The Good - The Bad and The Ugly about Pentax

selfnoise · 10-20-2018, 12:21 PM

For me the ugly is mainly the aperture block issue... I realize many companies routinely fail to offer compensation for systemic issues, but it still left a bad taste in my mouth.

The good for me is ergonomics, IBIS, value, and the DA limited pancakes which are essentially the perfect lenses for the kind of things I like to do.

Bad is AF.C and video features but no need to elaborate there.

**PJ1** · 10-20-2018, 02:39 PM

Originally posted by TaoMaas

I didn't mean my post to be directed soley at PJ1

I understand that and I take your point. I fall into the trap of thinking that what is not relevant to me probably isn't relevant to many others either. I guess the world has different expectations and is moving on without me! But here is a contradiction for you: Pentax make/market quite a few lenses that are intended for television cameras - c-mount with 2//3" coverage. Yet, as you point out, they don't seem to be seeing the wider potential for video in their more traditional camera line. They are only small players but there might be some advantages if they could develop a path to integrate systems across the different areas. I am only speculating though. It is far outside my area of experience.

Canid · 10-20-2018, 02:49 PM

Originally posted by Lord Lucan

Find a legacy Pentax shift lens :-
SMC Pentax 28mm F3.5 Shift Reviews - K Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

Doesn't have TILT, only SHIFT... just like my Laowa.

Originally posted by zjacreman

but on the wide end the Rokinon is the only game in town with tilt and shift movements.

As I mentioned in my reply to @zjacreman there is also the Schneider 28/4.5 T/S
Here was the listing for it on B&H: Schneider PC-TS Super-Angulon 28mm f/4.5 HM Aspheric 06-1075956
Nearly impossible to find, but they DO exist. I remember someone posted a picture of one in a thrift shop here on the forums a while back.

Fauxton · 10-20-2018, 05:55 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by kooks

What do you guys think that is the Good/Bad and Ugly about Pentax???

I was wondering about this since a few days ago, we all know that there is no perfect camera or system but as far as Pentax is, this is my list:

The Good: build like a tank, image quality (at least in K1) is one of the best in the market, weather sealing, astro features, bang for the buck when you are in the camera target

The Bad: slow AF compared with other cameras, video features are way way way too bad for current standards, lack of modern lenses, way to slow to release new products and keep the hype, few camera models(FF) makes the brand too nichy for some.

The Ugly: Their marketing department.. we actually don't kow if that department is real or not, but if it is real their job is terrible.

Wish that the bad will come Good ones in not a long time.

They say value is in something attributed by the customer. So against the requirements does Pentax succeed or fail? My requirements likely differ from yours so therefore my answer to your question has to be taken in view of what my requirements are. They are simple; I want a camera with which to take still photographs for mostly personal pleasure. Video is of no concern. I don't shoot sports but if I did it would be rally or sports car races. AF tracking is therefore not at the top of the list although accuracy of focus is important to me. The lens catalogue is important however its well served with the current set of lenses. I rarely shoot above 135 mm. And if I shot sports the 60-250 f4 or the 70-200 f2.8 (overkill) would be my choice. I'm quite happy with the choice of lenses. Quality and haptics are important - I'd like think I have a good instrument in my hands that can stand some occasionally hard knocks. I don't mind the noise of the screw drive "drill". I like flexibility; I particularly like the hyper program mode - absolutely the only way to shoot a Pentax (IMHO). Okay so what would I like to see that would better address my requirements? Honestly not much. I would always like less noise and more DR. But it has to be a substantial jump over what the K3 or K5 has and really that not happening yet. I would like better AF accuracy, better repeatability of the AF. But between f4 and f11 the depth of field covers the hysteresis there, at least in the K5 and K3. Resolution - maybe - I might buy the K1 for that. But the K3 with the Tamron 17-50 is already as sharp as hell. At least my copy. Let me ask your question another way. Is there any compelling reason to buy any of the new cameras - Sony, Canon or Nikon? Answer - not for the price. If I was going to upgrade I'd look at the K1 Mk II and the 15-30 and 24-70. and save thousands over the other makes. The additional marginal capability in the other makes isn't worth the cost. An A7III (the only current model I'd consider) with a 16-35 f2.8 and 24-70 f2.8 is $8500 CAD and the K1II with the 15-35 f2.8 and 24-70 f2.8 is $5600 CAD. Against my requirements that is a no contest win for Pentax. Should I feel the need to upgrade. So I figure I already have the best value out there. And if I want the K1 Mk II with the above lens set is waiting. But for me its likely not worth the $5600. Think of what lenses for my K5 and K3 I could buy for that?

Away from my requirements to the brand. Yes, Pentax should advertise more. Yes they should round out the lens set of for the K1. Yes they should have a K3 Mki3 out. But no radical improvement is called for I don't think. But the market is a different things altogether. So if Pentax wants to survive and they don't carve a niche out - like the only maker of OVF high DR cameras, then if they compete with Sony or Canon or Nikon then Mirrorless is the way to go. And software would differentiate. And that isn't a Pentax strength.
Sorry for the rambling - just some random thoughts to your question.

automorphism · 10-21-2018, 01:01 PM

Something that wasn't mentioned in this thread and I forgot myself is that Pentax has the option of DNG Raws. Wish everyone did that! In this day and age, having a proprietary Raw format seems ridiculous, as camera manufacturers generally don't make money off any Raw software (with a few exceptions).

**newmikey** · 10-21-2018, 01:13 PM

Originally posted by automorphism

Something that wasn't mentioned in this thread and I forgot myself is that Pentax has the option of DNG Raws. Wish everyone did that! In this day and age, having a proprietary Raw format seems ridiculous, as camera manufacturers generally don't make money off any Raw software (with a few exceptions).

I have zero use for DNG as all my raw converters do PEF without a problem.

automorphism · 10-21-2018, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by newmikey

I have zero use for DNG as all my raw converters do PEF without a problem.

More cameras using DNG would mean less time programmers need to spend adding support for additional Raw formats. That in turn leads to higher quality software and more time for other, cooler stuff. Might not matter to you now in the present, but it makes a difference.

**Kerrowdown** · 10-21-2018, 02:23 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Lord Lucan

Find a legacy Pentax shift lens

+1, it's a fine hunk of beautifully engineered piece of glass, here's my review.

SMC Pentax 28mm F3.5 Shift Reviews - K Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

wed7 · 10-21-2018, 06:49 PM

Good: Pentax cameras were not driven by marketing department, they are instead promoted within the grassroots level (its users; us!) So ergonomics and handling experience is superb, build quality and weather sealing are superb qualities, and of course, image quality is always a priority.

Bad: This is user (need) dependent but generally these are my observation, slow AFC and its accuracy is sooooo slow vs most competitors, abysmal video capability vs most competitors, lack of 3rd party lens and lighting support, selected cameras with tether support. Release of full frame primes is painstakingly SLOW. Service centers are pretty rare. Modern WR fast prime lenses are also non-existent to match WR bodies!

Ugly: Local pricing is plain bad/expensive (This would also get worse once Pentax continue spewing their "premium" products.)

**newmikey** · 10-21-2018, 11:08 PM

Originally posted by automorphism

More cameras using DNG would mean less time programmers need to spend adding support for additional Raw formats. That in turn leads to higher quality software and more time for other, cooler stuff.

Two misconceptions in one single sentence. Programmers don't spend much time "adding support for additional raw formats" - typically the format is already established in the software and adding a new camera model's raw is just a few lines of code. If you'd need to depend on the time freed up, you'd be sadly disappointed at the cool stuff made possible by that...

reh321 · 10-28-2018, 01:47 PM

Originally posted by newmikey

Two misconceptions in one single sentence. Programmers don't spend much time "adding support for additional raw formats" - typically the format is already established in the software and adding a new camera model's raw is just a few lines of code. If you'd need to depend on the time freed up, you'd be sadly disappointed at the cool stuff made possible by that...

Where could I find information about the internal format of a CR2 file? a NEF file? I've always been curious about how different companies implement 'raw'.

**newmikey** · 10-28-2018, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by reh321

Where could I find information about the internal format of a CR2 file? a NEF file? I've always been curious about how different companies implement 'raw'.

Most likely place is the dcraw source code, should have everything you need.

10-21-2018, 06:49 PM	#39
wed7 Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Manila, Philippines Posts: 1,421	Good: Pentax cameras were not driven by marketing department, they are instead promoted within the grassroots level (its users; us!) So ergonomics and handling experience is superb, build quality and weather sealing are superb qualities, and of course, image quality is always a priority. Bad: This is user (need) dependent but generally these are my observation, slow AFC and its accuracy is sooooo slow vs most competitors, abysmal video capability vs most competitors, lack of 3rd party lens and lighting support, selected cameras with tether support. Release of full frame primes is painstakingly SLOW. Service centers are pretty rare. Modern WR fast prime lenses are also non-existent to match WR bodies! Ugly: Local pricing is plain bad/expensive (This would also get worse once Pentax continue spewing their "premium" products.) Last edited by wed7; 10-22-2018 at 01:04 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Old used lenses: the good, the bad, and the ugly.	catwalk	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	21	08-25-2018 07:26 AM
Architecture The Good, The Bad And The Ugly	Kerrowdown	Post Your Photos!	13	07-27-2018 10:49 PM
Abstract ladybirds, the good and the bad (ugly )	mohb	Post Your Photos!	2	10-04-2016 12:27 PM
Ricoh WG-M1 The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly	Rusty Rat	Pentax Compact Cameras	9	09-21-2016 09:09 PM
For Sale - Sold: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly - Film Cameras (US)	Nowhere Matt	Sold Items	3	05-27-2010 12:09 PM

10-20-2018, 12:21 PM	#31
selfnoise Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Westbrook, ME, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 288	For me the ugly is mainly the aperture block issue... I realize many companies routinely fail to offer compensation for systemic issues, but it still left a bad taste in my mouth. The good for me is ergonomics, IBIS, value, and the DA limited pancakes which are essentially the perfect lenses for the kind of things I like to do. Bad is AF.C and video features but no need to elaborate there.

10-20-2018, 02:39 PM	#32
PJ1 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Toowoomba, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,484	Originally posted by TaoMaas I didn't mean my post to be directed soley at PJ1 I understand that and I take your point. I fall into the trap of thinking that what is not relevant to me probably isn't relevant to many others either. I guess the world has different expectations and is moving on without me! But here is a contradiction for you: Pentax make/market quite a few lenses that are intended for television cameras - c-mount with 2//3" coverage. Yet, as you point out, they don't seem to be seeing the wider potential for video in their more traditional camera line. They are only small players but there might be some advantages if they could develop a path to integrate systems across the different areas. I am only speculating though. It is far outside my area of experience.

10-20-2018, 02:49 PM	#33
Canid Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Photos: Albums Posts: 98	Originally posted by Lord Lucan Find a legacy Pentax shift lens :- SMC Pentax 28mm F3.5 Shift Reviews - K Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database Doesn't have TILT, only SHIFT... just like my Laowa. Originally posted by zjacreman but on the wide end the Rokinon is the only game in town with tilt and shift movements. As I mentioned in my reply to @zjacreman there is also the Schneider 28/4.5 T/S Here was the listing for it on B&H: Schneider PC-TS Super-Angulon 28mm f/4.5 HM Aspheric 06-1075956 Nearly impossible to find, but they DO exist. I remember someone posted a picture of one in a thrift shop here on the forums a while back.

10-20-2018, 05:55 PM - 1 Like	#34
Fauxton Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 100	Originally posted by kooks What do you guys think that is the Good/Bad and Ugly about Pentax??? I was wondering about this since a few days ago, we all know that there is no perfect camera or system but as far as Pentax is, this is my list: The Good: build like a tank, image quality (at least in K1) is one of the best in the market, weather sealing, astro features, bang for the buck when you are in the camera target The Bad: slow AF compared with other cameras, video features are way way way too bad for current standards, lack of modern lenses, way to slow to release new products and keep the hype, few camera models(FF) makes the brand too nichy for some. The Ugly: Their marketing department.. we actually don't kow if that department is real or not, but if it is real their job is terrible. Wish that the bad will come Good ones in not a long time. They say value is in something attributed by the customer. So against the requirements does Pentax succeed or fail? My requirements likely differ from yours so therefore my answer to your question has to be taken in view of what my requirements are. They are simple; I want a camera with which to take still photographs for mostly personal pleasure. Video is of no concern. I don't shoot sports but if I did it would be rally or sports car races. AF tracking is therefore not at the top of the list although accuracy of focus is important to me. The lens catalogue is important however its well served with the current set of lenses. I rarely shoot above 135 mm. And if I shot sports the 60-250 f4 or the 70-200 f2.8 (overkill) would be my choice. I'm quite happy with the choice of lenses. Quality and haptics are important - I'd like think I have a good instrument in my hands that can stand some occasionally hard knocks. I don't mind the noise of the screw drive "drill". I like flexibility; I particularly like the hyper program mode - absolutely the only way to shoot a Pentax (IMHO). Okay so what would I like to see that would better address my requirements? Honestly not much. I would always like less noise and more DR. But it has to be a substantial jump over what the K3 or K5 has and really that not happening yet. I would like better AF accuracy, better repeatability of the AF. But between f4 and f11 the depth of field covers the hysteresis there, at least in the K5 and K3. Resolution - maybe - I might buy the K1 for that. But the K3 with the Tamron 17-50 is already as sharp as hell. At least my copy. Let me ask your question another way. Is there any compelling reason to buy any of the new cameras - Sony, Canon or Nikon? Answer - not for the price. If I was going to upgrade I'd look at the K1 Mk II and the 15-30 and 24-70. and save thousands over the other makes. The additional marginal capability in the other makes isn't worth the cost. An A7III (the only current model I'd consider) with a 16-35 f2.8 and 24-70 f2.8 is $8500 CAD and the K1II with the 15-35 f2.8 and 24-70 f2.8 is $5600 CAD. Against my requirements that is a no contest win for Pentax. Should I feel the need to upgrade. So I figure I already have the best value out there. And if I want the K1 Mk II with the above lens set is waiting. But for me its likely not worth the $5600. Think of what lenses for my K5 and K3 I could buy for that? Away from my requirements to the brand. Yes, Pentax should advertise more. Yes they should round out the lens set of for the K1. Yes they should have a K3 Mki3 out. But no radical improvement is called for I don't think. But the market is a different things altogether. So if Pentax wants to survive and they don't carve a niche out - like the only maker of OVF high DR cameras, then if they compete with Sony or Canon or Nikon then Mirrorless is the way to go. And software would differentiate. And that isn't a Pentax strength. Sorry for the rambling - just some random thoughts to your question.

10-21-2018, 01:01 PM	#35
automorphism Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Ontario, Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 791	Something that wasn't mentioned in this thread and I forgot myself is that Pentax has the option of DNG Raws. Wish everyone did that! In this day and age, having a proprietary Raw format seems ridiculous, as camera manufacturers generally don't make money off any Raw software (with a few exceptions).

10-21-2018, 01:13 PM	#36
newmikey Site Supporter Join Date: May 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,287	Originally posted by automorphism Something that wasn't mentioned in this thread and I forgot myself is that Pentax has the option of DNG Raws. Wish everyone did that! In this day and age, having a proprietary Raw format seems ridiculous, as camera manufacturers generally don't make money off any Raw software (with a few exceptions). I have zero use for DNG as all my raw converters do PEF without a problem.

10-21-2018, 02:13 PM	#37
automorphism Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Ontario, Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 791	Originally posted by newmikey I have zero use for DNG as all my raw converters do PEF without a problem. More cameras using DNG would mean less time programmers need to spend adding support for additional Raw formats. That in turn leads to higher quality software and more time for other, cooler stuff. Might not matter to you now in the present, but it makes a difference.

10-21-2018, 02:23 PM - 1 Like	#38
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,819	Originally posted by Lord Lucan Find a legacy Pentax shift lens +1, it's a fine hunk of beautifully engineered piece of glass, here's my review. SMC Pentax 28mm F3.5 Shift Reviews - K Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

10-21-2018, 11:08 PM	#40
newmikey Site Supporter Join Date: May 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,287	Originally posted by automorphism More cameras using DNG would mean less time programmers need to spend adding support for additional Raw formats. That in turn leads to higher quality software and more time for other, cooler stuff. Two misconceptions in one single sentence. Programmers don't spend much time "adding support for additional raw formats" - typically the format is already established in the software and adding a new camera model's raw is just a few lines of code. If you'd need to depend on the time freed up, you'd be sadly disappointed at the cool stuff made possible by that...

10-28-2018, 01:47 PM	#41
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,180	Originally posted by newmikey Two misconceptions in one single sentence. Programmers don't spend much time "adding support for additional raw formats" - typically the format is already established in the software and adding a new camera model's raw is just a few lines of code. If you'd need to depend on the time freed up, you'd be sadly disappointed at the cool stuff made possible by that... Where could I find information about the internal format of a CR2 file? a NEF file? I've always been curious about how different companies implement 'raw'.

10-28-2018, 02:01 PM	#42
newmikey Site Supporter Join Date: May 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,287	Originally posted by reh321 Where could I find information about the internal format of a CR2 file? a NEF file? I've always been curious about how different companies implement 'raw'. Most likely place is the dcraw source code, should have everything you need.