[osv]

Guys ! Guys !

Except of course adapter change the optical properties of the lenses... I mean they change the registration distance to begin with and this one has to be micro level precise... Or you get a blurred image. That one of the reasons to have adapters..

wrong again, for the millionth time... all nex adapters allow for focusing past infinity, it's not like aftermarket m42 to kmount adapters.

there is no such thing as a fixed infinity focus point on the lens focus ring, that is an obsolete dslr concept, that is totally unnecessary with evf mirrorless manual focusing.

[rburgoss]

Again, Mr. OSV: On post # 37 of this thread, you tell me the following:

telling lies about the content of thread, that everyone can read, serves no purpose, lol

Based on the mutual exchange of opinions about this subject.

First, I am not telling lies; I am just trying to understand your position, because (read carefully), along this thread, have said the following:


OSV's words through this thread

Post # 12 (praising Sony)

"...the a7r is way beyond anything that you've ever used before, and again, the raw file issue that you are fixated on simply isn't a factor: Sony A7R teams up with Canon glass

however, the way that you looking at all three of the a7x models indicates that you don't really have a need for any of them... people who have clear goals for the best p.q. know that the a7r/d810 will fit the bill, and that's not you.

if you had a real need for low-light performance, you'd be buying the a7s, and you'd know that was right for you, because it's the best there is on the market today."


Post # 19 (praising Sony, bashing Pentax)

"...sony has been sucking wind as far as zooms go, that's for sure... people are hanging their hopes on this new 16-35/4, but i am skeptical.

sony fe primes, on the other hand, can be world-class... the fe55 in particular mops the floor with any prime that pentax has ever made, and it's lighter to boot.

...

...notice how the best zoom for pentax isn't a pentax at all, it's a Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC HSM, by a large margin..."

Post # 22 (bashing Pentax, praising Sony again, bashing Pentax again)

"...fa31 is irrelevant to the point that was made, which was, pentax zooms are weak sauce... you have to go 3rd party to get the best zoom for pentax cameras."

"wrong again... nex system can mount ALL lenses that have ever been made, pentax is totally limited on what lenses are available."

"ff emount can run aps-c mode, for the same dof as pentax, but why bother shooting with a crippled crop sensor? the iso performance with crop sensors sucks, period.

pentax does NOT make the best lenses in the world, lol... every lens manufacturer makes a couple of exceptional lenses, nex users can pick and choose from all lenses in the world.

pentax lens choices are extremely limited, because it's locked into only one or two lens mounts... pentax kmount is a dead-end platform.

now lets compare pentax 24mp crop vs. sony 24mp crop... your precious da15 has really lousy resolution numbers, and even the best pentax 50mm macro can't match the resolution numbers of the sony 24mm prime"

So, after all this bashing against Pentax and praising in favor of Sony, the most logical thing to assume, is that you are aiming to move forward to Sony, as per your experience, tests and beliefs... right? So I asked you on post # 25"

"1- Have you started your gear switching towards Sony?"

Your answer was:
absolutely not! why would i want to give up the best glass that pentax has to offer? and why would i want to switch to another dslr platform, that uses a horrible ovf? you can't get accurate manual focus with any ovf, period.

i just tested a bunch of 28mm, 35mm, and 50mm lenses, from canon, konica, pentax, minolta, etc. on the a7r, and i'm keeping the pentax versions of those focal lengths, over everything else... so your failed sarcasm is wrong, lol

however, i did the same testing with probably ten 24mm primes, and the k24/2.8 failed right off the bat, because the sides on ff are worse than the others... there are very few 24mm primes that have flat fields on ff.

i have pics to back all that up on my blog."




Your answer completely contradicts your words on the previous 4 or 5 posts! I simply don't understand.

BTW, I do not expect a direct answer on this matter, because I know for sure DXO does not publish any measurable data that can justify why someone can bash against something and yet, sticks to it. Or why someone can praise something and yet say its horrible. Perhaps your horoscope can shed some light here. (Or maybe going back to your medications.... can do some good; lithium perhaps?)

Or is it that deep in your heart, you are beginning to trust your own eyes and in your subconscious mind, you do know Pentax is better and all those numbers from DXO mean crap?

A short word of advice: Learn to use your own taste buds to enjoy the goodies. Do not rely on someone else's taste to use "his" opinion to back up your taste. It will surprise you how many "gourmets" are payed to say whatever someone pays them for. The only victim is people like you, that desperately need "an expert" opinion on something that you are afraid to evaluate yourself.

Also, have in mind that Sony's A7 system is roughly 12 months old. I dare you to come back to this same forum 40 years from now, and tell my grandchildren, that Sony's A7 mirrorless system is still going strong.... That is something not even Nikon or Canon can claim, since the K mount was introduced exactly 40 years ago... and the first K mount lens ever made, will work, WITHOUT ANY ADAPTERS, on the newest K3. If that is not compatibility and loyal customer support, I do not know what is.

Also, my question was not sarcasm at all. Assuming you were planning to move to Sony, I also asked you if you were planning to get rid of all your Pentax stuff... right? I just wanted to honestly know if some of that gear would be of interest and perhaps make you a reasonable offer before hitting the marketplace...

[Mikesul]

Your photos are proof of the quality of these Pentax lenses.

I guess the reason I like Pentax is for the slow lenses. It is really easy to compare lenses between Canon, Nikon and Sony. Tougher to compare Pentax with them, since Pentax makes slower, smaller lenses. In lens motors, faster lens speeds and in lens image stabilization all combine to make lenses from other companies larger in comparison. As to image quality, it is fine. You can get good images with any of the brands out there.

[GateCityRadio]

---------- Post added 11-03-14 at 07:40 AM ----------

[/COLOR]

Thoses picture are nice... I mean 40 years olds lenses on film can achieve the same you know... And if everything is in focus, a compact could achieve the thing too if you don't need bokeh.

Not that I want to say A7 familly is unable to take great photos. Of course they can... Like all cameras.

Would the photos be that much worse with a K3 and a FA31 f/1.8 than with this A7 FF and 55 f/1.8... I'am not so sure.

Still Sony has almost no lenses nativelly available and they are all expensive. On pentax the DA35 f/2.4 achieve almostthe performance of FA31... Not in the bokeh highlight, and with some subtle rendering difference. But while not as good, it is already very good. it cost 150€ or something to buy. There nothing like that available for Sony A7 on native mount. Sony adapter is going to cost more than the lens !

It is very likely that the DA35 f/2.4 would have done just as good on 4 of the 5 photos you included ! For the first one with the OOF highlight, I would not bet on it. The FA43 would have give you likely a more 3D look, more contrast, more colors than what your actual shoots while at least on my screen on the forum size yours look quite classic and flat. But that very likely too that FA43 would have add much more disturbing out of focus bokeh too at least in 1-2 photos.

I am aware as I shot film for many years, but I don't think I need to explain the convenience of digital over film. I'm not so sure the DA35 is even close to the FA31...or even close to the zeiss 55 1,8 for that matter. I had a DA35/2.4 and while it was good, it was not great like the FA limiteds or the Sony Zeiss lenses. I think the comparison to the FA31 and zeiss 55/1.8 is fair though. I could of bought and carried a K3 and FA31, but it would of cost nearly the same and still been bigger with a smaller sensor. The idea of buying the sony was too have a walk around camera in addition to my Pentax rig and the sony beats the size of the K5 I already own with a larger sensor to boot. The K5 is still my work horse for portraiture and serious work. I don't own the FA31 so I can't really compare, but I do own the FA43 and have used it on the A7 and K5/K7/K200D. It is a great lens, but it doesn't AF on the A7 and with the adapter its about the same size as the zeiss 55 1.8, which has AF and IMO has better bokeh and is better wide open.

So to answer your question, could I have seen similar results with a K3 and FA31....sure, because I know how to use a camera.....equipment is equipment. But then again I might not have because the K3 probably would of sat at home. I had my K5 with me on that trip and it spent most of the time sitting in the car because I didn't want to lug it around.

[osv]

Post # 19 (praising Sony, bashing Pentax)

"...sony has been sucking wind as far as zooms go, that's for sure... people are hanging their hopes on this new 16-35/4, but i am skeptical.

you just quoted me saying that sony was "sucking wind as far as zooms go, that's for sure... i am skeptical"

and you just called it "praising sony"?? you clearly misrepresented what was said... and that's not the only example.

Your answer completely contradicts your words on the previous 4 or 5 posts! I simply don't understand.

i gave straight answers based on my own solid lens testing, **with pics to prove everything that i said** on my blog.

no one in the history of this forum has ever provided 36mp full-width comparative crops from pentax lenses, period.

you don't understand because it's confusing; the test results are a mixed bag, some pentax lenses are weak, but many are also strong.

it's that way for all companies that make lenses; nobody has a perfect lineup across all focal lengths.

whatever dxo says is between you and them; i didn't create their data, i just posted it in response to the sony platform trolling.

i will say that ignoring it would be a pretty foolish mistake, tho.

[rburgoss]

Seems to me we are loosing track here. I thought the thread was about "why I am staying with Pentax", not something like "I am a Pentax user, but would like Pentax to change this and this so it performs as...."

IMHO that would be politically incorrect. It would be like saying "Hey, my wife is fat, with stretch marks and dog breath, but I still love her even though I wish she could have my neighbor's wife body..."

Then so be it. I am gaining nothing nor loosing anything from participating in this thread or trying to understand someones mind who can bash something, yet stick to it.

Well, I guess anyone is entitled to its own opinion. That's the basic rule in a "free will" environment.

All this reminds me a short story about a "misunderstanding":

This guy calls the doctor and asks: "Doc, is it OK if I take a bath with diarrhea?
The Doctor answers: "If you have enough crap and makes you happy, then throw it upon yourself; just remember to close your eyes and mouth..."

[GateCityRadio]

Is it so hard to understand that people might actually like two (or more) camera brands/systems? A camera is just a tool. I think one can point out Pentax's weaknesses and still be a fan of Pentax.

[rburgoss]

Is it so hard to understand that people might actually like two (or more) camera brands/systems? A camera is just a tool. I think one can point out Pentax's weaknesses and still be a fan of Pentax.

It is perfectly normal. What is not normal is to provide ONLY negative feedback against Pentax and 99% positive info about Sony, but right at the bottom line happens that Pentax is good enough and Sony has some horrible feature....

Anyway, as I said on my previous post, this is not making me richer or poorer in any way. I just contributed with my honest 40 year experience as a Pentax user, telling my very own reasons for staying with Pentax; reasons which by the way, none are based on comparisons with other brands or anyone else's experience, neither supported by tests.

BTW, in case anyone is wondering, I do not claim Pentax is the best of whatever. I do recognize there are far superior systems in quality, longevity, reliability and customer support. I just say from my own 40 yr. experience with Pentax, I do not feel the need to switch brands. Could I be happier wth another brand?

Let me answer that question with a hypothetical situation: Let's say the burglars broke into my house and steal my whole photo gear. The insurance company pays me $40 thousand bucks for the stolen gear. Will I go for the best money can buy under whatever brand carries the current "best" label, or will I go back to Pentax?

Please check post #10 on this same thread. Reasons 4 and 5 (my original post on this thread).

Anyone loves a good vacation, especially if destinations and costs have almost no limit, but even after a dream vacation, when you come back home, your get that feeling of warmth, familiarity, sense of belonging "here" and an overall sensation of having everything back under control. There is no feeling like being back home!

With Pentax, I feel at home! With any other, I feel like a stranger; I feel I do not belong...

[Nicolas06]

I am aware as I shot film for many years, but I don't think I need to explain the convenience of digital over film. I'm not so sure the DA35 is even close to the FA31...or even close to the zeiss 55 1,8 for that matter. I had a DA35/2.4 and while it was good, it was not great like the FA limiteds or the Sony Zeiss lenses. I think the comparison to the FA31 and zeiss 55/1.8 is fair though. I could of bought and carried a K3 and FA31, but it would of cost nearly the same and still been bigger with a smaller sensor. The idea of buying the sony was too have a walk around camera in addition to my Pentax rig and the sony beats the size of the K5 I already own with a larger sensor to boot. The K5 is still my work horse for portraiture and serious work. I don't own the FA31 so I can't really compare, but I do own the FA43 and have used it on the A7 and K5/K7/K200D. It is a great lens, but it doesn't AF on the A7 and with the adapter its about the same size as the zeiss 55 1.8, which has AF and IMO has better bokeh and is better wide open.

So to answer your question, could I have seen similar results with a K3 and FA31....sure, because I know how to use a camera.....equipment is equipment. But then again I might not have because the K3 probably would of sat at home. I had my K5 with me on that trip and it spent most of the time sitting in the car because I didn't want to lug it around.

I can get that, I don't like heavy gear. The Sony can be quite good for short focal but medium/long focal and zoom are quite big. Overall the lenses are bigger than Pentax lenses and so what system to prefer will alot depend of the number and focal you want with you. If just a few the classic DSLR system because as smaller if no smaller overall. It also come with a much more complete lens offering with more choices in price too.

[Nicolas06]

Is it so hard to understand that people might actually like two (or more) camera brands/systems? A camera is just a tool. I think one can point out Pentax's weaknesses and still be a fan of Pentax.

In the end if we try decript what osv is saying, we understand that osv has an A7 system (we don't know if it A7r, A7 or A7s or all) and that he mostly use Pentax lenses on it with manual focus. Simply because Pentax lenses are really good.

Still, he is particularily disatified with the choice for wide angle and bash the DA15... That is made for APSC anyway. So he is look for a good wide alternative and this is not Pentax for him.

All of that said this confirm my view that the lenses offering for A7 familly isn't that great and that you go back to manual focussing when using other brand lenses to compensate. For me as this seems many tend to do the same things it just show the Sony echosystem is not ready. But everybody can have his own opinion!

[Nicolas06]

no one in the history of this forum has ever provided 36mp full-width comparative crops from pentax lenses, period.

That's true, but we do have 51MP crop from Pentax lenses... and a body that has better high isos than A7s...

As for the 36MP, you can go to the discussion "So is 16 megapixel enough?" where most are convinced you don't gain much to go past 16MP, some even sold their K3 because they don't see the interrest. Personnally I have seen a gain but it tend to be of practical use only if you crop a lot and print huge.

Without the gain in AF, the K3 would not be an interresting offer at all. Comparatively out of the 3 Sonys, the most interresting is the 24MP. The other too 2 ask for too much money for a small difference... Slighty better high iso (+0.3EV compared to D800) for A7s with 1/3 of the resolution or slightly higher resolution toward A7 that has already enough pixels for most uses.

None of theses change will make prints or full screen display significantly better in most cases.

[Mikesul]

It seems that a high percentage of the comments for or against higher megapixels are based on a need to print. That is of course a good basis for decision but there are other reasons to consider pixel density such as the importance of cropping or to be able to examine the subject at close detail. Not all high quality photos are intended as art. Documentation goals often overlap with aesthetic considerations and may often favor higher megapixel sensors.

[redcat]

the importance of cropping or to be able to examine the subject at close detail

Not only that, sometimes I crop the image (like 1/50th of the photo) for an interesting subject that my eyes didn't perceive at first !

[osv]

That's true, but we do have 51MP crop from Pentax lenses... and a body that has better high isos than A7s...

no, it doesn't, and no, you don't have anything nearly as good as a "51mp crop", lol

As for the 36MP, you can go to the discussion "So is 16 megapixel enough?" where most are convinced you don't gain much to go past 16MP,

it's not always about the total mp count, as that link i've posted already shows.

but you wouldn't know that, because you've never used 36mp camera, and you've never edited a file generated by a 36mp camera.

[savoche]

Certainly a lot of hostility in here - and preciously few minding the topic of the thread. Will I be yelled at if I try to go back on topic, I wonder? I'll chance it...

I'm staying with Pentax for the same reason I bought (digital) Pentax in the first place. They make excellent photographers' tools in the form of fairly compact bodies with very good APS sensors, and they make some wonderful lenses so small that you can carry half a dozen of them without them taking up a lot of space. Weather sealing has been very nice to have at times, too.

(And I don't care about other formats - if I did I wouldn't have gone the Pentax way to start with.)