[simsburyphoto]

I stay with Pentax mostly because I have a large investment in Pentax glass. As long as I can keep using it I will stay with Pentax.

[CarlosU]

I received my first Pentax (ME Super) as a gift in 1980. Today, more than 8 bodies and 16 lenses later (not all with me right now), I cannot justify to switch brand and the hassle that comes with it.
But if I was starting from scratch today, I'm not sure I would go with Pentax. I love what the brand gave to me all those years, and love the gear I have now. I'm so committed that I just bought a new 21 HD Limited last month. But nowadays the offer from other brands seems to be more right for first time buyers. Sure they will not get one of those "specialities" only Pentax can provide, but unless they need specifically one of them, they would make a safer decision going for other brand, in a broader sense.

[Kozlok]

I started with Pentax because when I bought the K-X it had the best looking high-ISO of any camera in its price range, and I couldn't come up with a reason to pick the others. Since then, I've had the opportunity to shoot Canon and Nikon, and I hated every second of touching those cameras. They felt so cheap and junky. After I got the K-30, I knew i was truly a Pentaxian, no other camera offers as much at that price point. I stay for the DA15 and FA43 and the WR zooms. I know no other system has anything similar.

[disconnekt]

My firt film camera was a M42 mount screwmount camera, a Sears TLS (rebadged Ricoh Singles TLS). After doing some research on the mount and at looking at other cameras, I figured I'd say with that mount since there was a good amount of compatible 3rd party cameras/lenses with minor issues* to get for a decent price.

Then did some looking at K-mount cameras since I wanted to find a fully mechanical camera with a smidge better specs (higher iso) & that used more modern battery (LR44 in my case with my case with the K-90), and found that similiar with m42 mount, there was plenty of 3rd party cameras & lenses to choose from with very minor issues**, so I decided to stay in Pentax's lens eco-system.

*minor compatability issues with certain camera body's & lens(es)
**Ricoh "P" lenses (infamous Ricoh Pin), issues with certain lenses from the 70's/80' with "shield" on the mount

[Sandy Hancock]

I started photography in the late 70's with a Ricoh body and mainly Sigma lenses because I was an impoverished teenager. I chose K-mount because it was ubiquitous back then and the Pentax name was highly regarded.

When I deemed DSLR technology had matured to the point of rivalling film, I got a K10D so I could use my old lenses. My first Pentax prime was the FA 77 Limited and my eyes were opened.

I'm no longer impoverished, so I can buy pretty much what I want, but Pentax still strikes a chord with me. I like to be different.

The reasons I stay?

The DA and FA Limiteds - I have them all and they are like family members to me.
The ergonomics - from the Q7 to the 645Z, they just feel good, and operating them is intuitive.
All the old glass - still working natively with the most modern cameras.
The K-1 - a perfect foil for great full frame glass, both old and new.
Weather sealing. Build quality. Even aesthetics.

I don't give a tinker's cuss about video. I have learned to work around the AF limitations. I don't want to carry (much less pay for) fast super-telephoto lenses.

[dave_roe]

Back in the old days, (1967), the small newspaper I worked at only used Pentax.

Cut my teeth so to speak on Pentax and have never looked back.

When it comes to results and the biggest bang for the buck Pentax is the only way to go.

[david94903]

I chose Pentax, for my move to a digital SLR, back in 2008, with the purchase of my K20d. A few factors were in play. 1) I already owned Pentax film bodies and glass, and to the best of my knowledge, Pentax was the only camera manufacturer supporting the use of old glass. Being able to use my older glass was probably the most important factor to going with the Pentax system. 2) For features and quality, Pentax was by far the best bang for the buck. I researched the heck out of everything on the market at that time, and nothing beat Pentax for quality to value. 3) At that time, my wife owned a Canon Rebel XT that she'd purchased in 2006, and truthfully, I wasn't very impressed with it. I owned at that time a Kodak Easyshare P880, and though a "cheaper" and much more limited camera than the Canon, it out performed the Canon, hands down. Since my first purchase of the K20d, I have since purchased a K-5, K-5IIs, K-01, K-3 and now the K-1. In addition, I still own, and use, my forty year old ME Super, and my even older K1000. Needless to say, the Pentax brand has been a solid performer for me since 1979. Pentax quality has always been excellent, and price points have been very good. I see a lot of talk, people complaining about Pentax being behind all the other brands. Personally, I don't see that as an issue. One reason is, I only have so much money to spend. Would I like to see "more" new lenses and options? You betcha. Would I purchase everything that came out? Not a chance. However, I do look at the roadmap and keep an eye out for what's to come in the future (and I have my "wish list." One strategy I employ, after purchasing of a new camera body, I start saving for the next one right away, for three or four years down the road. I squirrel away $20 - $30 a month, every month, for two, three, four years, and when that next camera comes out, and I'm ready to upgrade to, I have my funds ready (mostly ready?) to go (with my switch to a full frame kit, I've had to up my monthly squirrel contribution to keep up with the high price point). This slow and steady strategy keeps me from getting too caught up in the "must have it now" frenzy.

[iheiramo]

My first camera was Nikon. When it and my two lenses were stolen I was back to starting point. On second round I chose to go with Pentax due to value, IQ and concentration to still photography.

[lotech]

My first SLR was a Yashica when I learnt to shoot film, then I switched to Minolta. Back in those days people were all after Nikon even for hobbyist; they thought a Nikon on their hand will make them a pro, but I did not want to follow the trend and instead jumped to next level and bought a Contax. I could barely afford a lens for it back then. After some struggling I finally gave it up since I could not afford the whole system, and there were plenty of high quality and cheap Russian m42 lenses only made available in K and F mount beside m42 - so I bought a Pentax.

When I turned to digital some 15 yrs ago I bought a used Olympus E300. I played with it for a year and decided to upgrade. I was deciding between Pentax and Olympus, and I found they were very similar company established about the same time. I did not know about sensor format back then, and by chance I came across a shop sold a K20D at bargain, so I did not hesitate and picked it up. Since then I decided to settle on the Pentax keep upgrading over the years never regret.

There are 3 main reason I like the Pentax:
1st it is very reasonable priced for the build quality, it is weather seal specially suit my need for outdoor activities.
2nd it has excellent handling feel prefect on my hand and zero learning curve extremely user friendly.
3rd Pentax is deeply rooted in photography, not just another wealthy new kid on the block, Pentax knew how to design camera for real photographer.

Pentax is old school seems never catch up the trend, but Pentax is reliable and timeless no nonsense, I am glad that I picked the right choice and will continue my life with it !

Forgot one big and one silly reason I want to add here.

4th Pentax got IBIS regardless lens in use, this is a well come feature only available on Oly if I remember right, both are well established company with long history.

Pentax decided not to invest on high end video on their camera at least for now, almost all shooters are yelling for high end video on the upcoming models but I won't care a bit, this is not simply I rarely shoot video, but also that adding high end video means adding the production cost, I don't want to spend the money on something I rarely use. AFAIK sensor for shooting high end video is different from those for stills, this is not simply adding additional h/w to make a still camera to shoot video, major components also need to be changed, so the additional cost will not be small. Shooting video is similar but not quite the same as shooting stills, different technique required to shoot some good footages, also additional accessories are needed. We can not mix these two type of shooters, occasion video shooters already been taken care of with HD capacity on the current models, I don't see anything missing on the Pentax beside faster and more accurate AF.

So I hope small move Pentax in the video department, or they already have something big in the drawing board we don't know, but for now I've no better choice than Pentax it is bang for the buck to me !

[Piotrek K]

I do not feel grass is greener on the other side, really. The only brand I could consider to switch is Nikon, but hey I'm not sure they will make DSLRs anymore in a few years. I'm also APS-C fan, so are you sure other brands are really so much competitive in this area?

[jgnfld]

I do not feel grass is greener on the other side, really. The only brand I could consider to switch is Nikon, but hey I'm not sure they will make DSLRs anymore in a few years. I'm also APS-C fan, so are you sure other brands are really so much competitive in this area?

Re. Nikon...I was given a loaner of a D7000 while my K70 was in for repairs. I know it's a bit older but anyony who thinks the AF is superior to even K50 performance wasn't using the body I used. I finally just turned off AF and went manual.

Could have been my unfamiliarity but I really tried. It was simply not up to snuff in accuracy and not better in speed relative to the 55-300 plm anyway. Or short throw primes.

[Piotrek K]

Re. Nikon...I was given a loaner of a D7000 while my K70 was in for repairs. I know it's a bit older but anyony who thinks the AF is superior to even K50 performance wasn't using the body I used. I finally just turned off AF and went manual.

Could have been my unfamiliarity but I really tried. It was simply not up to snuff in accuracy and not better in speed relative to the 55-300 plm anyway. Or short throw primes.

Well everybody says Nikon/Canon have mighty AF out of the box - even if you are novice you will get perfect tracking etc.

[Vmax911]

Like most everyone else, Pentax holds the greatest value. Picked up the K100D due to weather sealing and in body stabilization. Weather sealing would cost well over twice as much with the other guys, and stabilization added a premium on every lens. I've never had the heart to jump ship, and so far haven't needed to.

[MetalUndivided]

I chose the K-70 as my first ever camera due to it being an incredible value proposition.
I feel like it's the only camera in its price range that doesn't habitually shout "should've spent more money, poor ass" at me.
I also like its design

[troenaas]

Perversity

And I've always used Pentax - maybe my photography has grown up with Pentax and adapted to the Pentax strengths and weaknesses - and don't change without good reason - I thought about a Canon when there was no FF, but then the K-1 came along and I'm so happy I stayed

Same here, I also considered Canon before K1 appeared. I didn't like Canon's ergonomics (and I had to many K-mount lenses).