Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-28-2010, 04:09 PM   #91
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 499
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
And how exactly does Sony's situation differ from Pentax's, except that there are a plethora of old, manual focus lenses out there that could be used on full frame for Pentax?
That "exception" is a huge difference.

04-09-2010, 08:18 AM   #92
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: DC Metro, USA
Posts: 212
My father had been a Minolta shooter since the beginning of 90s, when I took his gears over this past year I considered switching to Sony as well to use the old Minolta lenses, but what made me go for Pentax was not that there was a huge selection of prev gen lenses to choose from, but rather that they had manufactured some excellent lenses recently, esp. the DA limiteds.

I think it's great that there's a huge selection of old lenses to choose from, but at the end of the day, I believe most consumers are more encouraged by where the company is going, what lenses are being made. I think Pentax is on the right path w/ the K-x and the 645D, both target specific markets and are not half-hearted attempts to please everybody.
04-09-2010, 08:33 AM   #93
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,114
QuoteOriginally posted by 24X36NOW Quote
That "exception" is a huge difference.
I find it hard to imagine a world where someone would switch from Canon or Nikon to a Pentax FF because of the old glass. Backwards compatibility is nice to have, but I don't think it's that high up in terms of importance except for a very small group of photogs.
04-10-2010, 08:17 PM   #94
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40-55'-44" N / 73-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,102
QuoteOriginally posted by shuie Quote
Bear in mind while the lineup of MF glass from Pentax may be somewhat limited, I'm fairly certain it is larger than the Canikon crowds.
I wonder what percentage of 645 MF lenses are being used on CanKons via adapters. Not that I'm in Adorama all that much, but almost every time I'm in there I see used 645 lenses being handled and/or bought @ the counter, it's a non-Pentax body owner.

04-11-2010, 07:03 AM   #95
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 499
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
I find it hard to imagine a world where someone would switch from Canon or Nikon to a Pentax FF because of the old glass.
Perhaps; but would be a big consideration for people that:

- Are still shooting Canon manual focus gear/never made the switch to autofocus
- Are still shooting Minolta manual focus gear/never made the switch to autofocus
- Bought into Canon/Nikon/Sony digital, but don't yet have any significant investment in glass, and are working on a budget

QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
Backwards compatibility is nice to have, but I don't think it's that high up in terms of importance except for a very small group of photogs.
I think anything that expands your choices of available lenses is important, because it (a) makes the mount more attractive to buy into in the first place, and (b) makes it more likely that existing customers stick with it. In Pentax's case, it was key to their survival, since their existing user base was much bigger than their base of new adopters, and they would have lost much of their existing user base (and thus, a significant portion of their potential new sales) very quickly without backward compatibility.
04-12-2010, 12:21 PM   #96
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 410
When, oh when....
04-12-2010, 02:39 PM   #97
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
I find it hard to imagine a world where someone would switch from Canon or Nikon to a Pentax FF because of the old glass.
FA Limiteds are old glass. I need say no more.
04-13-2010, 12:54 AM   #98
Veteran Member
ghelary's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 617
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
FA Limiteds are old glass. I need say no more.
FA ltd were released around 2000. Not that old, even less old than 50/1.4. Other brand have as well older made for film lenses, as long as they are working well on digital, why changing.

Now regarding the older lenses compatibility, there is a whole trend in photography using old dogs, the most famous mount is M42, but not limited to it. This movement is interested not in pure "scientific" qualities of lenses, but more in their artistic properties, a bit like the Lomo movement or the cross processing techniques. Not every camera is easily used with such lenses:
- Canon FF you have to make sure that your lens is not recessing too much in the camera (otherwise the miror will bump into it),
- Nikon is not popular apparently because adapters don't allow focus to infiinity (on M42)
- Micro 4/3 is very popular as it allows to mount about everything but you have to deal with a crop factor of 2 (so no wide angle)

All in all, Pentax is a no brainer for an old lense lover, compatibility and ease of use is as good as it get. The only downside is the lack of FF.

So are some people entering Pentax system because of compatibility with old lenses : certainly yes.

My 2 cents,
Guillaume

04-13-2010, 04:23 PM   #99
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by ghelary Quote
Now regarding the older lenses compatibility, there is a whole trend in photography using old dogs, the most famous mount is M42, but not limited to it. This movement is interested not in pure "scientific" qualities of lenses, but more in their artistic properties, a bit like the Lomo movement or the cross processing techniques.
Comparing nice Pentax M42 lenses to lomography? Oh dear, I think we might hear from the Tak club on that one!
04-13-2010, 05:15 PM   #100
Veteran Member
jct us101's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rohnert Park, CA
Posts: 3,695
The thing is that saying that Pentax has some great old lenses only appeals to a very small amount of the Canikon users, as most of them just want autofocus and a lens that gives them good pictures of their cat or dog.
04-14-2010, 12:50 AM   #101
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,230
QuoteOriginally posted by jct us101 Quote
The thing is that saying that Pentax has some great old lenses only appeals to a very small amount of the Canikon users, as most of them just want autofocus and a lens that gives them good pictures of their cat or dog.
Not only Canikon users, Pentax own users as well.

I myself have a bunch of older Pentax primes (M serie for the most part). Seing as a I use my Film cameras (almost not at all), I really dunno why I should keep those 50/1.4, 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 135/3.5 etc.
OK the M200/4 still has some interest because = 300mm FOV on 24x36. For the rest, sure they are good lenses (not extraordinary but not bad either).

The thing is, for using them well, I need a lot of time I usually do not have -> rarely used.
04-14-2010, 01:11 AM   #102
Veteran Member
ghelary's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 617
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
Comparing nice Pentax M42 lenses to lomography? Oh dear, I think we might hear from the Tak club on that one!
This is the same approach, you don't put a takumar on a camera for pure sharpness, you use it for its specific rendition (color, bokeh etc...) So I don't think I'm insulting anybody here (and anyway, I don't care about the fanboys)

And M42 is not limited to takumar, far from it, not counting Carl Zeiss Jena (East German), Helios, M42 lenses had been produced by a seemingly unlimited number of weird lens makers.

This specificity have been retained a bit with the less popular K-mount. For that reason, we have had Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses much before Canon EOS users.
04-14-2010, 05:53 AM   #103
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by ghelary Quote
This is the same approach, you don't put a takumar on a camera for pure sharpness, you use it for its specific rendition (color, bokeh etc...)
Taks and certain other M42 lenses are fine in terms of sharpness and other rendering characteristics. But lomography is specifically about degraded images that have a certain aesthetic appeal. Ido not think it fair to compare the two. This is not about "insulting anybody", it is simply about getting the facts correct.

QuoteOriginally posted by ghelary Quote
And M42 is not limited to takumar, far from it, not counting Carl Zeiss Jena (East German), Helios, M42 lenses had been produced by a seemingly unlimited number of weird lens makers.
Of course that is true, and some of these lenses are funky and strange. However to say that is the only reason people use M42 is reductionist. Some prefer the feeling, some like the solid build, others are happy to buy them for less money than contemporary lenses.
04-15-2010, 12:48 AM   #104
Veteran Member
jct us101's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rohnert Park, CA
Posts: 3,695
Isn't it true that all Nikon lenses were made in the F mount too? I don't usually see Nikon users talking about all of their old lenses, maybe some of the good old film ones, but for them it's all digital.

Well they're totally full of themselves usually too so that might be part of it.
04-15-2010, 04:12 AM   #105
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,744
The question really is whether or not you are making a camera for "the faithful," or to draw no people in to Pentax's brand of photography. To draw new people in, you need to make a compelling line up. Particularly on the upper end, you need good high iso, fast auto focus and a complete lens line up. I think that most of the full frame cameras sold these days are purchased by wealthy amateurs and telling them that they can use a manual focus K mount prime on their camera is just not a huge selling point. It is a big selling point for those who have accumlated a large stock pile of K mount and M42 lenses over the years and are comfortable with manual focus.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • 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!
645d, cameras, canikon, crowd, hoya, mf, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, photography, specs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:05 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com 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?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top