[normhead]

There's nothing more useless than someone who tells us , "My system "blah, blah, blah" is way better than my Pentax gear better."

How many times have i followed thread, where someone is explaining how bad some K-mount system is, for whatever, taken the time to add up prices and discovered that their base system costs more than my whole UWA, normal, Telephoto set up.

Personally, I think comparison threads that do not specify the gear used in the two systems, all lenses aquired for both systems and their prices are pretty much useless and should be deleted.

I like a good comparison as much as the next guy, but, I need to know what is being compared, I need to know what the augmented abilities I will get, and what I will miss in the K-mount system, and what it will cost me to get those additional abilities.

A guy who says 'I get a better keeper rate with my 'blah blah blah' gear", and doesn't tell us what equipment he uses for both systems and what he paid for both systems, is wasting everyone's time.I Like hearing about new gear, but I also don't plan to increase my budget for photographic items. Way to many of these comparison threads are of the "if you spend more money you get better gear." Variety.

If you can get me better results for the same money, who knows, I might be interested.

Essentially, if I'm going to compare systems, I'm going to compare what it costs for a whole system, which in my case overs 8mm to 510mm, with 17 zooms and primes. I realize most of the system switchers are not looking at nearly that kind of investment, but they can at least tell us what their comments are based on.

---

Last edited by normhead; 06-27-2018 at 11:58 AM.

[SSGGeezer]

Essentially, if I'm going to compare systems, I'm going to compare what it costs for a while system, which in my case overs 8mm to 510mm, with 17 zooms and primes. I realize most of the system switchers are not looking at nearly that kind of investment, but they can at least tell us what their comments are based on.

Bingo! The case for false equivalence is strong in the Canikony crowd! There is no way I could get the same lenses and image quality for anywhere near the same amount of cash with another system. And I have spent what I consider, a fair amount of cash on gear.
Well less than 4K but that includes lenses and camera bodies that I have sold but not subtracted from the total spent. What could I get along with a high end Canon or Sony for that much money? I have 4 limiteds, 1 * lens, cover 15mm to 500mm in focal lengths and have multiple tripods and flashes as well as bags and filters. Top that Canonikonys!

[AldaCZ]

I know some who gone Pentax>Nikon>Fuji...still not happy... go figure

[Kozlok]

You are insisting that your limits are the same as someone else’s. I care not very much about the cost, but I do insist on an OVF, and I want a minimum weight for a given IQ for the specific kind of shooting I do. I also want SR and focus confirmation with manual lenses. My keeper rate with Pentax is pretty high, but I shoot slowly, and none of the other cameras meet my needs. If I shot fashion in a fast-paced environment, I’d care about keeper rate above all other factors; cost would be nearly irrelevant.

To insist on same-value is also a false equivalence for someone in different circumstances.

[vector]

I recently shot photos of my daughters junior high play. 2 performances, one night on the front row, second night standing at the back. Used my K1 and Tamron 70-200mm in M mode. Wasn't easy as the stage lighting varied throughout. Out of 680 photos only about 10-15 were not keepers due to focus, motion blur, or exposure. The rest were crisp and clear, not blown out or under exposed, though not all were decently enough composed to really be worth keeping (that's me not the equipment). After the show some other parents I know were showing me their photos from various canon/nikon/sony cams. Most had bad motion blur and horrible over exposure. The cameras were used in auto and the lighting conditions are just too challenging. I showed mine and got lots of wows and requests for copies. In the end I gave the whole lot of photos to the school to be used for year books and they put up a bulletin board full of them to showcase their arts program. That experience was yet another example that what you know, and technique matter more than the gear. I am pretty sure I could have got decent shots with those other cameras if given the chance. To be fair, I have now shot a fair number of these types of shows and have already learned the hard way how to set my camera. My first several attempts produced a lot of out of focus, motion blurred, over/under exposed shots.


Now I don't shoot professionally, it's purely for fun and to capture those moments for family and friends and occasionally go out and try to make something resembling art. I am definitely not limited by my equipment, though I may be holding the equipment back. I found the focus on the K5 to sometimes be a challenge, but with the K3 and K1 I have no issues or complaints. I have handled some friends Nikon gear and I still don't feel the need to switch especially when I see the price of Nikon lenses. I know Pentax seems to be going the way of big over sized and over priced glass too. I like compact vintage glass and a little character. I also like good value. I have 24x36" prints made with the lowly Tamron 28-75mm that look amazing. People are way too obsessed with sharpness and clarity that makes no difference unless pixel peeping or making massive prints.

The gear comparison problems are never going to end though. It's epidemic in our society to want to be or have better than our peers, and obsessing over camera gear is just one more outlet for that. Especially if we can "prove" our is better even while being blind to the unfairness of the comparison.

My challenge now is to get out and shoot more with what I have. I find the more I shoot, the happier I am with my gear.

[ChristianRock]

I remember one particular ex-forum member (thank God for the "ex") that was always advertising Sony in here and saying how his A7R was so much better than Pentax and calling everyone stupid who didn't agree with him. Turns out the newest Pentax he ever had was a K10D.

So yeah, apples to apples is a good thing...

[biz-engineer]

How many times have i followed thread, where someone is explaining how bad some K-mount system is, for whatever, taken the time to add up prices and discovered that their base system costs more than my whole UWA, normal, Telephoto set up.

It is very seldom that a product is significantly cheaper than its perceived value. Every company had costs, and unit cost of a product and the resulting product value is a share between the company and the customer. If the price is too high relative to the feature set, sales quantities won't be optimum, and if the price is too low sales volumes will be high but the net profits not optimum. So, usually, for a given kind of product, the price / value is seldom very different from one product to another. That's why I challenge anyone to find a camera brand A that has all the features of brand B, same quality of brand B, same service etc... and is also significantly cheaper than brand A. If that was the case, the responsible marketer would quickly adjust their prices , either to achieve more sales or more profits. One can easily take a representative groups of customers of a market segment and get them surveyed to make a model of they choices. I was interview by Swaroski as they were researching to decide how to position a new model of binoculars, the questions were fairly accurate about features, prices and choices when the customer is presented with different product/price alternatives.

[honey bo bo]

No You Can't see My Gear!

[DeadJohn]

Norm, this post should be an automatic reply if anyone talks about Sony's new 400mm f/2.8 lens. One of the usual naysayers is likely to say the Sony A9 + 400/2.8 is superior to Pentax for wildlife. It probably is. The Sony gear costs roughly $16,000.

[AldaCZ]

Norm, this post should be an automatic reply if anyone talks about Sony's new 400mm f/2.8 lens. One of the usual naysayers is likely to say the Sony A9 + 400/2.8 is superior to Pentax for wildlife. It probably is. The Sony gear costs roughly $16,000.

You have forgot the grip to make it WR XD

[LensBeginner]

I agree wholeheartedly.
Only exception, as Kozlok pointed out, is if money isn't an object, and one system just doesn't offer what you're after.
Not my case, though, as my budget is quite limited.
Ah, the catch would be that if one tries to use this argument as his "way out", we'll demand extraordinary proof: please, show us exactly what you bought with your supposed truckload of money...

[photoptimist]

No You Can't see My Gear!

Just don't sit in the fixer!!!!

[DeadJohn]

I agree wholeheartedly.
Only exception, as Kozlok pointed out, is if money isn't an object, and one system just doesn't offer what you're after.
Not my case, though, as my budget is quite limited.
Ah, the catch would be that if one tries to use this argument as his "way out", we'll demand extraordinary proof (please, show us exactly what you bought with your supposed truckload of money...

If money were truly unlimited, I could buy a camera company or contract one to customize an existing camera system for me. Wealthy people who act on such whims end up poor.

In more practical terms, carrying capacity is often my main constraint regardless of cost. I like hiking with opportunities for landscape and wildlife. It's impractical to carry a backpack large enough for 2 full systems, one customized for landscape and the other for wildlife.

[LensBeginner]

If money were truly unlimited, I could buy a camera company or contract one to customize an existing camera system for me. Wealthy people who act on such whims end up poor.

In more practical terms, carrying capacity is often my main constraint regardless of cost. I like hiking with opportunities for landscape and wildlife. It's impractical to carry a backpack large enough for 2 full systems, one customized for landscape and the other for wildlife.

...if you managed to have the handshake photograph on the Financial Times, then you would have every right to say the you prefer Xy and Pentax is s*17 because you bought the former and they now do as you say

[FozzFoster]

Bingo!

Bingo!