Hmm... I can not agree with this. Prices are pretty much the same given the same level of build quality and optical performance.

I keep forgetting how different pricing is in Europe, it is hard to compare different models.

[Reed]

Exactly. Pentax primes are great, but mostly quite slow, especially the DA Limiteds (f2,8 is the fastest aperture). Fuji primes from the "compact line" have mostly f2 (18mm, 23mm, 35mm, 50mm) and their line of fast primes is f1,4 (16mm, 23mm, 35mm) or even f1,2 (56mm).

Limited DA70 is F2.4, there are some faster AF primes also in current line, just to mention recent DFA*50/1.4 or DA*55/1.4. Thing that I miss the most as portrait shooter is 100mm modern non macro prime around F2.

[iudex]

Limited DA70 is F2.4, there are some faster AF primes also in current line, just to mention recent DFA*50/1.4 or DA*55/1.4. Thing that I miss the most as portrait shooter is 100mm modern non macro prime around F2.

I forgot the 70mm Limited was f2,4, not 2,8 (and it´s a lens I owned, shame on me ;-), however the DA Limiteds can be generally described as slow (narrow aperture) lenses (15/4, 21/3,2, 35/2,8, 40/2,8, 70/2,4).
And you are right with the 100mm, I owned the 100mm/2,8 macro and used it mostly for portraits; it did the job and I was happy with it, however a faster lens would be more suitable for portraits, plus as a macro lens the long focus range was sometimes a pain... (you know where). I know there is the FA 77/1,8, but it is considerably shorter and most importantly very expensive. Something like Fuji 90mm/2 would be ideal.

[Reed]

Well that is why I'm going soon to get decent condition F135/2.8, I like macro lenses, but for portraits when stepped down, they get too much "clinical" in rendering or my taste.

[iudex]

Well that is why I'm going soon to get decent condition F135/2.8, I like macro lenses, but for portraits when stepped down, they get too much "clinical" in rendering or my taste.

I agree, the 100mm Macro is super sharp (the sharpest lens I ever had), but for portraits super sharpness is not that critical, somethimes a little softness is better and more pleasing.

[mikesbike]

I agree, the 100mm Macro is super sharp (the sharpest lens I ever had), but for portraits super sharpness is not that critical, somethimes a little softness is better and more pleasing.

On FF this would be good for portraiture as well as macro, so one lens could serve more than one purpose. 135mm is getting a little long for ideal portrait use in terms of perspective. We now have the high-performance DFA 50mm f/1.4 and a forthcoming DFA 85mm f/1.4 which would be fine and specifically for portrait use. But these are very large sized lenses for FF bodies, where the FA 77mm LTD is compact, and is spot-on as tested for FL by Pop Photography. Many if not most of the 80-85mm portrait lenses out there have been shown coming up a bit short in FL, which is legal up to a certain percent, and is quite common throughout the industry.

As far as the DA limiteds, they were designed in concept for maximum compactness combined with high quality, hence the reduction in maximum aperture. We then also have the traditional FA 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4, and 31mm f/1.8, 43mm f/1.9, 77mm f/1.8 Limiteds which are FF lenses yet still compact, and useful for APS-C as well. A smaller sensor always allows lens designs to be smaller than those for cameras having larger sensors. To some people, APS-C is the ideal compromise, being close enough in all respects to FF. Others are willing to go yet smaller, while at the opposite end are those whose interest is almost exclusively for FF or even medium format.

[jlstrawman]

I began using Pentax equipment in 1966 with an H1a film camera body and developed my own B&W 5x7 prints at home from Tri-Ex. Years later, I acquired a K100D Super, which I still have, and which still produces gorgeous files in good light. Then came a K-7, K-5, and a K-30.

In May 2016, the K-1 showed up. Unfortunately, advancing age, and arthritis in both thumbs and wrists, made handling the K-1 unpleasant. My hands are smaller than average, also. Reluctantly the K-1 was sold. Due to a slightly smaller form factor, and the prospect of adapting a multitude of lens, I moved to the Sony a7 series and currently use the a7 and a7II, They are easier for ME to handle. Surprisingly, I also found that 24mp FF gave ME more keepers than 36mp, when shooting hand held. The Sony a7 series works for ME. Are they "better" than Pentax bodies? Definitely not. They fit my needs better, at this time. Hopefully, someday, RI will produce a body that suits my needs better than Sony. My nice collection of excellent condition Pentax manual and FA Ltd lenses is another story, and will not be sold willingly. YMMV.

Here at PF, couldn't we, collectively, spend less time worrying about why Ricoh doesn't do this or that, less time worrying about what so-called reviewers think about Ricoh and Pentax, and spend more time showing others our photos, and helping other to become more proficient?

---

Last edited by jlstrawman; 09-13-2018 at 01:03 PM.

[Sluggo]

A pair of lenses in my collection are enough to make me want to stay with the brand indefinitely. Those are the FA31 and the A*85. Others of you, I'm sure, feel similarly about certain other lenses you own. They aren't just an investment in photographic technology with certain specifications; there's something more visceral in my connection to them and the fluency they lend to certain kinds of shooting.

I don't feel any particular passion about the camera bodies or any particular features they have; nor about any of my other lenses, most of which are fine workhorses at their focal lengths. My attachment to Pentax mostly just comes down to those two extraordinary lenses. If I lost/broke those and couldn't replace them, I wouldn't much care what system I was using.

[mikesbike]

Obviously, as has been stated so many times, different designs offer different advantages. So if a certain one fills particularly important needs for the individual, changing to it makes sense. Also, there is nothing wrong with having equipment from more than one manufacturer to meet one's needs.

---------- Post added 09-13-18 at 03:17 PM ----------

Likely stay with Pentax and restructure the kit. I'd get a Kp, 15, 20-40, and 70 limiteds and stop there. My wants/needs have changed over the recent years is what is driving that change. I'd stay with Pentax for the value, performance, and familiarity. But, other tempts include Fuji and micro 4/3's. I think Pentax still wins out, however.

Indeed. One of my favorite ensembles. I just got the DA 70mm LTD. having talked myself into it on another thread! I also add the FA 77mm and then as an extender, the DA* 50-135mm. All in all, a very compact kit for what it is.

So as to "Why Do I Stay With Pentax"- it begs being answered with another question: "Why wouldn't I stay with Pentax?" What should I do- sell everything and go to CaNikon and pay for WR lenses starting around $1,000 each? If I had an especially important need like a lot of fast sports shooting where my Pentax gear isn't making it, I would consider adding a Nikon D500 and appropriate lens for this purpose. Nikon is also noteworthy for their superior multi-flash setups. (although I have shot some fast-moving sports with my Pentax gear. The Nikon D500 is simply formulated for fast-tracking, high FPS burst shooting)

A few years ago, a retired family friend whose background is in marketing, with shoot setups, etc, went from using Canon DSLR equipment to a smaller Oly outfit for his own use. Lenses are remarkably small, due to the smaller sensor, and he says it yields fine results for his needs. He travels a lot. I handled his camera and some lenses, took a few shots. I was also shooting with my K-5IIs. For me, while the smaller size of the Oly outfit was very impressive, and desirable, I still liked my Pentax K-5IIs better. Better control set, and features like the Pentax Hyper System, etc. Built-in flash. Great build and handling. Those complaining about the smaller grip of the KP would certainly not like the Oly design.

Later, along came the KP. Comparable in size to APS-C compact mirrorless, it was a definite draw for me as a compact higher-quality alternative. Wonderful features, built-in flash. Great control set, nearly as good as my K-5IIs, and fine build quality. Many advanced features. Changeable feel with the different grips, and an available battery grip. Actually, with my DA* 50-135mm, it weighs around 1/4 lb. less than the Oly and its smaller sensor with its 50-140mm. I am very happy with the fine results I get from my K-5IIs, and my very small K-S2, but the KP is delivering results that amaze me! VF, AF, build quality, everything is highly satisfying.

I do know Sony has long been a leader in video cameras. Their continued success in cameras featuring video does not surprise me. Their FF mirrorless has also been in the lead, and continues to be impressive. It does also save weight, but a big FF tele lens is still big, and the EVF and control set is not to everyone's liking. I don't have the FF K-1, but should I get one it would essentially be with shorter lenses in mind. My Pentax APS-C equipment has been delivering great results for me.

[ikandree]

When people ask me what kind of camera I use and I say Pentax, I often get a "Who?" reply. My husband works as a high school media teacher and recently acquired a Canon camera for his classroom. (Incidentally, he requested a Pentax but was denied bc the school wanted something "people would actually use." Lol) I thought the Canon felt cheap. Plasticy. Some might just called it lighter, but I called it flimsy. I'll also admit that I like being a little bit different and "breaking from the crowd."

I'd stick with a Pentax.

[BigMackCam]

In May 2016, the K-1 showed up. Unfortunately, advancing age, and arthritis in both thumbs and wrists, made handling the K-1 unpleasant. My hands are smaller than average, also. Reluctantly the K-1 was sold. Due to a slightly smaller form factor, and the prospect of adapting a multitude of lens, I moved to the Sony a7 series and currently use the a7 and a7II, They are easier for ME to handle.

We've enjoyed discussing this before, so you already know my feelings on this, but I'll repeat here for others... It may not be the most popular thing to admit here on a Pentax-specific enthusiast site, but I really like the A7 MkII, and - with the adapted lenses I shoot with much of the time - I find it easy on the hands and arms (not to mention the neck) for a full-frame kit.

Surprisingly, I also found that 24mp FF gave ME more keepers than 36mp, when shooting hand held. The Sony a7 series works for ME. Are they "better" than Pentax bodies? Definitely not. They fit my needs better, at this time. Hopefully, someday, RI will produce a body that suits my needs better than Sony.

With a 24MP full-frame sensor, pixel density is broadly equivalent to 10MP on APS-C - e.g. a Pentax K10D - and places the same demands on lens performance and the photographer's steadiness. Indeed, the A7 MkII's crop mode produces 10MP images, which proves that point So I can completely understand the increase in number of keepers. Plus, as I've made tediously clear on these forums, 10MP APS-C (from my K10D-clone Samsung GX10) is plenty for me under normal circumstances. 24MP full frame works very well indeed, and is enough for most people, I think.

Here at PF, couldn't we, collectively, spend less time worrying about why Ricoh doesn't do this or that, less time worrying about what so-called reviewers think about Ricoh and Pentax, and spend more time showing others our photos, and helping other to become more proficient?

Amen to that!

[ChristianRock]

I toyed with the idea of Sony at one point but got to play with a coworker's A7II and A6000. I felt they are basically built like disposable toys compared to Pentax bodies and the EVF got on my nerves quickly.
Not to mention any AF lens would cost quite a bit.
So no, I would not switch from Pentax, for my needs and budget it's by far the best option I think.

[PDL]

I started out with Fujica SLR's. They were stolen and the insurance company gave me just enough money to get a SF-1 and a Tokina zoom. When I decided to go digital the *ist Ds was on sale along with a Tablet PC at Costco. I was familiar with Pentax since my cousin had a Spotmatic and my Father bought a K1000 so the brand was not "new" to me.

I have stayed with Pentax because I have a basic set of lenses and it would cost way -- too -- much -- money to simply switch brands. The idea of switching brands just because the "other guys" have nicer things is pretty silly to me. I have a good understanding on how to do things (52+ years of photography) so I just deal with any limits that are out there. Most of the time the limits are located behind the viewfinder - not in the camera body or lenses.

I am still waiting for a beer bottle opener on the body, but since most bottled beer comes with twist off lids, that will get pushed further down the "gotta have" list. As I am retired now, I doubt that I will be purchasing a new camera body for a really long time if ever.

[Rondec]

I began using Pentax equipment in 1966 with an H1a film camera body and developed my own B&W 5x7 prints at home from Tri-Ex. Years later, I acquired a K100D Super, which I still have, and which still produces gorgeous files in good light. Then came a K-7, K-5, and a K-30.

In May 2016, the K-1 showed up. Unfortunately, advancing age, and arthritis in both thumbs and wrists, made handling the K-1 unpleasant. My hands are smaller than average, also. Reluctantly the K-1 was sold. Due to a slightly smaller form factor, and the prospect of adapting a multitude of lens, I moved to the Sony a7 series and currently use the a7 and a7II, They are easier for ME to handle. Surprisingly, I also found that 24mp FF gave ME more keepers than 36mp, when shooting hand held. The Sony a7 series works for ME. Are they "better" than Pentax bodies? Definitely not. They fit my needs better, at this time. Hopefully, someday, RI will produce a body that suits my needs better than Sony. My nice collection of excellent condition Pentax manual and FA Ltd lenses is another story, and will not be sold willingly. YMMV.

Here at PF, couldn't we, collectively, spend less time worrying about why Ricoh doesn't do this or that, less time worrying about what so-called reviewers think about Ricoh and Pentax, and spend more time showing others our photos, and helping other to become more proficient?

I'm not sure that I agree with your assessment of the Forum situation. There are hundreds of photos posted every day on the Forum of varying quality. It is clear that Pentaxians are using their cameras to take photos and share. I, personally, take and post multiple photos every week and enjoy the photo threads like the "Share Your K-1 Photos" and lens threads quite a bit. Furthermore, when anyone has a question about how to use their gear or take certain photos, there are plenty of answers.

At the same time, it is like anything else and people discuss various aspects about the future of Ricoh and other brands, comparing them and contrasting them. Maybe wishing like you, for mirrorless options or maybe just tweaks of existing SLR designs. These things drive conversation too.

It isn't an either or proposition. People can come to share a photo and stay for a discussion. As long as it doesn't get too heated, it is all good.

[kevinWE]

My original attraction to Pentax came from the K10D. The price was right, the camera was fairly easy to learn, M42 glass was EXTREMELY easy to adapt to the body saving me hundreds and hundreds of dollars in glass expense. It was such a great camera to learn on.

Now, I find I simply enjoy the image quality and features and a low price point.