Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-08-2016, 01:30 PM   #61
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,530
QuoteOriginally posted by WPRESTO Quote
Yes but, the attraction of multiple lenses draws many buyers - those who do concert natural light and want f1.4, those who do general photography and need only f2.8 if that, and those who do landscapes and want tilt-shift. BUT, I will reassert it is the reputation Nikon established no later than the early 1960's that is critical. It's like trying to undo the reputation of Cadillac or Mercedes, even though other brands have have just as much luxury and far better repair records, or trying to convince some that a California wine is as good as or better than a French wine, or that's it's just as good to dine off of Corelle dinnerware as Limoge China. Nikon has for decades been THE PROFESSIONAL'S CAMERA, a reputation well-earned by both camera bodies and lenses and at this point, a reputation and market extraordinarily difficult to penetrate.
Both Nikon and Canon have bodies with features that you can't get in a Pentax at any price.
Value for the dollar is where Pentax does best

Randy

04-08-2016, 01:30 PM   #62
Senior Member
Ontarian50's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 240
Hey, it was a long hard haul for many companies to make the transition to digital sensors. First, only Kodak had them, at stratospheric costs to the early adopters ($20,000 and up).
Eventually, there was a market for 2 megapixel plus cameras amongst photojournalists, at the $8,000 price point. That market was sown up at the time by Nikon and Canon. There was no way Pentax, Olympus, or Minolta could launch an $8,000 camera into the marketplace.
Which left Nikon and Canon a few years to test out digital equipment in the high price, fast obsolescence marketplace. They figured out how to do it, pay Kodak their royalties, and come up with a few patents of their own.
Pentax and Minolta didn't jump into DSLRs until the price point came down to around $3,000 or a bit less - which meant they were left paying licensing of tech to the first guys. We're lucky Pentax survived. Minolta and Contax didn't.

Sure, Pentax has had some trouble - not the least of which was ignoring the attraction of the 70-200mm 2.8 lenses that were potent tele zooms on the APS-C bodies sold by Nikon and Canon. Pentax's answer was to launch the 50-135mm "equivalent". A lot of sports photographers jumped ship from Pentax because they couldn't wait til 2016 for a true 70-200mm. Also Pentax's AF was/is a bit lacking for those same action-oriented guys. It also didn't help that all the big dream lenses (ie: 600mm f4.0) were in Pentax's past. And don't forget that for ages, Pentax considered two camera bodies a complete product lineup.

Fortunately, not everything is action-oriented. And photogs used to a more calm approach to their photography found a lot to admire in Pentax stuff. For those who take the time to find out, colour rendition, build quality is just great.

But yes, there's a lot of momentum behind the Nikon/Canon juggernauts. There's a lot of depth to their bench.

Last edited by Ontarian50; 04-08-2016 at 01:41 PM.
04-08-2016, 01:41 PM   #63
Loyal Site Supporter
WPRESTO's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,178
QuoteOriginally posted by Ontarian50 Quote
But yes, there's a lot of momentum behind the Nikon/Canon juggernauts. There's a lot of depth to their bench.
And I will assert yet again, Nikon has deep history of brand loyalty among professionals, a deep reputation for superior cameras and optics that is extremely difficult to crack. It is not possible to understand Nikon's current position without going back to the original Nikon F and seeing how it swept up many professional photographers.
04-08-2016, 06:07 PM   #64
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,721
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
Apparently the people who worked on the camera aren't with the company any more, some design info had been lost, and they didn't have any spares. I also believe it was an older type of battery (i.e. not a lithium battery). I'm sure if they tried hard enough they could put together a power supply, though I'm not sure we'd be positively surprised with the results (this camera is almost 4 years older than the *ist D after all)
I would have thought that being based on the MZ-S it would have used that camera's battery, and aren't there working MZ-S's out there? Evidently things are not that simple! Alternatively an AC adapter, but things are clearly not as simple as that either...

04-09-2016, 05:25 AM   #65
Veteran Member
Tan68's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 396
QuoteOriginally posted by FantasticMrFox Quote
... in general Pentax in-body IS does not make their lenses any cheaper.
A few years have passed since I compared, but I found the same to be true of Tamron. Their lenses with IS for Nikon or Canon mount cost the same as the lens for Pentax mount and IS omitted. (or pretty much the same cost...)

This always made me sad.. maybe the bits for IS were in the lens because to remove them required a re-designed lens. If the bits were in there, the cost should be the same and this is fair. If the bits were in there why not let the Pentax user use in-lens IS as desired.. unless there was no IS on/off switch on the lens.

Anyway, even if my reasoning above is pants, the Tamron lenses also cost about the same regardless of mount or IS.

---------- Post added 04-09-16 at 07:30 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by aleonx3 Quote
You mean like grocery shopping? ... For techno gadgets, it is quite different, some people do the research on line and then order it on line... and then there are some who want to get the "touch-and-feel" in the store and then order it on line.
I like to eye my fruits and vegetables and then pounce.
Some people like to molest every fruit within reach before making a decision.

I guess I am more the research and then order rather than touch.feel.
04-09-2016, 08:40 AM   #66
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,530
QuoteOriginally posted by Ontarian50 Quote
Hey, it was a long hard haul for many companies to make the transition to digital sensors. First, only Kodak had them, at stratospheric costs to the early adopters ($20,000 and up).
Eventually, there was a market for 2 megapixel plus cameras amongst photojournalists, at the $8,000 price point. That market was sown up at the time by Nikon and Canon. There was no way Pentax, Olympus, or Minolta could launch an $8,000 camera into the marketplace.
Which left Nikon and Canon a few years to test out digital equipment in the high price, fast obsolescence marketplace. They figured out how to do it, pay Kodak their royalties, and come up with a few patents of their own.
Pentax and Minolta didn't jump into DSLRs until the price point came down to around $3,000 or a bit less - which meant they were left paying licensing of tech to the first guys. We're lucky Pentax survived. Minolta and Contax didn't.

Sure, Pentax has had some trouble - not the least of which was ignoring the attraction of the 70-200mm 2.8 lenses that were potent tele zooms on the APS-C bodies sold by Nikon and Canon. Pentax's answer was to launch the 50-135mm "equivalent". A lot of sports photographers jumped ship from Pentax because they couldn't wait til 2016 for a true 70-200mm. Also Pentax's AF was/is a bit lacking for those same action-oriented guys. It also didn't help that all the big dream lenses (ie: 600mm f4.0) were in Pentax's past. And don't forget that for ages, Pentax considered two camera bodies a complete product lineup.

Fortunately, not everything is action-oriented. And photogs used to a more calm approach to their photography found a lot to admire in Pentax stuff. For those who take the time to find out, colour rendition, build quality is just great.

But yes, there's a lot of momentum behind the Nikon/Canon juggernauts. There's a lot of depth to their bench.
Excellent points
04-09-2016, 02:34 PM   #67
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,399
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
I would have thought that being based on the MZ-S it would have used that camera's battery, and aren't there working MZ-S's out there? Evidently things are not that simple! Alternatively an AC adapter, but things are clearly not as simple as that either...
The old K-1's battery spans nearly the entire grip AFAIK. They had to build the grip into the body to make room for a big enough battery.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

04-09-2016, 02:49 PM   #68
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Roi-et, Thailand
Posts: 773
QuoteOriginally posted by slip Quote
People don't realize how important auto focus is until you are taking shots of the bride coming down the path and your autofocus can't keep up... or when your grandchildren are walking towards you and you miss almost all the shots.it. Should be the most important thing to all the brands.

Randy
110% correct. If I'm buying a big heavy DSLR it ain't for the EVF . . . it's all about the autofocus. Otherwise, what's the point?

04-09-2016, 02:50 PM   #69
Pentaxian
bertwert's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Golden, BC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,378
QuoteOriginally posted by HopelessTogger Quote
. If I'm buying a big heavy DSLR it ain't for the EVF
DSLRs don't have EVFs...
04-09-2016, 02:54 PM   #70
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Roi-et, Thailand
Posts: 773
QuoteOriginally posted by bertwert Quote
DSLRs don't have EVFs...
Exactly!
04-09-2016, 03:16 PM   #71
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,721
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
The old K-1's battery spans nearly the entire grip AFAIK. They had to build the grip into the body to make room for a big enough battery.
Funny you should mention that - I was watching Matt Granger's unboxing of the D5 the other day and the battery on that thing looks almost as big. From about 4:10...

04-09-2016, 03:21 PM   #72
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,399
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Funny you should mention that - I was watching Matt Granger's unboxing of the D5 the other day and the battery on that thing looks almost as big. From about 4:10...
Yup, but the pro Nikon batteries huge physically and also huge in terms of capacity. If you look at the battery life of a D4 or D5, it's almost 4000 actuations. Puts many other cameras to shame :P

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

04-09-2016, 04:13 PM   #73
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,924
QuoteOriginally posted by Tan68 Quote
I like to eye my fruits and vegetables and then pounce.
Some people like to molest every fruit within reach before making a decision.
Last Saturday, I watched a woman squeeze loaf after loaf of bread. Finally, I couldn't stand it any longer, so I asked her "what are you doing to that poor bread?" She explained that she wanted the softest loaf, to which I explained that each loaf was now less soft than it had been before, because she had permanently compressed part of each one, and now someone like me would have to buy it {then I picked up a loaf she hadn't gotten to and left}

---------- Post added 04-09-16 at 07:48 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by slip Quote
People don't realize how important auto focus is until you are taking shots of the bride coming down the path and your autofocus can't keep up... or when your grandchildren are walking towards you and you miss almost all the shots.it. Should be the most important thing to all the brands.
QuoteOriginally posted by slip Quote
Both Nikon and Canon have bodies with features that you can't get in a Pentax at any price.
Value for the dollar is where Pentax does best
Here, you respond to your own issue. Canikon offer a camera for every niche; Pentax cannot do that right now. Pentax is not strong in "events" right now; they may improve over time, but this is not the time. Unless the bride is sprinting down the aisle {as mine almost did}, or the grandkid has had way too much sugar, I'm not convinced that Pentax will fall short; here I have to admit that I have never been a fan of thin DOF, because context is important to me, so my style may work better with Pentax than is true of others. However, I have absolutely no concern in using my low-cost Pentax K-30 to take pictures that are happening in snow or rain {and will no longer be happening by the time the weather dries}; if I used a comparable Canikon camera, I would have to plan on buying a replacement real soon.
04-09-2016, 05:22 PM   #74
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,721
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
Yup, but the pro Nikon batteries huge physically and also huge in terms of capacity. If you look at the battery life of a D4 or D5, it's almost 4000 actuations. Puts many other cameras to shame :P
Oh, granted. This was but a physical size comparison, nothing more.
04-10-2016, 01:31 AM   #75
Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 27
QuoteOriginally posted by FantasticMrFox Quote
You are right, there is a selection. But I am looking for a zoom lens that I can use for night sky and landscape photography, that takes filters, has a fast aperture and is below 500. The Pentax 10-17 is a fish-eye, the Sigma 8-16 doesn't take filters, the Sigma 10-20 and Tamron 10-24 are my best bet but are not fast and need a lot of stopping down to give reasonable edge performance, plus with the Sigma's there is a lot of concern of sample variation and decentering, and the Pentax 12-24 seems to be a great lens but is 700 here in the UK and 865 in my native Germany

And that's why I am disappointed that the reputedly very sharp Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 isn't available for Pentax. At about 475, being fast and sharp and taking filters, that would've been the one

I guess I will just forget about a fast lens, save up and wait for the Pentax 12-24's successor that's on the roadmap. It will probably have HD coatings, weather sealing and DC focusing, if it's a constant f/4 and as good optically or even better than the 12-24, then it'll be a great lens. It'll just be quite pricey and I have to wait ...
If you look for Pentax in Germany or Netherlands or Belgium you are paying al lot more then elsewhere because of the way the distribution still works for the shops. Of course it is also a niche-market here which drives the end-user-prices.
it might very well be cheaper to book a short holiday to buy a lens outside "this continent", make a lot of photos on that trip with your new lens and fly back.

Canon and also Sony sell over the computer-trade-systems so you can buy them at low prices at these stores whilst Pentax is only availlable over the specialised importer.
For me, as I use a lot of 'older lenses', Pentax is cheaper since you can use them all with the newer bodies as well with SR and of course the weather sealing in the newer zooms. I also do have some Sigma's that are about the same price for Canon/Nikon over here.
Very nice for filming with the shake compensation in the lens since the SR in body can make some noise...
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
bits, bride, camera, canikon, cost, dslr, fuji, lens, lenses, line, pentax, pentax dslr cameras, people, photography, research, sony, tamron, time, video
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which flash unit is okay for Pentax DSLR cameras? Tonytee Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 4 05-04-2015 10:39 AM
DIY Hand warmer for DSLR and Cameras Sliver-Surfer Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 01-16-2015 10:35 PM
New Cameras....What are Your Plans? Rupert Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 84 02-27-2012 06:37 AM
For what they are worth: Used Cameras a.seki Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 05-02-2011 02:08 PM
DSLR wide angle in the ~13 to 16mm range, what are the choises for Pentax Douglas_of_Sweden Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 35 01-27-2009 08:37 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:51 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top