used to think of FF's and the canikons having better AF-tracking and so on and wondering what I should do, but since I got my K-7 I don't even have the slightest desire to even think about other systems. I am just loving photography, all I want to do is shoot, shoot and shoot some more - I submit some of the best works to PPG and in two years I had 17 images with my K10D, but in just a few months I have 27 images with the K-7, the K-7 just begs to be used, especially with the quality Pentax primes. I still have severe bouts of LBA, but I absolutely don't care what other camera brands are up to, as I am 100% happy.
Crazy! Having just one would be the crown on a hobby
12-09-2009, 08:47 PM   #48
Veteran Member
Andi Lo's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,925
If what you need is not in pentax brand and you really have to have it (and have the money for it), then either switch or run dual... the camera is just a tool.

I personally would like to eventually own a 17mm + 24mm TS lens and abody to mount my takumars as a fullframe lens, so I will eventually acquire a full frame body (leaning to the 5dII). But for now my K10D + Sigma 10-20mm would have to suffice. After all the other combo cost around 7 times more

My reason to stay with pentax right now is mostly because I cant afford what I want in the other brands yet (full frame and the 17mm TS). There's really no reason for me to shoot other brands if I dont go full frame. K10d AF in good light is perfect; very fast and accurate. Low light AF is really not K10d's territory... I'm still debating whether I should get the K-x to improve my lowlight ISO performance or just save up until I can afford a true fullframe body.

Last edited by Andi Lo; 12-09-2009 at 08:53 PM.
12-09-2009, 09:20 PM   #49
Veteran Member

Join Date: Jun 2009
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,679
My plans have also changed since lens prices increased. I originally bought 4 lenses, a 35ltd, 43ltd, 77ltd & a 50-135. Had to return the 50-135 because it died an early death due to AF failure, sold the 43ltd, then traded the 35ltd to get another 43ltd. So right now I am down to just two lenses, well four counting the fun SMC Tak 50/2 & my Commie Russkie buddy the Helios MC 44k-4 58/2.

But my inital plan was the first four lenses then to add a 31ltd and another DA* as well as sell the K20D in order to get a K7 once it was release and the price dropped a several hundred off MSRP. Then the price increase hit, and so did life. But given the increase in price across the board, the last new lense I buy, and I might opt for a used copy, is the 31ltd. I do want to add some sort of f1.2 lense which will be used but the recent prices on them are insane high, nearly $600 for an A50/1.2 this past week or so on eBay and we are not talking collector quality copies, just sorta average to slightly above average though I think was was well below average. The prices on good used lenses are increasing because more people canot afford new and/or have no faith in SDM's longevity.

I sense my final Pentax based kit will be the three FA Ltd bags-o-silver, a 35ltd and I hope some sort of f1.2...and a K7....that will be it. If I were to want more I would look back at the 7D once the price drops, and the reason is, while USM lenses fail also, they have a solid track record and we do not read of mass failures of most EF/EF-S lenses over in that camp. I would, of course have far fewer lenses, but it is also possible to use M42's on the EF mount with an adapter so the MF options are essentially the same as for Pentax.

However I do not see me leaving the Pentax gear and will use it until it turns to dust because I truly enjoy the images, I am not sure why but to my eye, as untrained as it might be, but to my eye, the rendering with the lenses I have is exceptional and near enough, or actually BETTER, than what I see out of the high end glass I would buy in the Canon camp (yeah, they still let me come and visit even if my whole kit fits in a lunch pail...hehehehe...)

I will just troll the thrift shops, estate sales, pawn shops and hunt for old and broken camera stores in the middle of dust nowhere...but buying into new lenses where the cover charge opens at around $500 and climbs FAST to the $1k range is not why I came to the brand. It kinda scares me what a 31ltd will cost next year when I can afford one. The 35ltd will be more affordable but still quite expensive compared to my first copy. Thank goodness the K7 will keep dropping, well I assume it should anyway, who knows since the HoyaTax was added to the cost of Pentax gear.

It is disconcerting to know the people making these $1k lenses are among the lowest paid people on the planet. I love they now have good jobs, but still we all know these folks are NOT being paid well, possibably not well enough to afford the very camera gear they work on. I have become very conscious about ethical wages and work for people making the things I buy...and to be honest I feel sort of dirty knowing what people making some of the most expensive items we use on our daily lives. At least in Japan I knew the wokring folks were paid well and had good jobs. For that I WILL pay an extra $100/lens...but not when the engineer designing the new lenses is making $500/mo at the new HQ. Kinda tough to rationalize that away.

And, oh, do NOT get me going on HoyaTax's MAP agreements every retailer is required to sign or no HoyaTax gear to sell, this artifically elevates prices across the board.

I feel for the OP here, and I agree with pretty much everything. And honestly when I read the prices of all camera gear in other countries I am amazed anyone is willing to afford the stuff.

Whew....that was a lot of BS...hahahaha...seriously though, it is exactly what has been going through my head about Pentax since I learned Hoya bought Pentax and pretty much left Japan.

12-10-2009, 01:37 AM   #50
New Member

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Romania
Posts: 22
QuoteOriginally posted by nanok Quote
...the prices of the premium glass, at least in europe, are now (and have been for quite a while) ridiculous...

That`s right! The prices are way to high in Europe. I think it is not because of a different price policy for Europe, but rather the exchange rate dollar/euro/yen and import fees. I have ordered lens from US but adding the taxes, curency and shipping, I`ve got sensible the same price. So I stop investing for the moment.
12-10-2009, 02:24 AM   #51
Veteran Member
ghelary's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 617
The prices of lenses are like the rest of prices of electronics and high tech stuff in general.

First you have to bear in mind first that the prices in Europe are including the VAT, while prices in US are not, this makes up for a difference of around 20% (depending on the country)

Then Euro rose considerably against the dollar, on the begining of the 2000s, Euro was around 0.8 Dollar, now it's struggling to stay under 1.5 Dollar. Companies cannot ajust prices on live exchange rates. And if you were willing to pay 600€ for a lens in 2007 why wouldn't you pay the same price in 2009 ? In fact Japanses makers were forced to rise the prices because of the rise of Yen even compared to Euro.

But at the end of the day, price of high tech good in Europe are may be higher because people are used to those prices. This may change will the globalisation, and in fact prices are rising less in Europe than in US.

12-10-2009, 02:31 AM   #52
Veteran Member
SteveM's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,295
Pentax releases weather-resistant 100mm F2.8 Macro: Digital Photography Review

Re the folks in Turket dropping Pentax for FF Canikon.....New FF Pentax weather sealed lens....this is a life saver for Pentax. sealed. Why make a new FF DFA weather sealed lens for a crop sensor?

We have a FF DFA non weather sealed lens.

You make a FF weather sealed lens for a FF weather sealed camera. Do you think they will make a FF weather sealed film camera?.....NOT!
12-10-2009, 05:21 AM   #53
Site Supporter
Site Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,120
The cost of lenses is much debated. I think the answer is simple. Pentax needs to come out with a couple of cheaper primes in the 200 dollar range -- say a 35 f2 and a 50 f1.7. They will be all plastic and have no durability, but they will give photographers a taste for primes. The more expensive primes should stay more expensive. No one buys Canon L glass for cheap and in the same way, if there is durability and craftsmanship in one of Pentax's lens it is not a problem for them to ask higher prices for it.

I hope the issue is more with the lack of cheaper options than that Pentax has more expensive options available.

12-10-2009, 05:38 AM   #54
Veteran Member

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,168
QuoteOriginally posted by ryan s Quote

Has Canon made a new EF (NOT EF-S, aka "digital only" similar to a DA) lens in the last 10 years? 15? I really don't know, although I do know their EF lenses are old designs, just like your FA 50...which, consequently, is the same as your M 50. That's ironic...
I'm just getting tired of ignorance like this.

You want EF lenses released in the past 10 years?

How about a few examples (there are lots more):
17-40L (2002)
28-300L IS (2002)
24-105L IS (2005)
17L tilt-shift (amazing lens by the way) (2009)
800/5.6L IS (2008)
24-70L (2002)
85L (2006)

And oh yeah, they released a 100/2.8 macro with a new IS system just recently as well...
12-10-2009, 06:10 AM   #55
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,263
QuoteOriginally posted by ghelary Quote
The prices of lenses are like the rest of prices of electronics and high tech stuff in general.
Not really. Lenses are essentially hand made and doesn't enjoy the price drop experienced by mass produced electronics.
12-10-2009, 06:11 AM   #56
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,263
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The cost of lenses is much debated. I think the answer is simple. Pentax needs to come out with a couple of cheaper primes in the 200 dollar range -- say a 35 f2 and a 50 f1.7. .
It will never happen. Those days are long gone....
12-10-2009, 06:30 AM   #57
Veteran Member

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Colorado USA
Posts: 1,337
Here's the Canon Eos lens year&month release dates

Here's the Canon Eos lens year&month release dates to answer your observation that Canon has not released a new lens in "10years?15years?" Canon has been optimizing all their lenses for digital use since around 1997. And they never stopped producing full frame glass.

Example from bottom of list

"200902" : TS-E24mm f3.5L II means "2009 February"

The list of Canon dslrs starts in 1995, some 8 years before the 1st Pentax istD*:

QuoteOriginally posted by ryan s Quote

Has Canon made a new EF (NOT EF-S, aka "digital only" similar to a DA) lens in the last 10 years? 15? I really don't know, although I do know their EF lenses are old designs, just like your FA 50...which, consequently, is the same as your M 50. That's ironic...
Here is a chronological list of all the EF and EF-S lenses introduced since 1987. The information is all contained on Canon's Lens Museum site, although it's sorted by lens type and focal length there rather than by date, so it's difficult to see what came when.

All up, Canon have introduced 142 lenses since 1987 - 53 primes and 89 zooms. Of these, 130 have been EF mount and the remaining 12 EF-S. About half have since been discontinued (the oldest still in production are the 15mm Fisheye and the 28mm/2.8).

So here is the complete list - year and month (yyyymm) followed by the lens(es) introduced. An asterisk means it's in production as at June 2009:

198703 : EF50mm f/1.8
198703 : EF35-70mm f/3.5-4.5
198703 : EF35-105mm f/3.5-4.5
198703 : EF100-300mm f/5.6
198704 : EF15mm f/2.8 Fisheye *
198704 : EF28mm f/2.8 *
198705 : EF70-210mm f/4
198706 : EF100-300mm f/5.6L
198710 : EF135mm f/2.8 Soft Focus *
198711 : EF300mm f/2.8L USM
198711 : EF28-70mm f/3.5-4.5
198712 : EF50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro *
198712 : EF50-200mm f/3.5-4.5
198806 : EF28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 II
198806 : EF35-135mm f/3.5-4.5
198806 : EF50-200mm f/3.5-4.5L
198810 : EF35-70mm f/3.5-4.5A
198811 : EF24mm f/2.8 *
198811 : EF200mm f/1.8L USM
198811 : EF600mm f/4L USM
198812 : EF100-200mm f/4.5A
198904 : EF28-80mm f/2.8-4L USM
198909 : EF50mm f/1.0L USM
198909 : EF85mm f/1.2L USM
198909 : EF80-200mm f/2.8L
198910 : EF20-35mm f/2.8L
199003 : EF35-80mm f/4-5.6 PZ
199003 : EF35-135mm f/4-5.6 USM
199004 : EF100mm f/2.8 Macro
199006 : EF70-210mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
199006 : EF100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM *
199009 : EF35-80mm f/4-5.6
199010 : EF35mm f/2 *
199011 : EF80-200mm f/4.5-5.6
199012 : EF50mm f/1.8 II *
199103 : EF75-300mm f/4-5.6
199104 : EF400mm f/2.8L USM
199104 : TS-E24mm f/3.5L
199104 : TS-E45mm f/2.8 *
199104 : TS-E90mm f/2.8 *
199104 : EF35-105mm f/4.5-5.6
199110 : EF100mm f/2 USM *
199110 : EF28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 USM
199112 : EF14mm f/2.8L USM
199112 : EF200mm f/2.8L USM
199112 : EF300mm f/4L USM
199203 : EF500mm f/4.5L USM
199204 : EF35-80mm f/4-5.6 USM
199206 : EF20mm f/2.8 USM *
199206 : EF85mm f/1.8 USM *
199206 : EF35-105mm f/4.5-5.6 USM
199206 : EF75-300mm f/4-5.6 USM
199206 : EF80-200mm f/4.5-5.6 USM
199211 : EF28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
199301 : EF35-350mm f/3.5-5.6L USM
199303 : EF20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM *
199305 : EF400mm f/5.6L USM *
199306 : EF50mm f/1.4 USM *
199307 : EF1200mm f/5.6L USM *
199309 : EF35-80mm F4-5.6 II
199310 : EF28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 II USM
199311 : EF28-70mm f/2.8L USM
199502 : EF38-76mm f/4.5-5.6
199503 : EF35-80mm f/4-5.6 III *
199503 : EF70-200mm f/2.8L USM
199503 : EF75-300mm f/4-5.6 II USM
199503 : EF80-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II *
199507 : EF75-300mm f/4-5.6 II
199508 : EF28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 III USM
199509 : EF28mm f/1.8 USM *
199509 : EF75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM *
199603 : EF200mm f/2.8L II USM *
199603 : EF400mm f/2.8L II USM
199604 : EF135mm f/2L USM *
199604 : EF180mm f/3.5L Macro USM *
199604 : EF17-35mm f/2.8L USM
199609 : EF24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM *
199609 : EF28-80mm f/3.5-5.6
199609 : EF28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 IV USM
199703 : EF300mm f/4L IS USM *
199712 : EF24mm f/1.4L USM
199802 : EF28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM *
199803 : EF22-55mm f/4-5.6 USM
199803 : EF55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 USM
199811 : EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM *
199812 : EF35mm f/1.4L USM *
199904 : EF28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 II *
199904 : EF28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 V USM
199904 : EF75-300mm f/4-5.6 III *
199904 : EF75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
199907 : EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM *
199907 : EF500mm f/4L IS USM *
199909 : EF400mm f/2.8L IS USM *
199909 : EF600mm f/4L IS USM *
199909 : MP-E65mm f/2.8 Macro *
199909 : EF70-200mm f/4L USM *
200003 : EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM *
200009 : EF28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 *
200009 : EF28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM *
200010 : EF28-90mm f/4-5.6
200010 : EF28-90mm f/4-5.6 USM
200010 : EF28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM *
200109 : EF70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM *
200112 : EF400mm f/4 DO IS USM *
200112 : EF16-35mm f/2.8L USM
200209 : EF28-90mm f/4-5.6 II USM *
200209 : EF28-105mm f/4-5.6 *
200209 : EF28-105mm f/4-5.6 USM *
200209 : EF90-300mm f/4-5.6 USM *
200211 : EF24-70mm f/2.8L USM *
200305 : EF17-40mm f/4L USM *
200309 : EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
200309 : EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM
200309 : EF28-90mm f/4-5.6 II
200309 : EF55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM *
200309 : EF90-300mm f/4.5-5.6 *
200406 : EF28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM *
200406 : EF70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM *
200409 : EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM *
200409 : EF28-90mm f/4-5.6 III *
200411 : EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM *
200503 : EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM *
200503 : EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II
200503 : EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II USM
200509 : EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM *
200509 : EF70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM *
200602 : EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM*
200602 : EF85mm f/1.2L II USM*
200608 : EF70-200mm f/4L IS USM*
200608 : EF50mm f/1.2L USM*
200702 : EF16-35mm f/2.8L II USM*
200708 : EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS *
200708 : EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS *
200708 : EF14mm f/2.8L II USM *
200802 : EF200mm f/2L IS USM *
200802 : EF800mm f/5.6L IS USM *
200809 : EF24mm f/1.4L II USM *
200809 : EF-S 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 IS*
200902 : TS-E 17mm f4/L *
200902 : TS-E 24mm f3.5L II *
200909 : EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM*
200909 : EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM*

Last edited by Samsungian; 12-10-2009 at 06:58 AM. Reason: I forgot to add in the two Sept 2009 lens releases
12-10-2009, 07:54 AM   #58
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,646
QuoteOriginally posted by LeDave Quote
..... it's sort of questionable because most of us from a Poll stated that we chose Pentax because of pricing.
Dave, don't take this as picking on you specifically, you just had the bad fortune of setting me off on one of my rants.

This, in a nutshell is what really went sideways at Pentax. They undervalued their (underperforming) equipment for years to try to get customers to buy the stuff, and now what they have for a customer base is a bunch of cheap @ss whack jobs who, had they any brains, would have bought Canon Rebels.
Lenses are not consumer electronics. Anyone who tries to apply that theory to lenses is a fool, plain and simple. Good quality lenses are not cheap to make, and better quality lenses cost a lot more to make than good quality ones. The law of diminishing returns hits home very quickly with lenses.
Unlike Canon and Nikon, Pentax doesn't have the advantage of economy of scale. With something like 5% (whatever) of the market, they are probably selling 1/30th of the lenses that Canon or Nikon are selling.
Low volume = higher cost.
High quality = higher cost.

SDM issues aside (and believe me, for what Pentax is charging for lenses, there should be no QC or design flaw issues at all), Pentax is making some of the highest quality glass in the business.

I guess the question is, is Pentax's pricing questionable because they have a cheap customer base or is the customer base questionable because they want Pentax to give them something for nothing?

If you don't want to buy it, don't buy it. If you don't agree with their pricing and can afford to take a lens quality hit, then go somewhere else and buy a Holga.
No one will stop you, and you'll be respected more for doing that than carping about how gas used to be two bits a gallon, bread was 15 cents a loaf and Pentax gave equipment away until they bankrupted themselves.

Last edited by Wheatfield; 12-10-2009 at 08:53 AM.
12-10-2009, 09:15 AM   #59
Veteran Member

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Prince George, BC Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 644
QuoteOriginally posted by RMabo Quote
Pentax has always been about entry level SLR's to advanced SLR's, and for professionals medium format is the answer. Pentax never released a SLR to compete with Canon EOS 1D, they had the 645 for that.

The K-7 does very well as a low priced competitior to EOS 50 and D300.
Of course the Canon AF 50 f/1.8 is cheap, it is all plastic and it is very cheap to manufacture. It doesn't even have distance info scale.
And you expect Pentax to come up with such a lens?

Pentax has always been about build quality.
When the competition has more plastics than metal in their chassies, Pentax has stand by metal even for the entry level model. (Yes, the K-x has inner chassi of true metal, not the plastics that Canon uses...).

The K-7 is a very nice upgrade to the K10D. 100% viewfinder, better performance at high ISO, faster and more accurate AF even in low light, even better weather sealing, added video and stereo recording, plus the bonus of better P-TTL and metering performance - in a smaller and more compact package.

I can't afford 24x36 and I don't need it. I don't want big cameras. APS-C is the ideal format as I see it.

I don't understand why Pentax lenses must be less expensive than Canon. Do you suggest that Pentax lenses are inferior to the lenses made by Canon and because of that they needs to be less expensive because Canon is better???

Well, my opinion is that Pentax lenses are better than Canon. Pentax has always had the best anti flare coating in the industry, and many of the technologies used in the lenses made by Canon, are in fact patented by Pentax. Pentax invented the hybrid aspherical lens element, for example (with Hitachi designing the production and manufacturing process). Pentax lenses has a nice colour rendition, compact size and are unique offerings.
Well said!
12-10-2009, 09:16 AM   #60
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,527
QuoteOriginally posted by jogiba Quote
The first of many D FA FF WR lenses to come.

Is this supposed to be information to be trusted or yet another rumor

  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
50mm, af, body, ff, k-7, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, pentaxians, photos, time, turkey
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Good news, bad news. Lloydy Pentax DSLR Discussion 13 05-06-2009 03:05 PM
So I guess this is bad news! Help! Syb Post Your Photos! 21 11-12-2008 12:43 PM
Some bad news... jsherman999 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 10-25-2008 07:02 PM
Old Flash on new bodies = bad news. But what about the inverse? Dubious Drewski Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 05-11-2008 03:28 PM
Bad news davemdsn Post Your Photos! 10 01-25-2008 10:20 AM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:16 PM. | See also:, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]