[photoptimist]

Unlikely: It would probably take five. Let's just say, it's unnatural and could have consequences in our understanding of quantum photography.

Indeed! A pentagram of Pentaxians with their pentaprisms would surely summon Maxwell's Demon to magically separate all hot pixels and banish all photographic noise to make ISO ∞ a reality.

[Cerebum]

Indeed! A pentagram of Pentaxians with their pentaprisms would surely summon Maxwell's Demon to magically separate all hot pixels and banish all photographic noise to make ISO ∞ a reality.

I need to find a fifth pentaxian and meet at the witching hour, neath the walls of the castle where the fate of the Pendle witches was sealed (Lancaster castle, just over there). That should work, surely! & its gotta be worth it for iso infinity

[Lhorn]

Apparently Randy Johnson is a Pentaxian. For those not familiar with Randy Johnson he was an American baseball pitcher. Standing 6'10" he was intimidating, a tremendous competitor and a very hard thrower who stuck out a lot of batters. Second only to the great Nolan Ryan in career strikeouts, he was dominant.

I guess he's a pretty good photographer too and apparently a hard rock/metal head.

Here's his website. On he "about" section is a picture of "the Big Unit" with a Pentax 67 around his neck.
Concerts – Randy Johnson Photography

Hos logo appears to be a dead bird. I assume that's reference to the time he was throwing a pitch when an unfortunate bird flew in front of the batter and exploded into a puff of feathers. The video is not hard to find if you are interested.

[volosong]

Much to my surprise, while walking in a local park near the pavilion where some workers were constructing the winter skating rink, one of the workers spied my K-1 and asked about it, and even if I had upgraded it to a K-1 II. He even knew what lens was on the body, correctly naming the focal range, (i.e., 24-70/2.8). I did not chat with him long because his co-worker started getting impatient. He must have been a "closet Pentaxian".

[mroeder75]

Apparently Randy Johnson is a Pentaxian. For those not familiar with Randy Johnson he was an American baseball pitcher. Standing 6'10" he was intimidating, a tremendous competitor and a very hard thrower who stuck out a lot of batters. Second only to the great Nolan Ryan in career strikeouts, he was dominant.

I guess he's a pretty good photographer too and apparently a hard rock/metal head.

Here's his website. On he "about" section is a picture of "the Big Unit" with a Pentax 67 around his neck.
Concerts – Randy Johnson Photography

Hos logo appears to be a dead bird. I assume that's reference to the time he was throwing a pitch when an unfortunate bird flew in front of the batter and exploded into a puff of feathers. The video is not hard to find if you are interested.

Speaks well for the brand. Randy Johnson could afford any camera on the market, and chose Pentax.

[Photos-by-Chas]

I'm wondering if Ricoh/Pentax's decision to hold on the mirrorless transition has affected, in any way, the continued loyalty. Personally, I will be staying with the DSLR and not switching to MILCs for a variety of reasons: familiarity with SLR, it is what I am used to; cost, I cannot justify paying for more expensive camera when my current kit is working so well; and I do not feel there will be any improvement in my photography with a different camera.

[Capt22]

Two weeks ago while taking pictures of the fall foliage in my local park with my K3 I happened to run into another photographer there shooting with a Nikon. We struck up a brief conversation and he asked me what I was shooting with. I told him a Pentax K3. His response, "I have heard of Pentax but never actually saw one before."

[jcdoss]

...His response, "I have heard of Pentax but never actually saw one before."

If he were allowed to touch your K3, I bet he would have switched brands instantly. 😃

[richard0170]

I'm wondering if Ricoh/Pentax's decision to hold on the mirrorless transition has affected, in any way, the continued loyalty. Personally, I will be staying with the DSLR and not switching to MILCs for a variety of reasons: familiarity with SLR, it is what I am used to; cost, I cannot justify paying for more expensive camera when my current kit is working so well; and I do not feel there will be any improvement in my photography with a different camera.

Your reasoning is just.
I have both Pentax and Fuji X systems, so believe I am in a position to make fair comparisons between the two. For me the big differences are to do with size and the colour science. The latter, being purely down to taste, is to be parked to one side. My X-T 1 is as capable as my KP, in a smaller, lighter body and with a greater variety of lenses,available. The XE and XT 10 line of cameras are even more compact, and if you don't mind the slight inconveniences in ergonomics, well worth looking at if size and weight bothers you. For certain uses I prefer the Fujis (general walk about, street, B&W, playin gwith adapted lenses) for other uses I prefer my K3, KP and K1 ii cameras (close up, landscape, still life, anything where I am going to use a flash, when I want vibrant colours). For anything else I just grab whatever the mood takes me. Some people struggle with EVF, though I don't see that much difference, but I do prefer an OVF for slow studied shots, which is why I prefer the Pentax's for the aforementioned purposes.
The elephant in the room though is that over time most mirrorless cameras have grown in size. Consider the X-T1 and its current descendant the X-T4 or Sony's original A7 and its current iteration for example. Thus negating much of the advantages the original marketing of the systems highlighted. Small "travel" type cameras like the XE or XT10 make sense when attached to small lenses but otherwise.....The cynic in me thinks its all just marketing to cover up the manufacturers' desires to cut costs. For example if Pentax were to make a KP without image stabilisation or an inbuilt flash it would be almost the same size as my X-T1, if quite a bit heavier due to the pentaprism.

[Jonathan Mac]

Your reasoning is just.
I have both Pentax and Fuji X systems, so believe I am in a position to make fair comparisons between the two. For me the big differences are to do with size and the colour science. The latter, being purely down to taste, is to be parked to one side. My X-T 1 is as capable as my KP, in a smaller, lighter body and with a greater variety of lenses,available. The XE and XT 10 line of cameras are even more compact, and if you don't mind the slight inconveniences in ergonomics, well worth looking at if size and weight bothers you. For certain uses I prefer the Fujis (general walk about, street, B&W, playing with adapted lenses) for other uses I prefer my K3, KP and K1 ii cameras (close up, landscape, still life, anything where I am going to use a flash, when I want vibrant colours). For anything else I just grab whatever the mood takes me. Some people struggle with EVF, though I don't see that much difference, but I do prefer an OVF for slow studied shots, which is why I prefer the Pentax's for the aforementioned purposes.
The elephant in the room though is that over time most mirrorless cameras have grown in size. Consider the X-T1 and its current descendant the X-T4 or Sony's original A7 and its current iteration for example. Thus negating much of the advantages the original marketing of the systems highlighted. Small "travel" type cameras like the XE or XT10 make sense when attached to small lenses but otherwise.....The cynic in me thinks its all just marketing to cover up the manufacturers' desires to cut costs. For example if Pentax were to make a KP without image stabilisation or an inbuilt flash it would be almost the same size as my X-T1, if quite a bit heavier due to the pentaprism.

If I were to say the biggest differences between my X-T20 and K-3 I'd say size and AF reliability are the big ones, and of course the viewfinder type and all that goes with it. Colour science is obviously different and like you I prefer the K3 for some things and the Fujifilm for others.

As for size, I can't really comment as I don't have much experience. I also have an X-M1 that is smaller than the X-T20 but then it lacks the viewfinder so that's to be expected. My S5 is about the same size and weight as the K-3 though the shape is different and even if newer FF mirrorless cameras are bigger than their predecessors, they're still smaller and lighter than an equivalent DSLR.

[richard0170]

If I were to say the biggest differences between my X-T20 and K-3 I'd say size and AF reliability are the big ones, and of course the viewfinder type and all that goes with it. Colour science is obviously different and like you I prefer the K3 for some things and the Fujifilm for others.

As for size, I can't really comment as I don't have much experience. I also have an X-M1 that is smaller than the X-T20 but then it lacks the viewfinder so that's to be expected. My S5 is about the same size and weight as the K-3 though the shape is different and even if newer FF mirrorless cameras are bigger than their predecessors, they're still smaller and lighter than an equivalent DSLR.

I forgot the obvious AF difference between mirrorless and Pentax. TBH though it's not that great between the KP and X-T1. and in any event the same AF comparisons could be made between Canikon and Pentax DSLRs!

I have to disagree with you over the size issue. Now much bigger is say a K3 iii than a X-T4, or even an X-H1 or 2. A much better comparison than between a K3 and X-T20. Or how about your S5 and a Canon 6D? Not so much in it really. And if one wants to get really picky take a look at a OM-D1X! My point is not so much that you can't get nice small mirrorless cameras, but that the manufacturers mostly seem to keep increasing the size of their offerings.

[Surnia]

I came across a k3 iii user from Malaysia in the rockies a month or two ago. I think it's the third pentax I've seen in the wild...

[pentuxgb]

To gain a bit of experience and learn some more, I've now done 3 mini workshops around the UK:

Cameras used:
Workshop 1: 2 Canons, 2 Nikon, 2 Fujis
Workshop 2: 2 Panasonics, 1 Canon
Workshop 3: 3 Fuji, two of the Fujis were medium format.

They all thought it was interesting that my Pentax K100D was still working and that I had and used 2 or 3 vintage lens.

I haven't seen another Pentax in the wild yet.

[Jonathan Mac]

My point is not so much that you can't get nice small mirrorless cameras, but that the manufacturers mostly seem to keep increasing the size of their offerings.

I think it's the price we pay for the constant feature creep - all those features need electronics to run them and that takes up space. Sensors don't have dramatic IQ differences from the previous generation. AF systems are very advanced and difficult to further approve. If a manufacturer leaves out new or advanced features then they'd get knocked in reviews more than they do for making their gear larger.

[photoptimist]

My point is not so much that you can't get nice small mirrorless cameras, but that the manufacturers mostly seem to keep increasing the size of their offerings.

One sad cause of this is that manufacturers are forced to deal with ignorance and insecurity.

For most non-photographers and many camera buyers, the first impressions are that "pros" use big cameras and "amateurs" use small cameras. The bigger the camera, the pro'er the photographer, right?

Peer pressure and insecurity make too many camera buyers opt for a larger camera just to keep up appearances. It's only the iconoclasts that thumb their noses at this rule and know that they can get great pictures out of a small camera.