[severalsnakes]

I needed a camera when I started taking art classes in college. I was doing great photo-realistic portraits in chalk pastels using just disposable cameras and my professor suggested I get an SLR. The K1000 was his suggestion. I couldn't find one, so I got a ZX-L and a Promaster 28-105 in 2003 or so. Loved it. Took it everywhere, used it every day for YEARS, almost always in Auto mode and didn't learn a damn thing. When I decided to get back into the habit of taking pictures, I did look at Canon and Nikon, but I liked the look of the K-30, the features blew all of the Canon's away and I justified it by telling myself I already had a lens for the body and could save money that way.

I plan on shooting Pentax/K-mounts (Ricoh!?) until they don't make 'em any more because of the attractive body design (Canons are ugly lumps, in my opinion.), ergonomics, the features (even basic/mid-range Pentax DSLRs are fine machines), in-body SR, vintage lens compatibility <3 and, at this point, sheer familiarity. Sometimes I forget how lucky I am to know and enjoy all of these benefits that Pentax offers. Plus, with my nerd gland fully activated, I've been acquiring film bodies and re-acquainting myself with that process. Not to mention all of the old glass I'm buying second-hand means I'm shooting manual all. the. time. It's pleasant, and I feel like Pentax has the (ongoing) history to make this feel like a real hobby, something that I can learn and grow with, backwards and forwards in time.

[MiLKMAN]

To me Pentax offers best bang for a buck in hardware and I like Pentax's colors and detail/noise ratio.

[KDAFA]

... Ultimately I decided to select which system I would buy into based on the one that seemed to provide the highest frequency or consistency of images that captured my eye in regards to image rendering. Consequently I searched across the web by camera make and model, followed more extensively by searches based on lens models. I realized that this might likely stack the deck in favor of Nikon and Canon since they are the most common brands in the hands of the majority of professionals. I searched for images that caught my eye as having special rendering properties and then applied my experience to consider the parameters by which the sample images were made. To my surprise, Pentax occurred more consistently than any of the other makes for having specific lenses that provided unique rendering properties...

I agree fully. The Pentax rendering is unique and to my eyes, simply superb. In my experience, it's irreplaceable.

[NotSteve]

The year was 2010. My current digital camera was the Fuji F70EXR. (This replaced a Canon PowerShot A50 which broke on November 30, 2004. I specifically remember the day because I needed that camera to cover a protest I was a part of -- 20,000 people protesting against the visit of George W. Bush to Ottawa. With everything else he did, I like to blame Dubya for also breaking my camera). I got the Fuji after several years of waiting for a point and shoot that that had decent low light capability, image stabilization, was pretty wide on the short end of the zoom and cheaper than the competing Panasonic travel zooms. I hadn't even considered a DSLR at that point.

In January 2010, at another demo, I took a pretty good overhead shot of large march. Someone wanted to blow this up for use on a billboard, but then I was told the 6 megapixel image (I'd selected an EXR pixel binning mode) was not going to cut it. They were kind of pissed off, and I was disappointed -- I wouldn't have gotten paid, but it would have been a nice feather in my cap.

So, clearly, it was time to take things to the next level in terms of gear. My main considerations were low light capability and resolution; the wide angle was easy enough as even basic kit lenses are fairly wide. At some point I also realized weather sealing would be useful. I borrowed a friend's old Canon 20D a couple times (I think that was the model) to see if I'd like using a DSLR -- check. The K-5 came out later that year and it came down to the Nikon D7000, the Canon 7D and the K-5.

Built-in SR meant even lower light capability with any lens, and that was big plus for Pentax. The 7D I think is sturdier than the D7000, but the sensor was not up to par with the Sony in the Nikon and Pentax, so it was out. I mostly shoot available light and no video, so the flash and video limitations of the K-5 were irrelevant to me. I wanted to invest in a good sturdy camera too that would hold up, another point in favour of Pentax.

I read a lot of reviews to get and sense of the camera, which were by and large quite glowing. I read Jim Radcliffe's blog post about how he decided to switch from full frame Canon and lots of L glass to Pentax. All in all, it put things in favour of Pentax from my point of view, so I waited for the oil stain issue to get sorted out and for the price to come down and ordered my K-5 online in April 2011 sight unseen.

No regrets with my decision, which is good, as I don't have the time or money to switch mounts. The camera continues to serve me well, as my abilities slowly improve to match its capabilities.

[Tonytee]

After reading a few threads about Pentax not having a full-frame camera and seeing that Pentax has a only a 3% market share of DSLR sales, I've began to wonder why are some of you shooting with a Pentax DSLR? Why didn't you do what more than two-thirds of all DSLR owners world wide have done and shoot with either a Canon or Nikon? I have my own guesses, but I wanted to hear from you.

For me, the answer was simple; The D800E was delayed by the Japanese earthquake and tsunami. So not wanting to wait any longer on rumors, I bought a 645D. I bought it not only for its resolution, but also for the medium-format look that no amount of pixels on a FF Nikon could ever duplicate. I also didn't want to be one of those guys who upgrades every few years and ends up spending more on mediocre equipment as opposed to just buying one awesome camera and having it for decade or more. That and the cost of the used lenses were major influence as well.

This past May I decided to enter the world of digital photography. My bridge camera is a Pentax k100d Super with a kit lens. My friends and fellow photographers advised me that after a few days of shooting digital, I would be spending a lot of time trying to kick myself in the a..., and asking myself, "Why didn't I do it sooner?". I just really enjoy this Pentax release a great deal. Pentax is one company that has always appeared to me as being shrouded in mystery. Perhaps the reason for that is the company does not spend a great deal of money on advertising. At least the same amount as the big boys. For example every holiday season our freeways are dotted with billboards touting Canon, Nikon and Sony as "The perfect Christmas gift." Never seen anything like that regarding Pentax. Also, that may be the reason that Pentax does not share the same status as the big boys. Why do I shoot Pentax? For one reason, the company has an excellent track record. It was a very smart move on Pentax's part to keep their lenses compatible with any K-mount compatible body. Also, it is a very good quality performer and continues to impress me everyday. Thanks for reading,

Rgds,

Tony

[lesmore49]

I shoot with Pentax, because I have since 1968. All the Pentax equipment I have has been reliable, durable and able to produce excellent photographs...even with my minimal skills. I have other equipment. Leica, Mamiya medium format, Olympus, Canon, Zeiss, etc....but Pentax both film and digital has been my main line.

It does the job. Like other Pentaxians I've endured the mild jibes, the looks of disbelief that I use Pentax...by other photographers.

When I look at their pictures...I don't see any reason to change camera equipment.

My pursuit of photography has generally always been a singular pursuit. I prefer going out in most any kind of weather and shoot what's out there. I'm not so much a camera gearhead, who sits around discussing the merits....mostly imagined...of which Nikon...or Canon...is better.

[Waratah]

Pentax is in my DNA, my late father used a Spotmatic from some time in early 60s until I guess 90s, most shots of three of his kids are with that camera., when I got a SLR in late 80s there can be only one!.

A lot of fun with that SLR, Some cheeky glamour with female collegues.

Fast forward, lost my SLR in a house fire, improvised with a PnS Pentax Optio, then in 2010 finally had money for a DSLR, the Nikon d90 was top of the the list, looked at equivalent Canon, can't remember model but it was a POS to handle, looked at equivalent Sony, meh.

Then happened in a duty free shop picked up a k200d, eureka! With a 18-250 I was hooked.

Having since bought a 50-135, a sigma 24-60, a k5ii and a 18-55 I'm pretty much happily trapped.

Never forget the ignorant camera saleman that tried to talk me out of Pentax due to limite lens choice (poor little ignorant man), and a collegue so genuinly dumbfounded that any one made let alone would buy anything other than canikon.

Why am I happy? Weather resistance, handling, build, size, the AA in k200, the green button, and lastly the wee cracker of a manual lens m50 x 1.7 for 20 dollars.

I've still got dad's spotmatic. Might get it out tonite and see how it looks.

[Rupert]

I've began to wonder why are some of you shooting with a Pentax DSLR?

Because we have what it takes....plain and simple!



Regards!

[dansamy]

Still loving Pentax & still collecting old glass, good, bad & ugly! Picked up a K-01 used from eBay. (Paid a little more than I wanted, but whatever!) Got a 21mm limited to play with this week. (Rental. Something tells me that limited glass is in my future camera bag(s)...)

[THoog]

Still loving Pentax & still collecting old glass, good, bad & ugly! Picked up a K-01 used from eBay. (Paid a little more than I wanted, but whatever!) Got a 21mm limited to play with this week. (Rental. Something tells me that limited glass is in my future camera bag(s)...)

Welcome back, Amy! Be careful, those Limiteds are addictive! Your F-35-70 and DA 35 should handle well on the K-01 as well.

[monochrome]

It's the lenses, stupid! :facepalm:

[dansamy]

Welcome back, Amy! Be careful, those Limiteds are addictive! Your F-35-70 and DA 35 should handle well on the K-01 as well.

Thanks! It's been a long, hard, sad year. Husband passed 11/14/14. We did take our planned Christmas trip to Disney last year, but I didn't take very many pictures. This year, for Halloween, I've got the K-01, 40XS, rented 21Ltd & I think I packed the plastic fantastic 50. I almost brought the F35-70. Then, I changed my mind. I left the big heavies at home. Everything I brought fits in a little bag that's really designed to hold a m4/3 with a couple small lenses or maybe a flash. And I figure I have enough pictures of the parks themselves that I really don't need any zooms. Just people pictures.

[zapp]

After reading a few threads about Pentax not having a full-frame camera and seeing that Pentax has a only a 3% market share of DSLR sales, I've began to wonder why are some of you shooting with a Pentax DSLR? Why didn't you do what more than two-thirds of all DSLR owners world wide have done and shoot with either a Canon or Nikon? I have my own guesses, but I wanted to hear from you.

For me, the answer was simple; The D800E was delayed by the Japanese earthquake and tsunami. So not wanting to wait any longer on rumors, I bought a 645D. I bought it not only for its resolution, but also for the medium-format look that no amount of pixels on a FF Nikon could ever duplicate. I also didn't want to be one of those guys who upgrades every few years and ends up spending more on mediocre equipment as opposed to just buying one awesome camera and having it for decade or more. That and the cost of the used lenses were major influence as well.

Pentax used to stand for a small footprint camera with very good image quality, in camera shake reuction and weather sealing. A lot of fixed focal length lenses with quite decent specs were available. Pentax missed out on presenting more large aperture lenses and will go fullframe now without a decent lens lineup. For quite some time there are many more announcements than deliveries. If you are interested in the next step - i.e. fullframe - one needs to re-check each lens, and all parameters. So far we do not know how the FF Pentax will perform, we have no clue what the 2.8/70-200 can deliver, so right now I have to say that I do not know why I stick with Pentax... besides I still like the small footprint, the weather sealing and the in camera shake reduction. Looking at the lenses that really interest me Canon and Nikon offer shake reduction in all but one of them, weather sealing is inlcuded and autofocus is from a different world.

[normhead]

I've had Pentax bodies since being photo-arts student 50 years ago. It suits what I do. The ruggedness of the bodies and most lenses, the portability and, for me, there is simply no compelling reason to change. If your camera does what you want a camera to do... there's no reason to change, just because there might be some other camera that does things you don't do.

It's like anything else.. to know what to buy, you have to know what you appreciate in a camera, and what things you can live without. Pentax builds solid, and I'm not always the most careful person, and am often in the wilderness for a couple weeks at a time. Robustness and reliability and the ability to produce top notch images, are the big reason for me. There may be a few performance issues if you compare to other brands, but none of those will mean, your image is not just as good or better than anyone else's if you nail the shot, at least for the images I take.

[wdsbhb]

Started with a kx (film), eventually moved to a zx-7 for the auto-focus. When l decided to go digital, moved to the k-x so l could use my old lenses, and now have a k5. Couldn't be happier.