[monochrome]

If I want to leave everyone else in the dust I buy a 150mp Phase One which is also a tool, just like Canon, Sony, Nikon, Pentax. But for wildlife even a Pentax KP can leave a Phase One in the dust. Again, cameras are tools and you buy the proper tool for the job.

Maybe this is stupid and I’m not poking you - but - I have an affinity for Pentax cameras. I like using Pentax cameras and lenses. Using Pentax cameras and lenses adds to my enjoyment of my hobby. The proper tool for how I approach making photographs is the camera that gives me the most pleasure making them while simultaneously producing the best possible image files.

Your philosophy, while rationally pure and technically correct, fails the test of universalism .

[Dan Rentea]

Maybe this is stupid and I’m not poking you - but - I have an affinity for Pentax cameras. I like using Pentax cameras and lenses. Using Pentax cameras and lenses adds to my enjoyment of my hobby. The proper tool for how I approach making photographs is the camera that gives me the most pleasure making them while simultaneously producing the best possible image files.

Your philosophy, while rationally pure and technically correct, fails the test of universalism .

I have an affinity for my car and I bought it because it takes me from point A to point B while it's agile and comfortable. I've tested 3 cars from 3 different manufacturers and despite that one of them had better specs, I didn't went home with that car because it wasn't as fun to drive as my car.

If you look at the other comment of mine, I said that each person should buy the camera that is best for him, not the one that has the overal better specs. If you bought Pentax and it brings you enjoyment when you use it, then you choosed right.

[UncleVanya]

As far as my personal work is concerned, well, I'm increasingly paranoid about showing it online.

Because of theft?

[texandrews]

Yet I'd say, all camera are special.

All my PS images are for the most part mushrooms, over 70 of them on flickr. I might have taken a few landscapes with PS, and sorry to be a contrarian Dan, but Pixel Shift is special.

Some of my Pixel Shift images.....





Canon, Nikon and Sony shooters can say what they want, Pixel Shift is something they can't match.

Please don't bore us with the "well yes but". When it works it leaves everyone else in the dust.

And the mushroom series is pretty excellent. And an excellent example of what PS can do.

[texandrews]

Because of theft?

Not exactly "theft", but of others starting to do the same sort of thing I'm doing. I got paranoid about this when I went to the AIPAD show in NYC several years ago, and there was a Berlin gallery there showing work by a guy, I think from Scandinavia, that I believe I had corresponded with after seeing his work online, and remarking that we were sort of interested in the same things. He saw my work as well. But when I saw the image the gallery had with them, it was a whole lot more like my work! Now, I'm very leery about putting more photographic images online. I ahven't updated my website for quite a while.

I'm not as worried about my other artwork. My "touch" wouldn't be reproduced by others so easily.

[normhead]

Nice deflection, the topic was special cameras, and I think you just brought up the 150 MP phase 1. You're proving my point here. Some cameras are special.

Your contribution seems to be morphing into there's no such thing as special.
Phone Websters, they need to know.

[Dan Rentea]

Nice deflection, the topic was special cameras, and I think you just brought up the 150 MP phase 1. You're proving my point here. Some cameras are special.

Your contribution seems to be morphing into there's no such thing as special.
Phone Websters, they need to know.

Normhead, if you want your K1 to be special, fine by me. If you think that a feature makes a camera special, then every camera must be special because D850 has 9fps at 45mp and nothing from Pentax or Canon can beat that, because Olympus has 7 stops of IBIS, etc.

But again, cameras are tools in my opinion. People and animals are special if you ask me, not cameras.

[Rondec]

I think probably the biggest question has to do with the photographer and what he or she enjoys using. I like shooting with a K-1 style body, but I'm sure there are plenty of folks who prefer something else. Typically, results are going to depend more on the skill of the photographer and the lenses he has at his disposal than on the camera body anyway.

But I would argue that for things like landscape photography, you would have a hard time beating the quality you get from a K-1 without going medium format (which as I've said is out of many of our price range).

[Lev]

EVF is more a problem when in low light, it is so bright than when you pull eye away from the EVF you need a couple of minutes to have the eye adapt to ambient light again. This problem comes from the fact that EVF brightness doesn't adapt well to ambient lighting. While OVF display the same light level as the ambient light, so the eye never need to constantly adapt from the luminance gap between EVF and ambient.

Interesting, I never thought about that before

[Dan Rentea]

I think probably the biggest question has to do with the photographer and what he or she enjoys using. I like shooting with a K-1 style body, but I'm sure there are plenty of folks who prefer something else.

It's what I said. Having that tool that makes you enjoy going out and take photograph is more important than who has the bigger sensor, who has the best lenses, etc.

Typically, results are going to depend more on the skill of the photographer and the lenses he has at his disposal than on the camera body anyway.

Lenses, cameras, flashes, etc. are tools and depending on what you shoot, you choose the tool that you need.

But I would argue that for things like landscape photography, you would have a hard time beating the quality you get from a K-1 without going medium format (which as I've said is out of many of our price range).

Yes, for landscape is hard to beat K1. But it's easy to beat K1 for action for example. Or for indoor arhitecture for example it's hard to beat Canon or Nikon due to lenses. You can use the pixel shift feature on K1 but as long as you don't have a Canon 11-24mm lens or a Nikon 12-24mm lens, you won't get the same result with a 15-30mm lens.

Or if you shoot macro, it's hard to beat the focus staking feature from Olympus cameras. Or take a 5DsR with a 135mm f2 or with a 200mm f2 lens and try to replicate the images with K1. You can't because you can't find the lenses in Pentax mount. And there are tons of examples where having the right tool you can get shots that are hard to replicate with other system.

If these examples means that cameras are special tools again, fine by me.

[reh321]

There is no special camera. Cameras and lenses are tools and choosing the best tool based on your needs

Most of my cameras (*) are special, with the exception perhaps of my two "failures", which is why I have so many packed away in my closet.
I can pick up any of them and just holding it reminds me of all the adventures we shared.

I still have my first range-finder camera, which I purchased in 1969 and learned to control exposure on.
I used the Super Program on the left of my signature photo for twelve years, including most all of the photos I took of our two babies {I also took a couple with that first range-finder}.
During one of our moves, I accidentally left behind the box camera which was my first camera, used by my Dad to take photos of baby me.


(*) in over 50 years of photography, I have had ten "primary" cameras.

[Dan Rentea]

Most of my cameras (*) are special, with the exception perhaps of my two "failures", which is why I have so many packed away in my closet.
I can pick up any of them and just holding it reminds me of all the adventures we shared.

I still have my first range-finder camera, which I purchased in 1969 and learned to control exposure on.
I used the Super Program on the left of my signature photo for twelve years, including most all of the photos I took of our two babies {I also took a couple with that first range-finder}.
During one of our moves, I accidentally left behind the box camera which was my first camera, used by my Dad to take photos of baby me.


(*) in over 50 years of photography, I have had ten "primary" cameras.

This is completly different than what I said when I wrote about cameras being special. The discussion was (if I understood correctly) orientated on specs and features and the above examples from Normhead with Pixel shift images or the examples I gave were provided as arguments in that dirrection. The sentimental values are a completly different discussion and can be extended to anything, from an old camera to a simple piece of paper.

[normhead]

Normhead, if you want your K1 to be special, fine by me. If you think that a feature makes a camera special, then every camera must be special because D850 has 9fps at 45mp and nothing from Pentax or Canon can beat that, because Olympus has 7 stops of IBIS, etc.

But again, cameras are tools in my opinion. People and animals are special if you ask me, not cameras.

Are you teaching me english?
Too funny.
You're way out of your league here.

[Dan Rentea]

Are you teaching me english?
Too funny.
You're way out of your league here.

What does everything I said related to teaching you english? Are you in a bad mood or something?

[normhead]

What does everything I said related to teaching you english? Are you in a bad mood or something?

You are trying to define what "special" means for me. And honestly, there's nothing as ridiculous as people trying to alter the meaning of words to prove a point or win an argument. There's huge "need to be perceived as right" with such attempts.

If i want to argue that cameras are special in some ways, that's none of your business. You don't get to alter the language to suit your argumentative nonsense.