[reh321]

I rarely shot RAW on my K-3. It is actually easier to use RAW then shot SOOC. So I do not think SOOC offers more simplicity. At least not in case where one wants to use phone for serious photography.

It depends on who you, what your goals are, and what your environment is.
Usually, there is nothing simpler then copying an image from the ‘camera’,
but of course, you have to avoid needing “corrections” and not want an “artistic” representation.

[reh321]

I rarely shot RAW on my K-3. It is actually easier to use RAW then shot SOOC. So I do not think SOOC offers more simplicity. At least not in case where one wants to use phone for serious photography.

As for quality - if you are photographing in good light and do not print big or pixel peep then there is no advantage of ILC over smartphones even in their current form. Of course with not enough light things change as computational photography is still far from reproducing long exposures without smudging details (I printed in-house made photo - it was terribly soft compared to same done with K-3). It depends for what you want to use camera.

Still, there are bigger and better sensors made for phone cameras and there is lots of advancement and experimenting with lenses going on. Phones are main field of technical and software innovation now when it comes to photography.

Anyway, we are going toward OT

Several weeks ago - when a discussion also wander off topic - I posted a photo I took with a smart phone I took of a “Virginian locomotive”. @AggieDad identified it as a an “SD70”. The “Virginian” was a railroad which was merged into the “N&W” in 1959, which was merged with the “Southern Ry” in the 1980’s to form the “Norfolk Southern”. The locomotive I photographed was one of several modern locomotives painted by the “Norfolk Southern” to honor their predecessors. I could have taken that photo with any camera - the “SD70” is a standard design - but the smart phone was the camera I happened to have with me when I saw that locomotive. In many times, a camera is a device to record modern life, and the artistic approach made possible by a modern camera is not needed; the Kodak Instamatic 100 I had in 1959 would have been perfectly adequate - but smart phones have replaced them in function.

[Cerebum]

Several weeks ago - when a discussion also wander off topic - I posted a photo I took with a smart phone I took of a “Virginian locomotive”. @AggieDad identified it as a an “SD70”. The “Virginian” was a railroad which was merged into the “N&W” in 1959, which was merged with the “Southern Ry” in the 1980’s to form the “Norfolk Southern”. The locomotive I photographed was one of several modern locomotives painted by the “Norfolk Southern” to honor their predecessors. I could have taken that photo with any camera - the “SD70” is a standard design - but the smart phone was the camera I happened to have with me when I saw that locomotive. In many times, a camera is a device to record modern life, and the artistic approach made possible by a modern camera is not needed; the Kodak Instamatic 100 I had in 1959 would have been perfectly adequate - but smart phones have replaced them in function.

I was talking to a colleague. We were discussing the irony in the fact that cameras are viewed with suspicion in urban enviroents, despite 90% of people there having a very capable camera in their pocket. There was also a piece in a mag regarding this. The author said we are at a stage where anyone can get a nice image of a nice location, there is no skill required. What we as photographers need to do to stand out is utilise the tricks our cameras have and use the skills we possess to compose something a bit special. Tbh, these days I get more enjoyment from using cameras, especially film cameras, than I do from viewing images. That's one area in which smartphone users will never compete oh, I absolutely love steam trains too

[Lord Lucan]

the irony in the fact that cameras are viewed with suspicion in urban enviroents, despite 90% of people there having a very capable camera in their pocket

If you are using a "real" camera these days, especially a large one, people assume you are a professional and perhaps assessing a property (for redevelopment?) or that the picture will be published (without their permission?), or simply making money somehow that they will not get a share of. They are also aware that it could be a telephoto picture that will be zoomed in on them them rather than being a wide scene. Of course, one could still be assessing a property with a phone camera, and anyone can publish anything on the web these days - you don't need to be a pro photographer for that.

At work, for years there was a ban on bringing a camera onto the site. Then, when every mobile phone got a camera in it, it changed to a ban on taking photos on site with a person in it without their permission. I never understood that, they could have just allowed mobile phones on site but banned using its camera (even though that would be hard to enforce), especially as some of the hardware you might photo could be made into an issue in the "wrong" hands.

[mlag]

At work, for years there was a ban on bringing a camera onto the site. Then, when every mobile phone got a camera in it, it changed to a ban on taking photos on site with a person in it without their permission. I never understood that, they could have just allowed mobile phones on site but banned using its camera (even though that would be hard to enforce), especially as some of the hardware you might photo could be made into an issue in the "wrong" hands.

At work, it was in most occasions to shield off the fine details of the production process...and photographing in general would be prohibited.
But if it focusses on persons it seems more for privacy reasons of that person,
or for protection, if the company produced "sensitive or high value or ...." goods which might induce hijacking, theft or similar consequences for the workers.

[richard0170]

Like travelling back in time today. Went to a local garden (Brodsworth Hall near Doncaster) where there was a falconry display on. Lots of real cameras on display. My KP was the only Pentax, and as I was not there for the birds I was not armed with a suitable lens. Many others were though. Canon and Nikon DSLRs and what looked like not a few Olympus OMD EM1s, all with long lenses.
And most surprising of all, a Nikkormat FT of some sort in very shiny condition.
Sadly all of these machines were being wielded by folk of a certain generation (mine) or older.....

[jcdoss]

Sadly all of these machines were being wielded by folk of a certain generation (mine) or older.....

This might cheer you up. While on our daily walkabout the town, I saw a younger lady (30s) wielding what appeared to be a Nikon Z mount machine with a medium sized zoom taking dog portraits with the lens hood on backwards. This is the first time since moving here that I've seen another real camera on a routine walkabout.

[edri]

Sadly all of these machines were being wielded by folk of a certain generation (mine) or older.....

It could also be seen from the images from the Pentax anniversary that most of the people there were roughly the same generations.

[cdd29]

I was photographing a Scottish festival today & an older gentleman came up to me pointing out my K-1ii and had a K-3iii. First time I've seen a K-3iii in the wild.

[Alex645]

Tallying the cameras in my film, digital photography, and videography classes, for the first time, not a Pentax in sight: Canon 20, Nikon 14, Minolta 2, Sony 2, Fujifilm 1.

Rare indeed because there are usually at least a couple Pentax 35mm SLRs and the discontinuation of DSLRs except Pentax. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if Pentax sold a solid but entry level DSLR, there is a market. And for the first time since 2010, I now have more students taking my film photography classes than my digital.

[mroeder75]

Tallying the cameras in my film, digital photography, and videography classes, for the first time, not a Pentax in sight: Canon 20, Nikon 14, Minolta 2, Sony 2, Fujifilm 1.

Rare indeed because there are usually at least a couple Pentax 35mm SLRs and the discontinuation of DSLRs except Pentax. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if Pentax sold a solid but entry level DSLR, there is a market. And for the first time since 2010, I now have more students taking my film photography classes than my digital.

I think of the K70 as an entry level DSLR. What do you think of the K70?

[Photos-by-Chas]

I think of the K70 as an entry level DSLR. What do you think of the K70?

I am not a teacheer nor a professional but the photos I get from my K-70 with the kit 18 - 135 are wonderful. Personally, I think in the right hands, almost any camera with a quality sensor, good lenses, and sufficient pixels for enlarging an image, is capable of taking appropriate and adequate photos of great image quality and providing a professional result. That having been said, I would include the K-70 in that grouping.

[Alex645]

I think of the K70 as an entry level DSLR. What do you think of the K70?

Although Pentax may consider the K70 their gateway entry level DSLR because it's their least expensive DSLR, I do not because for most beginners, price is a top priority.

Currently in USD:
Canon EOS Rebel T100 with kit lens: $379
Canon EOS Rebel T7 with kit lens: $479
Nikon D3500 with kit lens: $650
Pentax K70 with kit lens: $677 (current on sale price)

Do you get what you pay for? Well I would consider the Nikon D3500 worth the cost difference with the Canon T100 or T7, but over priced compared to the Pentax K70.

Is the K70 in its own league with the features, quality, design? Yes, far superior. But for students? The average family that spends hundreds on a new phone, getting a DSLR is a big ask if the K70 is $300 more than the T100...nearly double the price.

To help students that don't have 'hand me downs' from friends and family, I do send them info on this and highly recommend the K70. But this semester, all the new cameras in class were in the least expensive category plus a few Nikon D3500 probably because it's sold at the local BestBuy or camera store.

My next batch of students will be in January. I hope to see a few new Pentaxians in the new year.

[Photos-by-Chas]

Although Pentax may consider the K70 their gateway entry level DSLR because it's their least expensive DSLR, I do not because for most beginners, price is a top priority.

Currently in USD:
Canon EOS Rebel T100 with kit lens: $379
Canon EOS Rebel T7 with kit lens: $479
Nikon D3500 with kit lens: $650
Pentax K70 with kit lens: $677 (current on sale price)

Do you get what you pay for? Well I would consider the Nikon D3500 worth the cost difference with the Canon T100 or T7, but over priced compared to the Pentax K70.

Is the K70 in its own league with the features, quality, design? Yes, far superior. But for students? The average family that spends hundreds on a new phone, getting a DSLR is a big ask if the K70 is $300 more than the T100...nearly double the price.

To help students that don't have 'hand me downs' from friends and family, I do send them info on this and highly recommend the K70. But this semester, all the new cameras in class were in the least expensive category plus a few Nikon D3500 probably because it's sold at the local BestBuy or camera store.

My next batch of students will be in January. I hope to see a few new Pentaxians in the new year.

Just curiosity on my part, if you consider the K70 as too expensive as an entry level DSLR, would you consider, and possibly recommend, a slightly older used camera for a student entering the photography avocation? If so, what would you suggest? The brand is immaterial, just a good beginner camera.

[lesmore49]

If you are using a "real" camera these days, especially a large one, people assume you are a professional and perhaps assessing a property (for redevelopment?) or that the picture will be published (without their permission?), or simply making money somehow that they will not get a share of. They are also aware that it could be a telephoto picture that will be zoomed in on them them rather than being a wide scene. Of course, one could still be assessing a property with a phone camera, and anyone can publish anything on the web these days - you don't need to be a pro photographer for that.

Quite right. About 10 or so years ago, I saw a lot more DSLR's at events, etc. Now with the influx of camera phones, some of them quite good, I just occasionally see someone with a 'good' camera. When I go to an outdoor event...in my case mostly outdoor vintage vehicle shows...there are few that use expensive DSLR or mirrorless cameras. These shows have anywhere from 300-600 or so vintage vehicles/special interest cars and attract many 100's of people.

Cell phones abound.

I usually take my K1, with 24-70 F 2.8 lens attached. Quite often people assume I'm a commercial photographer, and I note that when I'm taking a photo, many times, but not always, other people will give me space.

If they only knew, I'm just a mere amateur, who likes using good camera equipment.

Now, in answer to the original question about whether Pentaxians are rare. Nowadays at least in my burg, I would say photographers using DSLR/Mirrorless cameras ...no matter the brand...are more rare than they used to be.

I'm relying on my experience of using advanced equipment, and doing the tourist thing, or going to events..... in the past half a century, plus.

It just seems that it is so convenient to use the camera that comes with your cellular phone....which can take some pretty good photos. The added advantage is that you can send them to your family members, friends and if you verge on celebrity status..maybe your followers.