[Digitalis]

How about the FA 200 macro? I wish Pentax would release this lens again, even if it had a price tag where I could just stand there and drool.

I said greatest lens of it's kind, not the greatest lens ever...there is a difference. And the FA*200mm f/4 ED [IF] Macro is certainly amongst them, I own one.

[Marc Langille]

I said greatest lens of it's kind, not the greatest lens ever...there is a difference. And the FA*200mm f/4 ED [IF] Macro is certainly amongst them, I own one.

Second the motion.

[BillO]

I said greatest lens of it's kind, not the greatest lens ever...there is a difference. And the FA*200mm f/4 ED [IF] Macro is certainly amongst them, I own one.

I know he FA* 200/f4 macro is a different formula than the A* version, but I own the A* version and have used the FA*. I honestly think the A* gives nothing away in IQ. Maybe even takes a bit. The AF and IF do make the FA* a little bit easier to handle, but not as much as you'd think for close up work.

Both are gorgeous lenses though and there is nothing from any manufacturer that can better them.

[ClinchShots]

I currently own a K5iis

I go to meetups and sometimes second shooter situations against people with a T5i / T3i or 60D

Those people never get better pictures than me.

They never even beat out the K30 with fast glass

my buddy with a D7100 kills it though. I think it relies more on the shooter than the gear

[wullemaha]

I know a guy here in Tokyo who is the manager of a popular shot bar in Roppongi, and shoots lots of Super GT racing photography on the weekends. He's a great guy, and we always joke around that I should not be allowed on the race track with my "toy" camera
He is a shooting Nikon 5D and one newer model (forgot which one). And I think he is secretly dreaming about the 645Z, he keeps mentioning that one

But I never had anyone actually telling me in earnest that Pentax is shit.
People either don't know it and don't care, or they don't know it and are then positively surprised when I mention some key features or show them what it can do...

[normhead]

My buddies have always shot Nikon or Hasleblad... and now that I'm near the park, it's a lot of Canon shooters. Every pro out there has found some reason not to shoot Pentax....and every Pentax shooter has found reasons to use Pentax. Some of them a bit spurious.

There's a guy I used to talk to on this site who left for a D7100. He got his 24 Mp camera a year before I got my K-3... it's not like there aren't any advantages to other brands. If he asked why... tell him why.. that's all he's asking. The things he showed you are the things that stood out for him, the things he bought the camera for. He's wondering what things you bought your camera for. That's how people share info.

Pentax? Why pentax?

That's what he wanted to know... and I guarantee you, going the other way, he was happy to show you "why Nikon."
He's just trying to fill in a gap in his camera knowledge.

OK so shooting a wedding.
The first thing i would have showed him would have been TaV, No shifting ISOon the fly, all done automatically.
Then I would have pulled the 21 and 40XS out of my vest pockets, I recently showed them to a Canon buddy, he looked at them in complete disbelief. He just couldn't comprehend that I'd handed him two lenses that were smaller than any one lens he owned.

[GibbyTheMole]

So is it common that a lot of "Pros" talk down about Pentax or was this guy just a major hater and fan boy?

Just an idiot. An actual "pro" knows better. Arguing with him would be like trying to teach your dog trigonometry.

[normhead]

Just an idiot. An actual "pro" knows better. Arguing with him would be like trying to teach your dog trigonometry.

Have you tried teaching your dog trigonometry? It's not as bad as you might think. You just have to have treats in your hand.

[crewl1]

This post was from 2010. The pro could even be dead by now.
In any case there are lots of reasons not to shoot Pentax but camera features, image quality and lens capability are not them.
Support and local availability may be.

[monochrome]

This post was from 2010. The pro could even be dead by now.
In any case there are lots of reasons not to shoot Pentax but camera features, image quality and lens capability are not them.
Support and local availability may be.

You don't need to talk trash to explain why you didn't choose Pentax as your professional tool. I have a couple acquaintances who appreciate my camera(s) but explain why they use their brands:

• Wedding Full-time - Nikon - complex indoor flash
• Sports local publication - big deal here) - Canon - long lenses

Once the critical differentiating factor leads to the brand choice, all other things (which are) equal, they make the rest of their tools complementary.

So, Nikon bodies and lenses; Canon bodies. Local service by both retailers and manufacturers (local reps) is a support function, but that merely confirms the 1st-Order decision.

The wedding guys can shoot outdoor / engagement with anything - in fact they'd like to borrow my K-3 and FA43 just for grins. PP would hold them back somewhat because they've evolved a complex production post-processing routine and presets optimized to their gear, also. They think multi-platform would make their inside employees less productive.

Once a brand is selected a productivity-oriented pro should naturally optimize the business to that brand - which extends all the way through the finished product. Guys told me they think Pentax got behind the curve ten or fifteen years ago and catching up will be awfully difficult.

The most important problem Ricoh needs to solve if they really want to court a professional segment is flash sync and accessories (the flashes).

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

You don't need to talk trash to explain why you didn't choose Pentax as your professional tool. I have a couple acquaintances who appreciate my camera(s) but explain why they use their brands:

• Wedding Full-time - Nikon - complex indoor flash
• Sports local publication - big deal here) - Canon - long lenses

Once the critical differentiating factor leads to the brand choice, all other things (which are) equal, they make the rest of their tools complementary.

So, Nikon bodies and lenses; Canon bodies. Local service by both retailers and manufacturers (local reps) is a support function, but that merely confirms the 1st-Order decision.

The wedding guys can shoot outdoor / engagement with anything - in fact they'd like to borrow my K-3 and FA43 just for grins. PP would hold them back somewhat because they've evolved a complex production post-processing routine and presets optimized to their gear, also. They think multi-platform would make their inside employees less productive.

Once a brand is selected a productivity-oriented pro should naturally optimize the business to that brand - which extends all the way through the finished product. Guys told me they think Pentax got behind the curve ten or fifteen years ago and catching up will be awfully difficult.

The most important problem Ricoh needs to solve if they really want to court a professional segment is flash sync and accessories (the flashes).

Good analysis. Flash capabilities and faster sync are pretty big issues, but even wedding photographers in Canon tend to use workarounds to avoid preflash failures. There are professionals who shoot Nikon or Canon for clients, and prefer Pentax for personal use. Many professionals mix brands for stills, formal shots - then carry Panasonic for video and casual images (notably Ira Block).

One thing I slightly disagree with, though. I'd say Pentax fell behind the curve at least 25 years ago. Once Minolta had the Maxxum in the mid-80s, the big three brands were established. Build and look of lenses in the early AF era created a perception of cheapness (although the optics often were quite good). Really, Pentax hasn't had a high-impact product since the Super Program / Program Plus series. These comments are based on worldwide market impact, not product quality...

[boriscleto]

Really, Pentax hasn't had a high-impact product since the Super Program / Program Plus series. These comments are based on worldwide market impact, not product quality...

I would argue that Pentax hasn't had a high-impact product since the Spotmatic.

[normhead]

I would argue that Pentax hasn't had a high-impact product since the Spotmatic.

I'd agree with that, I got started with Pentax during the buz around the Spotmatic. That was the last time I heard Pentax mentioned in those quiet tones of "you're not going to believe this but..."

As in, "You're not going to believe this but Pentax has made a camera that meters through the lens so you don't need a hand held light meter, and you can set your exposure looking through the viewfinder."

Now that was major... the sad thing is, though it was a huge innovation, the buzz from that only affects people my age. Younger folks just think... "Didn't every camera always do that?"' No one has called the name Pentax in those hushed muted tones of excitement and disbelief in the same manner since. I heard the same tones when a buddy got his F4 with AF so fast it could keep up with the 6 frames a second that camera was capable of. More recently, the D800 was maybe a step down from that but still pretty good.

To me the 645z has that kind of buzz, but only from photographers who have shot MF, and there's precious few of us.

The marketing guys realize, the only thing that can boost Pentax now is a product that causes a buzz. They've become part of the background noise. The sad thing is, the thing that they have to come up with is something that solves a problem photographers have that no one else has solved. If that's what they are working on for the FF, it could be a while, and really, I can't think of thing that could have an effect like TTL metering, or AF at 6 fps.

[boriscleto]

To me the 645z has that kind of buzz, but only from photographers who have shot MF, and there's precious few of us.

Which is surprising given how hard Pop Photog used to push MF back in the day...

[normhead]

Which is surprising given how hard Pop Photog used to push MF back in the day...

Did you see the 645z on the cover of Pop Photo on the news stands, I actually bought one. Not a bad write up either. They just needed someone to release an MF camera so they could write about it.

emmmmm eeeeeeeefff