[eddie1960]

Not sure what goes on elsewhere in the world, but in the US, what drives market choice is largely based on advertising presence. Both C & N have allocated huge budgets on TV and print media coverage. And it's probably true that retailers demand kickbacks for allotting shelf/floor space and that perhaps Pentax considers this verboten.

!

Yep, you pay for premium shelf space at all big box retailers, and you subsidize all advertising in flyers etc to get presence.
Pentax probably doesn't consider it verbotten they just have a very limited budget based on a % of the sales volume, and they likely require a measurable return on all ad investment

Canon has a ton of cash to spend, and have halo products to promote which convince people to buy at the lower end (if they can make that beautiful ds mkIV some of it must end up in my rebel sort of thinking)
they also have other industries that benefit from the name awareness (ie photocopiers business)

Nikon as well has the money and the higher end halo products that benefit the range.

TV is damn expensive ad space, and to get justifiable returns you have to sell a hell of a lot of cameras. Pentax doesn't have the retail presence (or likely the manufacturing capacity) to get that many cameras in peoples hands

The 645D definitely gets a halo product out there, but distribution and capacity have to be addressed before throwing a ton of cash at ad campaigns that can't be supported with availability
it would take a concerted effort and 5 year plan to get there, and should probably be done market by market leaving the biggest market for last as it requires the biggest investment - it does seem to be the plan actually they are really targeting the japanese market and have gained share there. profit from that can be reinvested in pursuing another market and so on.

[Balog]

Partly it's because they have some things (long fast lenses, better AF) that Pentax doesn't. Partly it's because they are ubuqitous at B&M. Partly it's because they have more advertising and marketing. Partly it's because the most visible "pro" photographers (those on the sidelines of sporting events, papparazzi, wild life photographers for magazines etc) almost always favor Canikon because of the aforementioned long fast/full frame/AF advantages, as well as the better support for people who burn through several hundred thousands shutter actuations per year. It's sort of like why chubby middle aged lawyers playing basketball with their friends often use the same expensive shoes as NBA players. Not that they need them, but the assumption is "pros are the best, therefore their equipment is the best" without regard to the intended use.

I wish Pentax had a comparable full frame professional camera (and the 645 is a $10k medium format with a far more limited lens selection so it's hardly applicable) but I'm more than happy with my K5. It's annoying finding no accessories and few used lenses at B&M stores, but overall the advantages Pentax offers suits me better than the advantages Canikon offers.

Let's not be jealous fanboys who feel the need to try to convince Canikon users they are foolish or wrong. I get enough of that from using Linux. Let's instead extol our own virtues, while acknowledging our shortcomings.

[Alan Clogwyn]

Horses for courses. Canon and Nikon both make Full frame Pro grade DSLRs, Pentax don't.

Pentax make a Medium Format Pro range, Canikon Don't.

Some people prefer Canon colours to Nikon, some prefer the subtler shades you get from a Nikon.

Canikon both have a prolific amount of low grade cameras, although they're not all that in any regard, because of the reputation of the FF cameras people want to buy into that.

I bought 4/3 then m4/3 because Size matters. No one else does anything that high quality that small. I've owned Nikon too, and hated everything about it, but if I really had to push for a FF camera then it would be a D3.

I wish Pentax or Olympus would make a FF range, that would be incredible.

[eddie1960]

I would love it if there was more widespread b/m distribution, but to be honest it's not a huge issue for me as every major Camera Store in Toronto has the line, it's just not in the big box chains like best-buy and Costco. In reality this is wise on Pentax's part as it protects their dealers margins somewhat and keeps the presence in the Stores who have staff that can sell it properly (not that they do, you pretty much have to ask to see Pentax where Canikon have bought most of the best display space, with Sony not far behind (Sony have been paying for premium exposure since at least the early 80's when i started in retail)

The main reason i'd like to see bigger market share developed is the additional lenses that would come to market with a bigger base and a wider selection of 3rd party items which really doesn't help hoya's bottom line

[eddie1960]

I wish Pentax or Olympus would make a FF range, that would be incredible.

I think there is a better chance of Pentax doing it but I'm not holding my breath

[gtxtom]

I remember when I was reading reviews for the K-5, which was my first Pentax dSLR. Every single review had a "con" saying that there aren't as many lenses available as CaNikon. Good thing I don't plan on buying 100+ lenses, right? ...

[jstevewhite]

I would say more that Pentax is a niche player, a photographer's camera company. For whatever reason, they have focused on weather sealing, compact size (both with regards to lenses and camera bodies).

I think the limited line is a testament to this fact. An enthusiast's camera company. Frankly, you could make "pro quality" images with any current DSLR and a decent lens or two.

Truthfully, Canon and Nikon both offer cheaper lenses than Pentax, although sometimes quality suffers a little bit as a result.

I think Canon/Nikon both have better marketing machines, pay high end photographers to use their gear and have better placement in stores (at least in the United States). There is definitely a perception out there that "real photographers" use Nikon or Canon. Not that I hear that from professionals, more from the masses who don't really know what they are talking about.

"Professional" is a dodgy concept though. I can introduce you to professionals who make good money that will tell you that you can't possibly be a pro if you're not using FF. I can introduce you to one that will tell you you're just playing if you aren't using MEDIUM FORMAT (that was actually quite common back in the film days). Then I can introduce you to two who use APS-c machines and make better images than the MF guy - and make more money with their "cheap" cameras.

I can introduce you to a guy who runs a wedding photography business. He's a businessman, first and foremost. His crews (he has three of 'em, three people per) use Canon 5DmkII exclusively, video and stills; they have five bodies onsite and an anvil case, and they operate like a well-oiled machine. The product they generate is stunning visually, but it *is* a product; they do about three different 'looks', over and over and over. He's the wealthiest "professional photographer" I know.

[jstevewhite]

I remember when I was reading reviews for the K-5, which was my first Pentax dSLR. Every single review had a "con" saying that there aren't as many lenses available as CaNikon. Good thing I don't plan on buying 100+ lenses, right? ...

Hehe... Pentax users have a long history of lenses to choose from. Unlike Canon - as much as I love Pentax, I'd still be shooting Canon if their bodies supported my old FD lenses. I keep looking at my 85mm f1.8 FD and agonizing over converting it to Pentax mount. It's irreversible, and even though I don't plan on using film again, I hate to... damage ... such a lovely lens. I converted the old 35 f2 I had (because it was broken anyway).

[thorwb]

Hehe... Pentax users have a long history of lenses to choose from. Unlike Canon - as much as I love Pentax, I'd still be shooting Canon if their bodies supported my old FD lenses. I keep looking at my 85mm f1.8 FD and agonizing over converting it to Pentax mount. It's irreversible, and even though I don't plan on using film again, I hate to... damage ... such a lovely lens. I converted the old 35 f2 I had (because it was broken anyway).

Jstevewhite: I think you're looking at this the wrong way. This is not damaging, this is saving an old lens that Canon left for dead.

[A-z]

...I keep looking at my 85mm f1.8 FD and agonizing over converting it to Pentax mount...

Do it! Better to use it than look at it I reckon

[jstevewhite]

Jstevewhite: I think you're looking at this the wrong way. This is not damaging, this is saving an old lens that Canon left for dead.

LOL! Good point. Well, looks like I need to shop for a cheap P/K lens I can steal the mount from. Thanks!

[liukaitc]

Well, because of my weird personality, I decide to choose Pentax for my DSLR world...simply, I want use a brand that is not popular. I want to feel different from mainstream. I guess if one day Pentax become as popular as the Canon now, I will swtich brand to a not so popular one.

[jstevewhite]

I remember when I was reading reviews for the K-5, which was my first Pentax dSLR. Every single review had a "con" saying that there aren't as many lenses available as CaNikon. Good thing I don't plan on buying 100+ lenses, right? ...

I think this is a fair enough criticism. OTOH, they should make it clear that they cover 18-300 very well in consumer market lenses, with no need for dual versions (OS and non-OS). That will cover the needs of the average guy who wants a better shot of his kids playing soccer, or better vacation pix than he gets with his powershot. If you're shooting the Space Shuttle, or Kodiaks in a national park, you might have to look to third party or the used market for your 600 f4.

[yusuf]

It's not just marketing, if you are into AF and if you can afford the camera and lenses, they can produce more keepers.

I like Pentax and I am sticking to it for lenses and i-body stabilization, but I recently had a chance to use 60D and AF was like a day & night difference. Again, I am not saying this to bring down Pentax but there is something we should be open to admit.

Now if photography is your bread and butter, there is no way you can take risk on some of these things, especially precise AF. And once more and more pro using them, it's natural for more and more amateur to get those cameras too.

Pentax seems to be narrowing that gap with k-5, but still there is a long way to go to win the confidence.

[Ratmagiclady]

Jstevewhite: I think you're looking at this the wrong way. This is not damaging, this is saving an old lens that Canon left for dead.

Hey, I've got both those and they aren't 'left for dead.' Still in play.



As for the old arguments about what's 'pro'... pro is knowing what you need, and making some money on it. Canon and Nikon both make some fine pro products, but it's *their* definition of 'pro,' which was never everyone's. Pentax could always expand their line, to cover more people's needs, but if they've got what you need, and more importantly, can put it in your hands for what you've got, then that's your gear, and that's all there is to it.

It's sometimes a *nice* thing that if Pentax's top of the line isn't a three thousand dollar rig, you know they aren't holding something back to try and make you want the pricier thing.