[Vylen]

This must be the prediction of the century!

To the OP: That sounded more like an uncle Bob than a professional. You're sure your cousin didn't get one of his friends make his uncle do the shooting? :-) ("Hey, doesn't your uncle have a fat camera rig? Can he take some photos for us?")

Oh wow... I actually said that so many years ago lol. I was just being cheeky if anything :P

[naldopr]

Many of my friend here in PR use Nikon or Canon and this type of war between brands put me in the research mode! And that how I end up in this forum and knowing more about Pentax! I knew the brand long ago by a small monocular I had have made by Pentax! And to be honest Even I still don't have Dsrl cam yet very soon k3 and even no experience at all in photography the reason I'm fascinated about Pentax is their culture! The people in the forum are the most passionate about photography there is no blame between folks and I can't tell how proud people are here on their Pentax camera no matter the model or how old the real love is there! And that was a click for me!

[Stavri]

A story from my past:

Back in the early 80s I had a chance to test a Leicaflex side by side with my Pentax LX. I shot a series of pictures comparing the following lenses: Leica
35mm - Pentax-M 28mm f2.8 Leica 50mm - Pentax-M 50mm f4 macro Leica 135mm - Pentax-M 100mm f2.8.

I cannot remember the Leicaflex model or the maximum apertures of Leica lenses; but they were the ones current at that time. They were supplied by Leica
Canada as part of a promotion to "try a Leica for a day" In the hopes that one would buy one.

The pictures were taken on Kodachrome 25 for maximum sharpness, and both cameras were mounted on tripods. The first slide on each roll of film was a
photograph of the other camera. Both films were processed by Kodak Canada. When the films were processed and returned uncut in strips, I asked the son of
the owner of the camera store where I dealt, to choose the Leica slides. He inspected both film strips with a Pentax 20X magnifier and selected one as being
shot by the Leicaflex. I then asked him which camera was pictured at the front of the strip. It was the Leicaflex. The pictures he thought were taken by the
Leicaflex had been taken by the Pentax LX. His father, who was a bit of a Leicaphile, also inspected the film strips and appeared somewhat upset by the
results.

At the time of the tests I used Leica Ms for all of my available-light work. Therefore, having no need for high-speed lenses, when I purchased Pentax
lenses, they were the slower f2.8 and f4 ones. These ones, I expect, would be easier to correct. Also the pictures were taken outside at around f8, rather
than wide open. This was not a definitive test; but it proved to me that, certainly in some areas, the Pentax lenses could hold their own against some of
the best. I was happy with the results because the circumstances of the test mirrored the situations in which I expected to use the Pentax and its lenses,
outdoors for architectural and other work.

I did this test because at the time I had started with the inexpensive K1000 and built my Pentax system from there. I replace the K1000 with an MX and added the LX when it became available. At that point I realized I could have invested in Nikon for a "few" dollars more. This realization made me very unhappy. The tests I just described helped me realize that for my purposes I didn't need the Nikon.

Now, of course, I would be hard pressed to run the equivalent tests against the current Pentax primes.

And I thought folks statement about their reasons for using pentax due to its Leicaness was a slight exaggeration

[MadMathMind]

Better question: how many enthusiasts have you met who go "ehh" when they see/hear of your Pentax...and then they walk around with the hood on backwards ("protect mode") on their Canon cameras?

[monochrome]

Soon we can smirk when they talk.

[jgnfld]

Soon we can smirk when they talk.

Was shooting in town today and at end walked into a local specialty foods store. Still had K-50 around neck. Lady at counter immediately told story about how a guy got a "big, boxy Pentax" stolen off his front car seat many years ago when she ran a B&B. She thought it was a great camera (though I suspect that attitude came from the crying jag of the owner of the camera).

[lightbox]

Just my $0.02, based on experiences with other hobbies and activities I've tried:

If you're a hobbyist or amateur / enthusiast who insists on the most expensive gear, and you can't justify that decision in practice (aside from what you've heard or read somewhere), then you're a "gear whore." You may enjoy the acquisition and status of the gear more than the activity. I know because I used to be this way when I got my first DSLR. I spent too much money buying things based on reviews and comments and would have, at one time, convinced others that if they wanted to do X then they absolutely needed to have Y and nothing less. The irony is that I myself didn't have the experience or credentials to make recommendations.

If you're a professional and the gear cost is a secondary consideration for you, then it's not even a debate. In fact, you shouldn't engage in such a debate with amateurs if you know that their gear doesn't pay itself off like yours does. It's irresponsible.

[monochrome]

People buy Porsches but the speed limit is still 70.

[Canada_Rockies]

People buy Porsches but the speed limit is still 70.

A long time ago, I worked for GMAC in Montréal, QC. The stupid award that year went to a male who wanted a fuel infected Corvette, and would not have anything less. The dealer offered to put all the decorations on, and he still had to have the fuel injected Corvette - to drive to work. Admittedly people drove at 50 on Montréal streets (not Km, mph in 30 zones), but this was not what that car was built for. The purchaser was made to sign a waiver that his warranty was void if he drove the car in any gear but 1st in town. (This was mechanical injection: not as flexible as today's versions) He broke the engine in three (3) months.

That rates right up with those who absolutely must have a D810 to take family snapshots. They won't break it, but that is not what it is designed to do.

[BennyBoy]

I found the opposite. I ran a Pentax setup(first spotmatic bayonet mount)can't remember the model). I had some real nice Pentax lens. In the mid 80's I got into Contax, first buying a used 159, then later a RTS II. I had five Zeiss lens, a 25f2.8/28f2/50f1.4/85f1.4&135f2.8. Most every pic I shot was many times better than any Pentax I'd seen at that time. My other photo friends with money, shot Nikon and Canon. They also agreed that the Contax pics looked better than there Nikon/Canon pics. There was just something very special about those Zeiss lens. And the flash control was years ahead of the other brands.

Now a days(for the last 10 years) I've shot Pentax DSLR's because I feel brand is less important now, as every few years anything from Pen/Can/Nik will be bested by whatever is current. Plus I really do believe that the man/woman makes the shot, and not so much the gear(better gear can help).

When ever I run into an Ahole going on about there superior Nikon/Canon gear, I ask them why they think so little of there abilities, that they feel the need to only use Nikon/Canon.

And if my pics look so good, does that not make me the better photographer? Because I did it with a mere Pentax?

I've posted this story before, but I think it's still apropos. Before you read it, I'm very happy with my current Pentax gear (MX, LX, K-7 (infrared converted), K-5, K-5 II). I still have the original Pentax kit used 30 years ago. The Leicas have been sold and are not missed; they were good in their time.

Back in the early 80s I had a chance to test a Leicaflex side by side
with my Pentax LX. I shot a series of pictures comparing the following
lenses:

Leica 35mm - Pentax-M 28mm f2.8
Leica 50mm - Pentax-M 50mm f4 macro
Leica 135mm - Pentax-M 100mm f2.8

I cannot remember the Leicaflex model or the maximum apertures of
Leica lenses; but they were the ones current at that time. They were
supplied by Leica Canada as part of a promotion to "try a Leica for a
day" In the hopes that one would buy one.

The pictures were taken on Kodachrome 25 for maximum sharpness, and
both cameras were mounted on tripods. The first slide on each roll of
film was a photograph of the other camera. Both films were processed
by Kodak Canada.

When the films were processed and returned uncut in strips, I asked
the son of the owner of the camera store where I dealt, to choose the
Leica slides. He inspected both film strips with a Pentax 20X
magnifier and selected one as being shot by the Leicaflex. I then
asked him which camera was pictured at the front of the strip. It was
the Leicaflex. The pictures he thought were taken by the Leicaflex had
been taken by the Pentax LX. His father, who was a bit of a
Leicaphile, also inspected the film strips and appeared somewhat upset
by the results.

At the time of the tests I used Leica Ms for all of my available-light
work. Therefore, having no need for high-speed lenses, when I
purchased Pentax lenses, they were the slower f2.8 and f4 ones. These
ones, I expect, would be easier to correct. Also the pictures were
taken outside at around f8, rather than wide open.

This was not a definitive test; but it proved to me that, certainly in
some areas, the Pentax lenses could hold their own against some of the
best. I was happy with the results because the circumstances of the
test mirrored the situations in which I expected to use the Pentax and
its lenses, outdoors for architectural and other work.

[zekewhipper]

THEN he had the audacity of comparing his Nikon d700 to my k-x. Like, are you serious? a $500 dslr against a $3000 dslr.

Why not? Skill counts too. Just because his gear costs more and he is a pro photog does not mean he gets better pictures than you. There are plenty of no-talents out there with good gear and their images suck.

[anemone]

Some pros are such people that they should be hold down in their studio. Their social skills and stress from unknown environment makes them behave badly. And some no-talents like me get the perfect shots with just good luck. I think I have had a lot of luck.

I have simple method to those who just keep talking how their camera is better than my. First part is silent treatment, second is to tell they don't have enough letters in their camera brand ( I wish Mitsubishi made cameras) and optionally remind that my father has bigger than opponent's father. Last I just walk away.

[Prakticant]

R-o-l-l-e-i-f-l-e-x
H-a-s-s-e-l-b-l-a-d
V-o-i-g-t-l-a-n-d-e-r

-----

Mitsubishi

[Bryce K]

Its always the Indian, not the arrow. That's been said in various forms many times in my short time here. Whenever I buy a photo mag or journal I'm looking to be inspired by what I find in there. When I see a gorgeous pic I'm pulled in by the lighting, composition, subject, etc... And when I look at the data they provide w/the pic I'm looking at focal length, ISO, aperture to try and understand how they got the shot. The type of camera really doesn't matter. The Canikon crowd gets poked at a little here for what is perceived I guess to be their sheeple mentality at times but whatever I guess. As someone else said in this thread more or less any "professional" who mocks another brand may be someone who takes photos for a living but they are not a true professional.

[Cuthbert]

And I thought folks statement about their reasons for using pentax due to its Leicaness was a slight exaggeration

That's interesting because on another board I upset a lot of Leica fanatics saying that the real reason of the Leica decline wasn't the introduction of the Nikon F in 1959 but the Spotmatic in '64 because the Pentax were small and quick like rangefinder unlike the Nikons of the time until the FM and Canon who always made big cameras.

On the Leica board on another side one guy said the equivalent of a M7 was a Nikon F3 with motordrive (!!!) while I suggested an humble ME super would have been more appropriate...some Leicisti agreed with me.

I've posted this story before, but I think it's still apropos. Before you read it, I'm very happy with my current Pentax gear (MX, LX, K-7 (infrared converted), K-5, K-5 II). I still have the original Pentax kit used 30 years ago. The Leicas have been sold and are not missed; they were good in their time.

Back in the early 80s I had a chance to test a Leicaflex side by side
with my Pentax LX. I shot a series of pictures comparing the following
lenses:

Leica 35mm - Pentax-M 28mm f2.8
Leica 50mm - Pentax-M 50mm f4 macro
Leica 135mm - Pentax-M 100mm f2.8

I cannot remember the Leicaflex model or the maximum apertures of
Leica lenses; but they were the ones current at that time. They were
supplied by Leica Canada as part of a promotion to "try a Leica for a
day" In the hopes that one would buy one.

The pictures were taken on Kodachrome 25 for maximum sharpness, and
both cameras were mounted on tripods. The first slide on each roll of
film was a photograph of the other camera. Both films were processed
by Kodak Canada.

When the films were processed and returned uncut in strips, I asked
the son of the owner of the camera store where I dealt, to choose the
Leica slides. He inspected both film strips with a Pentax 20X
magnifier and selected one as being shot by the Leicaflex. I then
asked him which camera was pictured at the front of the strip. It was
the Leicaflex. The pictures he thought were taken by the Leicaflex had
been taken by the Pentax LX. His father, who was a bit of a
Leicaphile, also inspected the film strips and appeared somewhat upset
by the results.

At the time of the tests I used Leica Ms for all of my available-light
work. Therefore, having no need for high-speed lenses, when I
purchased Pentax lenses, they were the slower f2.8 and f4 ones. These
ones, I expect, would be easier to correct. Also the pictures were
taken outside at around f8, rather than wide open.

This was not a definitive test; but it proved to me that, certainly in
some areas, the Pentax lenses could hold their own against some of the
best. I was happy with the results because the circumstances of the
test mirrored the situations in which I expected to use the Pentax and
its lenses, outdoors for architectural and other work.

The Leicaflex was a junky camera, even Leica today admits it, they were never capable of building a good SLR to match the Japs.