[MadMathMind]

The debate is not for him to switch, he feels Canikons are the only choice for serious photography.

I just feel that there are more choices than that. I have no desire to convince him to switch.

In my mind this guy is already proven that he's a gear junkie not a serious photographer.

To be fair (and I can't believe I'm doing this since I *hate* Canon...or maybe moreso, I hate their userbase), there are a number of things that make Canikon a better choice for professional photography. However, I doubt any of those reasons apply to this guy. The trick is to get him to explain why he thinks that. If you get something better than a bunch of stuttering and vowel recitation (unlikely), it will probably go along the lines of "They're just better" or "They have more lenses [that I can't actually afford but I can dream about]." That's when you know he read some online reviews, bought whatever they said, and needs to pump up his purchase to make himself feel better. Happens all the time in video games.

As a side note, this works really well for political arguments too. Getting someone to get beyond "You're ridiculous!" or "That view is WRONG!" is the key to exposing buffoonery.

[vonBaloney]

To be fair (and I can't believe I'm doing this since I *hate* Canon...or maybe moreso, I hate their userbase), there are a number of things that make Canikon a better choice for professional photography.

That's true, but those reasons don't have to do with gear -- they have to do with the fact that running with the crowd has its advantages. Being a better choice for certain scenarios, however, is MUCH different than saying you CAN'T do serious photography without a Canikon. It's a ridiculous notion just on the face of it...

[eddie1960]

To be fair (and I can't believe I'm doing this since I *hate* Canon...or maybe moreso, I hate their userbase), there are a number of things that make Canikon a better choice for professional photography. However, I doubt any of those reasons apply to this guy. The trick is to get him to explain why he thinks that. If you get something better than a bunch of stuttering and vowel recitation (unlikely), it will probably go along the lines of "They're just better" or "They have more lenses [that I can't actually afford but I can dream about]." That's when you know he read some online reviews, bought whatever they said, and needs to pump up his purchase to make himself feel better. Happens all the time in video games.

As a side note, this works really well for political arguments too. Getting someone to get beyond "You're ridiculous!" or "That view is WRONG!" is the key to exposing buffoonery.

In fact for a lot of reasons If uoi are only going to run a single system Canon or Nikon should be your choice as a pro. . First would be rental gear. If you arte starting out odds are you just won't own everything you need and rentals are a handy stop gap. in most cities you can rent canon and nikon gear. anything else is hit and miss. travelling for work would be the same.
If you are going to go work for a bigger Studio you will want to be one of the 2 as they will require it from a work flow standpoint (dropping pentax raw or Fuji raw into the workflow of a large operation will throw them off)
and then there is the ability to find a broad selection of used to flesh out your kit.
add in d4 or like level AF and speed for sports and flash control (which still sucks on Pentax and Fuji) for weddings
But many pros run more than one system for variuious reasons. it's always been this way (in film days of course you maybe ran nikon or canon (or pentax or minolta) and also had Hassy/mamiya/pentax/bronica/fuji... in medium format - a lot of weddings shot on bronica actually. with film brand wasn't so much the issue as it was shoot provia please or Kodachrome or ilford and submit the rolls we will process .....

[MadMathMind]

That's true, but those reasons don't have to do with gear -- they have to do with the fact that running with the crowd has its advantages. Being a better choice for certain scenarios, however, is MUCH different than saying you CAN'T do serious photography without a Canikon. It's a ridiculous notion just on the face of it...

Well, some of them do. If you want to do some really serious sports photography, you need those 400mm f/2.8 and 500mm f/4 lenses that Pentax just doesn't have. That's an example of where gear does factor in. That said, I don't think *this guy* is doing any of that, nor will most people ever do that because even if they wanted to, dropping $10k on a lens is just not realistic for all but a few.

Of course you can do serious photography without Canikon. You can't do all forms of serious photography without it, but that's fine with me. So I'd say the issue is not gear quality but rather availability. We all know Pentax has some glaring holes in their lens lineup.


The major disadvantage to Pentax, in my opinion, is that its always the afterthought when it comes to wider industry support. If Adobe decided to drop Pentax for Lightroom, it wouldn't affect their bottom line too much. With manufacturer provided lens profiles, there's little incentive for them to do so at this time, but the thought that an important 3rd party could just pull the rug out from underneath us as Tamron has is a bit disquieting. But until that day, I'm pretty happy with my stuff.

[bladerunner6]

Well, some of them do. If you want to do some really serious sports photography, you need those 400mm f/2.8 and 500mm f/4 lenses that Pentax just doesn't have. That's an example of where gear does factor in. That said, I don't think *this guy* is doing any of that, nor will most people ever do that because even if they wanted to, dropping $10k on a lens is just not realistic for all but a few.

Of course you can do serious photography without Canikon. You can't do all forms of serious photography without it, but that's fine with me. So I'd say the issue is not gear quality but rather availability. We all know Pentax has some glaring holes in their lens lineup.


The major disadvantage to Pentax, in my opinion, is that its always the afterthought when it comes to wider industry support. If Adobe decided to drop Pentax for Lightroom, it wouldn't affect their bottom line too much. With manufacturer provided lens profiles, there's little incentive for them to do so at this time, but the thought that an important 3rd party could just pull the rug out from underneath us as Tamron has is a bit disquieting. But until that day, I'm pretty happy with my stuff.

This is pretty close to my attitude.

Oh yeah, pro sports photographers need the big fast glass and having taken a sports photography class taught by a university photographer, I know that is absolutely the case. And if you are working in a Canon or Nikon only studio, certainly.

But telling someone with $600-$800 budget that might be stretched to $1300 that the only gear for serious photographers is Canikon is just plain silly.

Lots of serious photographers out there with other gear besides Canikon.

As for Adobe dropping Pentax from Lightroom, as Pentax is growing in market share, there are not a lot of reasons for doing that.

[Na Horuk]

Most of the lenses used in these threads are pretty affordable:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/250453-east-german-lens-club-6.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/31430-soviet-lenses-club.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/32688-dcl-dirt-cheap-lens-club-9.html

And I have many on 500px, link in my signature. I label which lens took a photo.

I think Canikon gear is great - but expect to pay a couple thousand for each item. I think Pentax gives better results for the same amount of money. Of course, comparing a $500 Pentax camera to a $3000 Nikon, the Nikon is bound to have some advantages. Its up to you to determine if those advantages are worth the money for you. And the advantages are not as linear or across the board as some might think. I've seen plenty of truly stunning photos taken with Pentax gear, and I doubt a Canikon camera and lenses could improve upon those photos in any meaningful way.

[aleonx3]

I am in a bit of a debate with a Nikon fanboy on another forum.

Don't think that I would venture into this kind of stuff as people tend to have their own opinions and most usually don't want to admit that their choice of camera system is less than what they bought it for. I can usually tell the gear head from those who are getting the best out of their gear by looking at their photos. But then, it is also a subjective argument if their photos are indication of how much they know and what was considered as good/great photos, except that I do have high standards and intend to keep pursuing more. So, no debate from me in most cases.

[eddie1960]

Don't think that I would venture into this kind of stuff as people tend to have their own opinions and most usually don't want to admit that their choice of camera system is less than what they bought it for. I can usually tell the gear head from those who are getting the best out of their gear by looking at their photos. But then, it is also a subjective argument if their photos are indication of how much they know and what was considered as good/great photos, except that I do have high standards and intend to keep pursuing more. So, no debate from me in most cases.

best attitude to have

[MadMathMind]

Don't think that I would venture into this kind of stuff as people tend to have their own opinions and most usually don't want to admit that their choice of camera system is less than what they bought it for. I can usually tell the gear head from those who are getting the best out of their gear by looking at their photos. But then, it is also a subjective argument if their photos are indication of how much they know and what was considered as good/great photos, except that I do have high standards and intend to keep pursuing more. So, no debate from me in most cases.

This sort of thing is not limited to camera equipment. It's widely prevalent in video games--I remember it being Super Nintendo vs. Sega Genesis way back when I was young. While being 10 years old makes it easy to believe "you can only be for one," this attitude is especially common even today. It seems to permeate every type of electronics: video cards (Nvidia vs. ATi), stereo equipment, televisions (mostly the anti-Sony crowd versus an imaginary opponent), automobiles, motorcycles, trading cards, airlines, whatever. For some reason, the need to justify one's purchase and thump that it's best is widespread. I get it when it comes to sports teams but not when it comes to electronics. Making a team when one doesn't exist isn't especially productive--the company appreciates your brand loyalty for sure but that romance is pretty much a one-way street.

[MadMathMind]

Don't think that I would venture into this kind of stuff as people tend to have their own opinions and most usually don't want to admit that their choice of camera system is less than what they bought it for. I can usually tell the gear head from those who are getting the best out of their gear by looking at their photos.

Recently, I learned that Canon perpetuates the "gearhead" mentality with their Professional Services. Requirement for admittance: you need to own a certain number of lenses/pro Camera bodies. The Rebel line doesn't count; apparently Canon doesn't believe those bodies capable of taking professional quality photographs. Nor are non-L lenses good enough either. Apparently quality of photographs is not the concern to be a "Canon Professional" but rather how much money you spend with them. In some ways it makes sense (it's more of a product service club anyway), but when the company that makes your camera is telling you that their non-pro branded gear isn't good enough for their elite club, what attitude do you think you're going to have?

[aleonx3]

Recently, I learned that Canon perpetuates the "gearhead" mentality with their Professional Services. Requirement for admittance: you need to own a certain number of lenses/pro Camera bodies. The Rebel line doesn't count; apparently Canon doesn't believe those bodies capable of taking professional quality photographs. Nor are non-L lenses good enough either. Apparently quality of photographs is not the concern to be a "Canon Professional" but rather how much money you spend with them. In some ways it makes sense (it's more of a product service club anyway), but when the company that makes your camera is telling you that their non-pro branded gear isn't good enough for their elite club, what attitude do you think you're going to have?

Thanks for sharing that information; they can have whatever guidelines (probably more of protection of their own gear), for that I don't think that I want no part of them. From what I have seen based on some friends using Canon gear (and also some so-called wedding-pros), the most popular lens that Canon people own "24-105/f4L" is an example of much over-rated lens and yet not cheap. I have found so many flaws with that lens with ridiculous perspective distortion in many of the photos I have seen; yes, thanks but no thanks is my response to them.

[nms_photog]

What I find funny, is that serious shooters of both Canon and Nikon actually seek out certain Pentax lenses to convert and use on their cameras............known fact and one of the reasons vintage Pentax lenses command premiums over like Canon and Nikon from same the eras. Don't think I recall many if at all, Pentax users trying to do the same. Also, go look at pixelpeeper.com and browse through the top rated lenses. Seven of the top ten are Pentax, with Pentax taking the top six spots. 12 of the top 20..........20 of the top 30.................25 of the top 40!!!!!!!!! Heck, Pentax and Sony/Zeiss practically make up the entire top 30 with only a few Sigmas and one Voigtlander. Nikon doesn't have a single lens in the top 50 with Canon only having 4 and their highest rated @ #31.

I believe there is a cheap lens club here somewhere, with plenty of excellent shots. I assume that Nikon guy is telling you that you need an expensive lens for professional looking photos. As most people know, even reasonable Nikon shooters: not true.

I am in a bit of a debate with a Nikon fanboy on another forum.

I would love some great photos taken with affordable lenses.

I will give credit when I post them.

Thanks. I will also be posting this in the macro section.

And aside from Pentax being a great system, this board rocks.

[MadMathMind]

What I find funny, is that serious shooters of both Canon and Nikon actually seek out certain Pentax lenses to convert and use on their cameras............known fact and one of the reasons vintage Pentax lenses command premiums over like Canon and Nikon from same the eras.

Canon changed their mount in 1987. You can't put anything older than that on a modern camera.

[TER-OR]

Pentax K5 with Vivitar 500mm T-mount with K adapter. A brute of a lens, certainly not easy to use, but when you nail it....

[IMG][/IMG]

---------- Post added 12-04-14 at 09:34 PM ----------

K5 with 50mm f/2 oldschool kit lens - highly underrated, IMHO.
[IMG][/IMG]