[NZ_Ross]

Not so bad....don't worry.... just a bit slow to focus, best not wide open, some glow when looking into the sun these days ....etc etc

but on the plus side - really well built body, butter smooth focus, quality optics, best in class coating and that famous Pentax look....oh and you belong to a fantastic community

[35mmfilmfan]

Bit late joining in with this one, but still . . . I've often wondered why Pentax gear, or even Pentax-fit lenses, 'apparently' come on the second-hand market far less frequently than other brands. Talking it over with various dealers who do new and second hand, it appears that firstly, some other brands frequently release 'new' models, thus encouraging people to 'upgrade', and their old gear is used in part exchange, and secondly, as we all know, Pentax have an encouraging habit of getting it right, thus resulting in a loyal ownership base. All my Pentax gear, from film bodies up to K10d and K20d, has been second hand, and I estimate I have spent about a third of what I would have needed to spend to get the new, improved (well, which is it ?) offering from a different manufacturer - though from what I read on here, there are occasions when even Pentax has quality control issues.

Tony

[Wheatfield]

If we were, we wouldn't be shooting Pentax.

[UncleVanya]

If we were, we wouldn't be shooting Pentax.

That's rather debatable. There are parameters after all. Best APSC DSLR lens might be the DA* 50-135 for someone and the Nikon 50mm AF-S f/1.8 for someone else. The point is it is really hard to get any objective measure of the best - but it is easy to pursue it.

[wildman]

My favorite Bresson
---------------------------------------------------------------
When critiquing another photographer's work:

"Mediocre - It's just what comes out of a camera when a camera works."
---------------------------------------------------------------
I know that feeling so well when critiquing my own work.

[Kerrowdown]

Not so bad....don't worry.... just a bit slow to focus, best not wide open, some glow when looking into the sun these days ....etc etc

There's not a lot that one can say to that...

[Wheatfield]

That's rather debatable. There are parameters after all. Best APSC DSLR lens might be the DA* 50-135 for someone and the Nikon 50mm AF-S f/1.8 for someone else. The point is it is really hard to get any objective measure of the best - but it is easy to pursue it.

It's really only been since the Ricoh takeover that Pentax has joined the 21st century. Their bodies have lagged behind the competition for decades, and for the past 15 years, they lens lineup has been wanting compared to the major players.
These are measurable parameters.
This doesn't change the fact that I am a big Pentax supporter. I can recognise it, and get on with my life. The camera has never been my limiting factor anyway.

[UncleVanya]

It's really only been since the Ricoh takeover that Pentax has joined the 21st century. Their bodies have lagged behind the competition for decades, and for the past 15 years, they lens lineup has been wanting compared to the major players.
These are measurable parameters.
This doesn't change the fact that I am a big Pentax supporter. I can recognise it, and get on with my life. The camera has never been my limiting factor anyway.

And again lagging behind is a me too thing not a thing that is just objectively better or worse. For example wireless may be a feature you don't want. As for the lenses - every other manufacturer lagged far far behind if the DA limited are your idea of perfection. My point is that there is no objective measure there are metrics but perfection is not something that is universally defined.

[c.a.m]

I can take mediocre photographs equally well with old cameras or with the 'latest and greatest'.

[UncleVanya]

I can take mediocre photographs equally well with old cameras or with the 'latest and greatest'.

That's the truth for many of us! LOL. On the flip side many can turn out fantastic results from a brownie hawkeye...

[victormeldrew]

OK I've definitely found an exception. I got a Peak Design Slide for Christmas.... It has made carrying and using the camera that much more enjoyable I am happy to keep shooting long after I would have got fed up with my old neckstrap. By the law of averages, a masterpiece must be that much more likely to appear on my memory card, I reckon. Nothing yet, but will report back when I'm famous.

[Rondec]

You definitely save money buy buying the lens/camera body that you will eventually end up with rather than purchasing three different lower tier bodies/lenses and finally ending up with a K-1 and DFA 24-70, for example. The bigger thing is figuring out how to make the most of the lenses and bodies that you own. I have heard just as many folks complain about top end gear as people complaining about problems with lower end cameras and lenses -- maybe more. I suppose when you spend a small fortune on gear, you get frustrated if your images aren't what you desire, although my experience is usually that if there is a problem, it lies behind the viewfinder.

[monochrome]

Peter Zack PM'ed me in 2008, "Shoot with what you have, not with what you dream about."

I could have listened, but gear is fun.

[Wheatfield]

And again lagging behind is a me too thing not a thing that is just objectively better or worse. For example wireless may be a feature you don't want. As for the lenses - every other manufacturer lagged far far behind if the DA limited are your idea of perfection. My point is that there is no objective measure there are metrics but perfection is not something that is universally defined.

So things like AF speed are not objective measures?
Depth of a product line are not objective measures?

We all pick and choose what is important, but no one can say with a straight face that Pentax has been an industry leader for the past 35 years or so.

[hadi]

you know, for me, where i am with gear, i think i'm finally good with gear.
i know my struggles with the Kx (grain, and very limited controls, which lead to limited creativity). so i upgraded to the K5. and that too, i found a little limiting in my creativity, so i upgraded to the K1.

in terms of lenses. i have everything covered from 14mm to 200mm in numerous primes and zooms, and none slower than f2.8.
i do wish that my 14mm was not bulbs so i can slap on a ND filter for landscape and waterfall stuff. but i'll make due with a 24mm instead.

i am investing in light modifiers and reflectors and stuff to use them as either props or whatever. but i'm not sure if those count...

but yeah, i actually am happy with camera gear. now, whenever anything new or different comes up, i dont really bother even looking at their direction.

......MAYBE....just MAYBE a very cheap used K1 i can get to use as a travel camera. the Kx is not keeping up with me when it comes to travel. despite it being small, it has a lot of issues. the k5 should be well enough for travel as its small and compact. yet the dynamic range of the k1 is hard to beat. and the low grain is breath taking. plus the full frame crop is awesome to have