[Ratmagiclady]

Funny how things seem to come down to appearance.
Hopefully you do know what you are doing.

Well, I was kinda talking about more than 'appearance,' but rather, 'manner.' But, even so, past that,

Theoretically, that'd be where the photos come in, wouldn't it? Assuming you get them. Which means, to your subject, your camera needs to be exactly as important or unimportant as it needs to be, and that means, it's the *camera in your hands,* not a name.


Being a photog means you may need to one moment be pointing a really huge rig at someone and have em be like, 'Ah, that's like a friend with an instamatic,' and the next minute, you might have to be *pointing* an Instamatic and making em feel like they're freakin' Katharine Hepburn. If you think brand name counts for a blessed thing, it's far less than the performativity some think they can buy with such names.

---

Last edited by Ratmagiclady; 05-20-2011 at 11:37 PM.

[UnknownVT]

Well, I was kinda talking about more than 'appearance,' but rather, 'manner.
If you think brand name counts for a blessed thing, it's far less than the performativity some think they can buy with such names.

Now you're talking -

it's not the brand
nor the appearance -
but how one behaves
and mostly
the photos one takes.

[m42man]

I think when it comes to addressing a professional's needs, you have to look at the camera system, rather than just the camera bodies themselves.

When it comes to exotic lenses, one automatically thinks of those huge (often white!) lenses the pros use at big events - and they're ALWAYS Canon or Nikon (nobody else makes them), and everyone's aware of that. That gives those companies a very large advantage, in marketing terms, over Pentax, Olympus, Sony, etc.

There may be a few pros who use other than the big 2 (because they have limited system requirements), but the general public won't be aware of it, because they don't get to see their equipment. I can recall of only one professional photographer in the public eye who used other than the big 2, and it was David Bailey in the 70s/80s with his Olympus Trip advertisements. And in those days even Canon was only just starting to make inroads into Nikon's grip on the pro market, thanks to their deep pockets and marketing skills.

[aurele]

What's strike me here, is that we all know why Canikon is ahead in market share / benefits / etc ..., but we all know why we choose Pentax : because it's different, and we are different to those bunch of sheeps that say "Canikon beeeeeehhhh Canikon beeeeeh !" in front of shops*.

*i don't say that Canikon have a bad product, just that most of "hockey mom and teenage girl" buys it to do "like the pro photog".

[Tommot1965]

whats cracks me the most..is that canikon users dont give a toss what pentax users use or have in the way of lenses....but yet Ive seen plenty of these canikon bashing threads on this very forum....

that makes me wonder why...would anyone like to comment on that ?..i have my own theory ..but im interested in others take on it...

[Big G]

whats cracks me the most..is that canikon users dont give a toss what pentax users use or have in the way of lenses....but yet Ive seen plenty of these canikon bashing threads on this very forum....

I agree with this entirely. So many threads over the years of "Gah! Canikon idiots!" where as the Canikon crowd really don't care about Pentax and just get on with photography.

With regards to the OP, if someone turns their nose up at your Pentax kit, then who cares - let your photography do the talking! They're only being an ignorant camera nerd.

[ccd333]

I agree with this entirely. So many threads over the years of "Gah! Canikon idiots!" where as the Canikon crowd really don't care about Pentax and just get on with photography.

Well, I would say it's easy when you're on top not to care, and one could argue it's only a reinforcement of snobbery when there is refusal to acknowledge a legitimate product. But I have seen erosion of this. The Ephotozine top 11 DSLR's post on their site, for example (Top 11 Best DSLRs). Plenty of Canon users were up in arms about the placement of the K-5 and K-r above their beloved cameras (BTW, I made a comment about it under the name ccd if anyone would like to read it and has a take on what I wrote). For the most part, the comments stayed above the fray.....and I don't think there's anything wrong with taking a dig now and then. Most people prefer to be associated with a winner that's universally recognized.....look at all the clamor about sports teams.

I do agree, however, that it's wrong to gratuitously disparage a particular camera maker or user.....when done constantly and with such fervor it doesn't make that person (or the cameras they are trying to defend) look good, it makes them look petty and jealous. It's silly how we seem to equate our own esteem with reinforcement of others (in essence living vicariously through the use of a product or following a team) instead of acting as strong minded individuals.....so in that regard I agree with your statement above. That being said, with the bombardment of Canon and Nikon exposure (no pun intended) in our photography culture, it's nice to see a product or products (that Pentax users know are as good or better than their more highly touted competitors) get their respective due.

---

Last edited by ccd333; 05-21-2011 at 06:46 AM.

[Wheatfield]

Don't you think their willingness to complacently sell K1000's and P30s to school photography classes without pushing the envelope made them... lazy? I mean, for years every kid that signed up for photography class came into our shop and bought a K1000 and a 50mm. All our other (new) Pentax stuff just gathered dust.

One of the guys I worked with back then now has his own camera store; He said here in the US Pentax quit dealing directly with retailers and forced them to go through distributors, which makes the Pentax systems difficult to discount much below MSRP.

I can't speak to how it is done in places other than Canada. Here, Pentax is distributed through Pentax Canada, the other manufacturers also have their own supply chain.
I believe Pentax in the USA has been supplied by a private importer since the early 60s, but I could be wrong.
The lazy part is correct. They stayed alive on K1000s and compact cameras through the mid to late 80s and onwards, and when those cameras stopped selling, they were caught with no revenue stream.

What's strike me here, is that we all know why Canikon is ahead in market share / benefits / etc ..., but we all know why we choose Pentax : because it's different, and we are different to those bunch of sheeps that say "Canikon beeeeeehhhh Canikon beeeeeh !" in front of shops*.

If you are smart, you bought Pentax because of the lenses. If you didn't, then you made a mistake, because the competitions bodies still work better than Pentax bodies.

I agree with this entirely. So many threads over the years of "Gah! Canikon idiots!" where as the Canikon crowd really don't care about Pentax and just get on with photography.

If you read other forums, I think you'll find that they care about what Nikon and Canon are doing, and nothing else really registers.
And they are incredibly fanboyish regarding those brands, in many ways, Canon fanbois are more annoying than Pentax fanbois.

[RioRico]

If you are smart, you bought Pentax because of the lenses. If you didn't, then you made a mistake, because the competitions bodies still work better than Pentax bodies.

Lenses are what drove me to Pentax three years ago, specifically the DA10-17, because nobody else had an affordable fishzoom then. But I bought the K20D because of price / performance advantages over the competition; and because reading user reports, Pentax users whined less than owners of other brands about how they wanted to upgrade immediately. I wanted a body I wouldn't feel a need to upgrade anytime soon. I got it.

I hadn't known that I would soon catch LBA, nor about heritage lenses. I hadn't known of the huge used-lens market, nor that I would become a compulsive eBay lens and camera trader. I just wanted specific lenses (the DA10-17, DA18-250, and FA50/1.4) to do what I couldn't do with my advanced P&S, and I wanted the best body that supported those lenses. Yes, I had felt plasticky Canikon bodies, and I bought the K20D unfelt.

Had I unlimited money, I might have bought a high-end Nikon system -- or more likely a Fuji forensic camera with Nikon lenses. But then I would be excluded from the M42 world. And Nikon didn't have an affordable fishzoom. Or I could have gone with Sony, because I'd been offered some Minolta AF lenses that would work with Sony dSLRs. But Sony had no fishzoom then either. Only Pentax offered the right lens AND the right body.

I'm brand-agnostic. Over the decades, I'd used many cameras, but never Pentax. My leanings were towards Sony, Olympus, Canon, Nikon. But cold hard numerical analysis brought me to Pentax.

[Big G]

If you read other forums, I think you'll find that they care about what Nikon and Canon are doing, and nothing else really registers.
And they are incredibly fanboyish regarding those brands, in many ways, Canon fanbois are more annoying than Pentax fanbois.

Fanboys will be fanboys .

[Macario]

I also think it is because canikon have million of models in dslr, and come with new models much quicker 9is this better? I don't think so, but apparently it works)

[Christine Tham]

Canon and Nikon are market leaders - it's a safe purchasing decision and at the end of the day they make better cameras and lenses than Pentax (debatable I know, but I've shot with Canon high end lenses on a 1-D)

If someone asks me "what camera should I buy?" I always say "buy a Canon in the price range that suits you."

But if someone asks me "why do you use Pentax?" I'll say "the Canon and Nikon pro gear are too expensive and too heavy for me. I use Pentax, because they make stuff that fit my hands that I can carry. And it was the first SLR I bought, and I saw no reason to change over the years."

At the end of the day, it's all about how useful a camera is to me - how often I will use it and how much fun I'll get out of it. I simply cannot use a big Canon or Nikon body with the heavy optically stabilised lenses, so they end up sitting on a shelf.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Canon and Nikon are market leaders - it's a safe purchasing decision and at the end of the day they make better cameras and lenses than Pentax (debatable I know, but I've shot with Canon high end lenses on a 1-D)

Those better cameras and lenses are outside the price range of Pentax cameras and lenses. It doesn't make sense to compare a $5000 camera equipped with >$2000 lenses against a $1500 camera with <$1500 lenses. But if you keep the comparison within the boundary of APS bodies and <$1500 lenses, Canikon doesn't shine at all.

[jstevewhite]

whats cracks me the most..is that canikon users dont give a toss what pentax users use or have in the way of lenses....but yet Ive seen plenty of these canikon bashing threads on this very forum....

that makes me wonder why...would anyone like to comment on that ?..i have my own theory ..but im interested in others take on it...

Here's the difference. When you read the CaNikon forums, you'll find posts dissing each other, not the "also rans". Nobody goes into a Canon forum and says "The Pentax lenses are better!" (That would almost certainly kick of a shitstorm, I promise), but we *frequently* hear about how much better Canon and Nikon cameras are than Pentax cameras. Whether it's AF, flash exposure, DR, noise, sharpness, you name it, I've seen a thread in the past week where someone said "The CaNikon is better in X". Since this is a Pentax forum, I think one should not be surprised if such posts ignite some fervor and furor.

[jstevewhite]

Lenses are what drove me to Pentax three years ago, specifically the DA10-17, because nobody else had an affordable fishzoom then. But I bought the K20D because of price / performance advantages over the competition; and because reading user reports, Pentax users whined less than owners of other brands about how they wanted to upgrade immediately. I wanted a body I wouldn't feel a need to upgrade anytime soon. I got it.

Yeah, that's it. Glass. I love the K-5, but it's the GLASS that brought me here.

I hadn't known that I would soon catch LBA, nor about heritage lenses. I hadn't known of the huge used-lens market, nor that I would become a compulsive eBay lens and camera trader. I just wanted specific lenses (the DA10-17, DA18-250, and FA50/1.4) to do what I couldn't do with my advanced P&S, and I wanted the best body that supported those lenses. Yes, I had felt plasticky Canikon bodies, and I bought the K20D unfelt.

LBA... no shit. I think every brand has it, but Pentax is worse than others, I think, because there's such a deep and wide back-catalog, so to speak. Canons can't use FDs or even (often) early EF; Nikon is doing something similar with consumer DSLRs. Pentax offers us so many places to LOOK, so many ways to try and get "that look"

I'm brand-agnostic. Over the decades, I'd used many cameras, but never Pentax. My leanings were towards Sony, Olympus, Canon, Nikon. But cold hard numerical analysis brought me to Pentax.

If I were rich, I'd own them all. I've never met a (non P&S) camera I didn't like