[clackers]

Spotted a Pentax DSLR user on Bourke St, Melbourne, Australia today. An entry level model was all I could tell.

I met fellow Pentaxian @Broo at a workshop last weekend ... great guy from Castlemaine with a K-1.

[sibyrnes]

I'm sure many of you have seen this:



Look at the size of that glass! 50mm f 1.2 maybe?

[Lucky-Luc]

There is a tv show called "Stranger.Things" In the second episode of the first season, there is a kid spying with film Pentax.

[Alex645]

Nice documentary short on Vimeo with a Pentax K1000 at the 1:00 mark:

Vimeo

[seagas]

TBH, the colour of the body is "irrelevant" except that any other colour draws attention (desired or otherwise) to the owner if he/she so desires. For myself, I am quite content to use the "basic" black bodies (being someone who has "learnt" not to draw attention to myself - there's literally painful "history" that I don't wish to talk about!).

I can certainly understand that. I prefer the not to use the tradition all black in anything, be a smart phone, automobile or camera, but I've always tend to march of my own drummer. For practical reasons, especially for smaller objects with includes cameras, I prefer anything that sticks out as I have a tendency to leave things behind.

[jeryst]

I've always used Pentax or Minolta and have never owned a Canon or Nikon
DSLR, although I have had a couple point and shoots. I'm not a professional, so
Pentax has always been the best value for me. I also very rarely see anyone else
using Pentax. Any time I go to a wedding or other type of event, I always see Nikon
and have never seen a Canon.

So I was just wondering how Pentax cameras like the K-1 stack up against the similar Nikons
and Canons in regards to features and image quality. Is there justification that those
other cameras are better than Pentax, or is it truely just a matter of advertising and
camera snobbery? I will always be a Pentax fan, but I would like to know the honest answer.

[Alex645]

So I was just wondering how Pentax cameras like the K-1 stack up against the similar Nikons
and Canons in regards to features and image quality. Is there justification that those
other cameras are better than Pentax, or is it truely just a matter of advertising and
camera snobbery?

If you compare apples to apples, meaning Canon, Nikon, Pentax full frame at the same price point you'd be looking at:

Pentax K1: 36MP, 5-way IBIS sensor shift, 33 AF points, 3.2" Tilting LCD (1,037,000), 204,800 max ISO, no flash, 1/8000" max shutter, operating temp 14 to 104°F (-10 to 40°C), 924 g., plus unlike the others Astrotracer and Pixel-Shift resolution mode.

Nikon D750: 24MP, no IBIS, 51 AF points, 3.2" Tilting LCD (1,229,000), 12,800 max ISO, built-in flash, 1/4000" max shutter, 32 to 104°F (0 to 40°C), 750 g.

Canon 6D II: 26MP, 5-way IBIS digital shift, 45 AF points, 3" Swivel Touchscreen LCD (1,040,000), 40,000 max ISO, no flash, 1/4000" max shutter, 32 to 104°F (0 to 40°C), 685 g., plus unlike the others only a single SD card slot.

So as you can see, each camera has pros and cons in various areas, but nothing that clearly makes one inferior or superior. With that said, the K-1 is the Pentax FF flagship unlike the Nikon and Canon priced equivalents.

Now if we compared the K1 ($1900) with the Nikon D5 ($6500) or D850 ($3300) or Canon EOS 1DX II ($6000) or EOS 5D IV ($3500) the pros and cons balance changes.

Yes, snobbery is often a factor, but it goes both ways. You can have rich snobs and you can have poor snobs; photographers with $$$$ gear that actually believe they are better BUT also photographers with $ gear that look down on the $$$$ geared photographers.

AND sadly much of the perception via the media is from advertising and marketing. Canon+See Impossible; Nikon+At the heart of the image; Pentax+imagine. change.

Canon and Nikon are so dominant because they have historically flooded brick and mortars worldwide with entry level DSLRs while having a midrange models for upgrading and pro end prestige for the photographers that use their gear for a living and/or networks, institutions, governments, corporations that can just lease it.

For me, it's about the glass. I don't own Apple products because they are cheaper, but because I like the software integration, and Apple makes the hardware that works with it. I own Pentax (and Nikon) cameras because there are specific lenses that I love and they work on those cameras. (Full disclosure: In college I had one horrible experience with a Canon, and it has scarred and biased me for life!)

IF you're not currently invested in one system of lenses and don't have the budget for a higher end FF from Canon or Nikon, the Pentax K1 is a gem. A good photographer can do wonders with a K-S2 or K-50.

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

With regard to image quality, the Pentax K-1 is up there with the best full frame cameras, and not much touches it in pixel shift mode for static subjects. I have a K-1 and Nikon D810 and D850.

[Lord Lucan]

As a Pentax user in the UK since the mid-80s when they were one of the "big five" in 35mm (with Canon, Minolta, Nikon, with Olympus), and I knew my LX was the equal or the better of the Nikon F3 and Canon F1N, and that Olympuses were mainly for David Bailey and fitting on microscopes The Pentax 6x7 was then considered one of the best cameras, even the very best, for hand-held resolution in studio photography and eg police crime-scene work. It saddens me that Pentax now seems to be an outsider despite staying on the rails - unlike Minolta and Olympus. I was not even aware before I came to this forum that I was supposed to look up to and admire Canon and Nikon users, and black-tape over my own camera name.

Posters here refer to seeing another Pentax user as like sighting a white leopard, and I start to wonder how Ricoh/Pentax are staying in business. I do not notice the scarcity of Pentax users because I live in the sticks and do not tend to go to cities, tourist areas or "events"; my prime interest is landscape. TBH I rarely see any other DSLR at all, only phone cameras, compact P&S's and occasionally a bridge.

I can understand that professionals want the after-sales service that Canon provide, but professionals are only a small proportion of DSLR users. You would think that the overwhelmingly better value for money of Pentax would give it a much bigger slice of the market than it has.

This week I bought a Pentax-D FA 24-70 from a Calumet branch. They are professionally oriented dealers and the branch had display cabinets for Canon and Nikon cameras only. I had to order my lens and they first had to "check whether there was one in the country" (their words). No wonder people are not encouraged to buy Pentax kit. The manager asked how I found the K-1 and I said I liked it, had been using it with a crop lens and some old K mount manuals, and that while I had heard that Canon and Nikon autofocus was faster, the Pentax IQ had been rated as equal or better. I added that I could not understand why Pentax was not more generally popular with the value it offered.

[totsmuyco]

I can understand that professionals want the after-sales service that Canon provide, but professionals are only a small proportion of DSLR users. You would think that the overwhelmingly better value for money of Pentax would give it a much bigger slice of the market than it has.

This week I bought a Pentax-D FA 24-70 from a Calumet branch. They are professionally oriented dealers and the branch had display cabinets for Canon and Nikon cameras only. I had to order my lens and they first had to "check whether there was one in the country" (their words). No wonder people are not encouraged to buy Pentax kit. The manager asked how I found the K-1 and I said I liked it, had been using it with a crop lens and some old K mount manuals, and that while I had heard that Canon and Nikon autofocus was faster, the Pentax IQ had been rated as equal or better. I added that I could not understand why Pentax was not more generally popular with the value it offered.

We have a brick and mortar retailer here all over our country. However, I don't think Pentax is going to pick up with the way they're priced and promoted. Nikon is sold cheaper than Pentax. canikony is also being pushed more than Pentax. If you'll compare the K-70 and the D5600, it's Pentax's AF that pulls it down. I don't really care about touch screen. All other features I believe are either the same or Pentax ends up to be a better choice. I believe the key to Pentax success is to focus more on its strengths and proper pricing. But then again, pricing and promotion here seem to be confusing.

[aslyfox]

Yesterday I met a Sony user at the zoo, he said that he had heard of Pentax film cameras but didn't realize they made digital cameras

He mentioned the K 1000 that he had in a film class one time

lack of publicity hurts

[jeryst]

I still feel the biggest problem is lack of advertising, which promotes lack of education, and just
plain arrogance. Just like people buy expensive cars and expensive homes to show
others how well they are doing, they buy the perceived more luxurious products just
to show that they can. It then trickles down to the wannabe's as well. I have a degree in
marketing, and all Pentax needs is to show a couple famous people using a Pentax,
and/or get a couple product shots in a popular TV show or movie, and watch how fast
demand would rise. I know this is expensive, but you know the old saying: It takes money
to make money. Maybe we could find someone famous among our ranks that would
be willing to step up.

[clackers]

I know this is expensive, but you know the old saying: It takes money
to make money. .

Yep, but they wouldn't get their money back, Jeryst.

Nikon currently aren't.

[Digitalis]

This might be old news - I was going through the behind the scenes footage from the star trek into darkness and spotted this:

[Mikesul]

Interesting. Any idea what the lens is? For publicity stills?