[dtmateojr]

Did anyone mention the green button yet? That thing is a gem.

[Ray Pulley]

If Nikon or Canon ever put shake reduction in their bodies instead of the lenses, I would seriously think of changing brands (Sony has it but I don't like their high ISO performance)

What would make you consider changing?

Just a discussion, not flaming Pentax In general

As usual, any and all options matter!

Thanks

Randy

I have been shooting Pentax since 1978, and I do have a lot of glass and other stuff I have accumulated over the years that helps to keep me from jumping ship for another brand, but for me it is the fact that Pentax has a primary focus on image quality.

They manage to squeeze every last drop of IQ out of the equipment, and if that means falling behind a little in other areas, that's ok.

I think that this focus is really a focus on the joy of photography, and that shows up in many ways, from great ergonomics to quirky and innovative products like pancake lenses, retro-mod designs like the K01, all metal lenses like the LTD series. Unlike the big two, Pentax does not seem to be mass-market driven where features and design decisions are all about market position and how the product plays in the lineup. The big two just do not take any design risks or do anything all that interesting, although they do make excellent gear that gets the job done, no question.

From the first Pentax I ever handled through my MZ-s and on to the K5 and K-01, Pentax bodies have a solid feel, and they have always felt like a little jewel compared to the competition. Part of this is the workmanship along with fit and finish, part of this is the size, but no small part is the ergonomic design decisions Pentax makes. Does this mean they do not have quality issues, or that every button and dial is located perfectly on every body, or that they will be perfect for everyone? No, but every time I pick up a Canon or a Nikon, I am struck by how much better Pentax ergonomics are for me.

I did reach a point in the last two years or so where I considered moving on, most likely to Nikon, but the K5 came along which addressed some of my growing frustration with the AF, and now I will likely pick up a K5II at some point and see what comes next.

I do think that it is high time for an update to the top end zoom lenses, the 16-50, and 50-135. The 16-50 is only so-so in IQ and it needs a little more reach even if it means giving up a little at the wide end. The 50-135 is stellar in the IQ department, but just too slow to focus. I have owned both since they came out, and I am not afraid of SDM, but I do think that the top end zooms (16-50, 50-135 at least, maybe the 17-70 and 60-250 as well), need a faster and more reliable focusing system. At this point, the lenses are definitely holding back the camera bodies in the AF area.

A rework of the flash system wouldn't hurt either.

Color me contrarian, but anyone can fork over $6-7k or more for a Nikon FF, two pro level zooms and a flash

Ray

[Ray Pulley]

As an owner of some 60 K mount lenses, there are very few things that would make me change from Pentax.

Wheatfield,

You win

I probably would have 60, but I trade or sell some that do not get much use for others that catch my eye, and have probably given away 10 or more to budding 'togs in the family.

K5, 16-50 and 50-135 going to the daughter-in-law when she arrives with the grand-children later this week. She already has my old K100 and some glass that I cannot remember.

Ray

[forestG]

pentax..... designed by photographers for potographers, not sum degree waving pencil pushing little upstart who reads stats and figures, then thinks they know everything.
pentax has always had an easy to use interface, putting useability first.unfortunately the af on pentax has always sucked ass.... untill now with an 'almost there' on the k5 and a 'we just nailed it' on the k5!!.
glass is second to none if you got the cash.
future proof raw files 'DNG'

[kadajawi]

Haptics/usability. My old Pentax didn't have the SR (which I do like, especially for video). It didn't have great image quality (for it's time yes, but these days). But it was very usable. Everything was where it belonged to. The K-5 is the same (though I do prefer a few things on the *istDS in terms of usability.

Other things I like... SR obviously, and the low light capabilities. Takes great photos, and it usually does what I want. Good customization. Viewfinders were always great on Pentaxes, and the K-5 is no exception. Ruggedness. The way the cameras feel in my hand. I always feel at home. The others have improved in this aspect, but they don't beat Pentax IMHO. Relatively lightweight and compact (I don't want to carry a big brick with me). Compatibility with legacy lenses, though Nikon does that too, and they are better at that.

The K-5 does need a video recording button badly. I'd gladly use the RAW button for that for example.

Overall I think Pentax just seems like those working on these cameras are photographers. Same with Lightroom. By photographers, for photographers. Especially Canons seem to be designed by marketing people and business men. Now if only Pentax had people that try to sell the cameras... (without having a word in the design process).

(DNG is nice, but not that important. It is better to let Lightroom convert to DNG (be it PEF to DNG or DNG to DNG), since the files get quite a bit smaller. It simply has more sophisticated compression algorithms (and the CPU power for that).

[abacus07]

I came to Pentax because of the compact size, WR, AA batteries and legacy lenses.

I stay with Pentax because the camera is still better than I am. And I love the DA15 and DFA100WR.

My only regret is that pentax didn't spec their K-30 early enough. I bought my K-5 in March but I would have waited if I had known for sure that the K-30 would be WR and AA battery compatible. Not a big deal though.