[clockwork247]

i was the lone sony shooter at a huge 7000 people event.... i saw a pentax neck strap, turn out it's just a canon lol, spotted all the canon/nikon in the crowd, got pictures to prove it too lol.

most people just think "canon" is the shit, well it might as well be, but I'm more into "bang for the buck", canon sure as hell won't give me that, my set of lens is probably cheaper than a canon 60D body (that someone I know own), yet he can use that body with no lens, VS me with a cheap body + bunches of lens fun time lol.

[starbase218]

If we are rare, why not take advantage of that? I mean, photography to me is not about blending in, but rather about expressing what you see - which is the exact opposite. If Pentax makes good-quality bodies and lenses - as most people here are probably convinced they do - why do we have to explain why we don't buy Canikon? To me it's the exact same thing.

[sandilands]

I'd buy that camera myself
just for the lens

and the quad still exists

Yeah, just dreaming ... I had the SMC - M 50mm f/2 in the kit with my first ME sometime in the 70's. Today I would want an f/1.4 in a student kit. Maybe $299 is wishful thinking.

I still use the old lens sometimes. For this shot I had nothing else in the bag faster than f/4, so it was ideal.

http://pixbyted.smugmug.com/Landscapes/Landscapes-of-the-West/uncatch10/1005024540_knSwi-M.jpg

[sandilands]

Alright.... now we need pictures. I haven't been there since 1967... (your assignment should you choose to accept it.) The dark room and studio when I was there were in the basement south east corner closest to Sams. , and part of the Quad... I know they were moved across the street a few years later.

That's making rusty gears move a bit in my brain. I remember the basement darkroom, but I thought it was in the south west corner. Didn't it get moved to the O'Keefe building on Victoria? Which basement corner had the swimming pool?

The "campus" really wasn't a campus in those days. I had one class in the old Pharmacy building on Gerrard and remember racing to the next one on the 7th floor of the Eaton's warehouse (Journalism building?) on Terauley Street. There was even an elevator operator.

[dapeek]

I think Pentaxians are doomed to become a dying breed at least here in the US. It is almost impossible for me to find a store anywhere near me that sells Pentax. So I would have to order a camera without knowing how it feels in my hand. I don't think most people are comfortable taking that leap of faith.

I did that myself with the K100D that I presently own (and have been shooting with for 4 years with no regrets) but what had drawn me to Pentax back then was the tremendous value for money proposition it offered. Back then the K100D packed more features and build quality per dollar than any of the competing models.

The landscape has changed significantly since then. I agonized over the K-5 vs. Nikon D7000 decision for months and finally ordered the D7000 yesterday. I understand and appreciate all the positives of the K-5 over the D7000 but they are simply not worth the $300 price difference at least to me, especially since I don't have a sizeable investment in Pentax lenses (your mileage may vary). The K-5 also has many negatives - the most significant one for me being the lack of manual video control.

Pentax has not succeeded in making any inroads at least in the US market by being the value for money brand (they still remain far behind the big players). Under Hoya management they seem to have made a conscious decision to become more of a niche brand relying on the relatively few loyal supporters they've always had. I hope this strategy works out for them and it is clear from this forum that there are many people willing to stick by Pentax no matter what. Just that this group of people will always be a minority (or even a rarity) in the overall scheme of things.

Dapeek

[normhead]

$300 price difference at least to me, especially since I don't have a sizeable investment in Pentax lenses (your mileage may vary).

You don't have $300 worth of glass, but you were considering a k-5? I just got a Kx for my wife, cost me $479, with a lens. WIth less than $300 in glass and coming from a K00D, you should have been looking at at Kr or Kx. But hey, as I used to say when I was teaching when questioned about how hard (or easy) my tests were " I can write a test that will fail every one, but what would that prove." Anyway, good luck with your purchase. I just bought my Tamron 90 from a guy who dumped his Pentax stuff after coming into some Nikon equipment. That I can understand. Paying for it up front? Not so much. I love that Tamron 90 by the way. People selling their Pentax stuff is good for me.

The odd thing is, I have a photo in a contest right now that could win me a full Professional Nikon camera bag with all the appropriate goodies ) me and over 1000 other people. Wouldn't that just be a killer? What can you get for that stuff?

[eddie1960]

You don't have $300 worth of glass, but you were considering a k-5? I just got a Kx for my wife, cost me $479, with a lens. WIth less than $300 in glass and coming from a K00D, you should have been looking at at Kr or Kx. But hey, as I used to say when I was teaching when questioned about how hard (or easy) my tests were " I can write a test that will fail every one, but what would that prove." Anyway, good luck with your purchase. I just bought my Tamron 90 from a guy who dumped his Pentax stuff after coming into some Nikon equipment. That I can understand. Paying for it up front? Not so much. I love that Tamron 90 by the way. People selling their Pentax stuff is good for me.

The odd thing is, I have a photo in a contest right now that could win me a full Professional Nikon camera bag with all the appropriate goodies ) me and over 1000 other people. Wouldn't that just be a killer? What can you get for that stuff?

a 645D which would be your perfect camera up there in the wilds Norm

[dapeek]

You don't have $300 worth of glass, but you were considering a k-5? I just got a Kx for my wife, cost me $479, with a lens. WIth less than $300 in glass and coming from a K100D, you should have been looking at at Kr or Kx

I am sorry I don't get your point. Are you saying that the K-5 is only for those who have thousands invested in Pentax glass ? That would just reinforce what I was trying to say.

Most people buying an entry-mid level model like the K100D would buy it with the cheap kit lenses which is what I did. And when they outgrow that model, they look for something more advanced. Each generation of Pentax SLRs has offered just 2 models - a basic one and an advanced one (Kx & K-7 before, Kr & K-5 now) and so it is not like there is a lot to pick from.

Megapixel count is not the most important factor for me and in many other respects the Kx or Kr are closer to entry level than the K100D (granted the sensor technology has improved a great deal in the last few years). I had considered the K-7 in the past but held off because of the high ISO limitations that model had. The K-5 seemed to be just the model I was waiting for (I would have gotten it with the 18-135 & 55-300 lenses) but I personally could not justify the higher price (compared to the D7000 which was well matched feature-wise, maybe inferior in some aspects and superior in other aspects).

Dapeek

[eddie1960]

I am sorry I don't get your point. Are you saying that the K-5 is only for those who have thousands invested in Pentax glass ? That would just reinforce what I was trying to say.

Most people buying an entry-mid level model like the K100D would buy it with the cheap kit lenses which is what I did. And when they outgrow that model, they look for something more advanced. Each generation of Pentax SLRs has offered just 2 models - a basic one and an advanced one (Kx & K-7 before, Kr & K-5 now) and so it is not like there is a lot to pick from.

Megapixel count is not the most important factor for me and in many other respects the Kx or Kr are closer to entry level than the K100D (granted the sensor technology has improved a great deal in the last few years). I had considered the K-7 in the past but held off because of the high ISO limitations that model had. The K-5 seemed to be just the model I was waiting for (I would have gotten it with the 18-135 & 55-300 lenses) but I personally could not justify the higher price (compared to the D7000 which was well matched feature-wise, maybe inferior in some aspects and superior in other aspects).

Dapeek

this is why i argue they should have kept the kx and k7 in the lineup, there is very logical line progression there and it gives more selection to people.
Personally i think people put too much emphasis on high iso. damn on film i've never shot higher than 3200 and given the latitude of a good film it gives me maybe 6400 when i print.
it's certainly nice to have the high iso option but after moving from the k10 to the k7 i have to say it is vastly underrated in it's high iso performance
K& at 3200 iso (better than any 3200 colour film i've used - oh wait there isn't one, ok better than 3200 b/w as well )

[normhead]

a 645D which would be your perfect camera up there in the wilds Norm

In my dreams. I used to have a Mamiya 645... the good thing was that when I got tired of carrying it around, I got a pile of money for it, kind of like a bank account.

Most people buying an entry-mid level model like the K100D would buy it with the cheap kit lenses which is what I did.

That's one way of looking at it. The other would be, if you're only if getting one lens, why would you even buy a DSLR? There are some fine point and shoots out there with some great features. The big deal about the DSLR is... you can use more than one lens.

I actually traded my K100D for my Kx so, we think differently.

And I'm saying, if you really want to get into things more, trade you K100D for a KX without glass. They'll give you $120 for your K100D and your old lens will save you $80. Keep your kit lens, and save the $1000 you save on the KD or the $600 you save on the Nikon, to buy a nice lens. You can get a Tamron 90 f2.8 macro new for that..

Then you're talking about a party.

Or as Mr. Scanlon my studio teacher used to say.. find a lens you like and buy the body that goes with it. If you would have been talking about some great Nikon glass that you loved to death, that would have made my heart warm.. Canon or Nikon or whatever.

But in the overall scheme of things, $300 dollars as the deciding factor because you have to have the top of the line is scary. Especially if you're still using just your kit lens. Back when your kit lens was a very acceptable 50mm 1.8 that was cool. Thinking you've learned much on a camera with a minimum aperture that's 3.5 is just dangerous. And what's with people buying DSLR's for video? Don't they still make video cameras?

Don't take this too seriously though, I'm not trying to say anything a good beer wouldn't wash away.

Good luck with your decision, either way.

[JJSk10d]

For me I really let the camera do the talking. Of course with camera's that are in the same range as my k10d, like the D80 and the XTi... People bad mouth Pentax where I am at, until they see some of my photography. Then they use the lens excuse. "Well we have more choices when it comes to lenses" I just shrug them off and continue shooting.lol

[Designosophy]

I've only had a DSLR since last July, but I was fortunate to discover fairly early on that a lens can make a greater contribution to the quality of a photograph than a body. With my Pentax-M 50mm f1.4 or A-28 f2.8 on my K-x, I can take a better photo than I could with a K-5 and the f3.5 18-55 D AL. If it were the *ist instead of the K-x, the same would probably be true, even with the significantly lower resolution.

If you want value, take a look at the back catalog of Pentax lenses. Prices have gone up for used Pentax manual focus lenses, but the more common K, M and A series lenses can still be had for decent prices. And nothing taught me more about SLR photography than learning to use a fully manual lens. Plus, there are a bunch of decent 3rd party lenses available.

[dapeek]

That's one way of looking at it. The other would be, if you're only if getting one lens, why would you even buy a DSLR? There are some fine point and shoots out there with some great features. The big deal about the DSLR is... you can use more than one lens.

If you have a whole bag of lenses to go with your DSLR, more power to you. But you cannot measure everyone else by your own yardstick. Different people have different needs and shooting styles and some people prefer to shoot with just one or two kit lenses. That is not to say that they don't know what they are doing or that they don't appreciate the advantages that DSLRs offer over point and shoots (large optical viewfinder, low shutter lag, better high ISO performance, etc).

Especially if you're still using just your kit lens. Back when your kit lens was a very acceptable 50mm 1.8 that was cool. Thinking you've learned much on a camera with a minimum aperture that's 3.5 is just dangerous.

Again different strokes for different folks. I understand the advantages of fast (large aperture) lenses and I have owned some in the past with my film SLR. Changing lenses often (fast primes) or carrying heavy lenses (fast zooms) is simply not suited to my current shooting needs. But it would be a little condescending to presume that someone who doesn't use these fast lenses is somehow not worthy of a more advanced DSLR.

And what's with people buying DSLR's for video? Don't they still make video cameras?

I am sure people were equally dismissive when other "gimmicky features" were added to cameras - such as autofocus and more recently live view. But that is not to say these features are not useful - at least to the people who choose to use them. That is why camera manufacturers continue to include these features in their cameras. I will not go into the advantages of video in DSLRs over regular camcorders but Pentax apparently has included a dumbed-down implementation of video in the K-5 - giving people the option to use video but giving them little control over how they use it.

Dapeek

[FH_le]

Maybe I am from a different planet, but just after I purchased my K5 (as my first pentax camera) I realized that two close friends were having Pentax camera's for years !
(somehow, I never really cared before, but now I enjoy lens-sharing...)

[jboyde]

I see my biggest share of Pentaxians during the Sakura Festival in DC every spring, when the cherry blossoms come out. Mostly Asian and Eastern European tourists have them, but still outnumber by "Canikonians".
I had one older white lady with a Canon draped over her neck scoff at me using the K200. I walked away from her like a homeless guy begging for change! The issue of "brand arrogance" is stupid. I talked to a guy 2 weeks later with a Leica rangefinder and he was the most down to earth guy I've met, and I bet 3 of my and 4 of her cameras couldn't even TOUCH what he had to pay!