[UncleVanya]

Are you kidding me? I once mentioned I had an item for sale and the moderators were quick to issue me a "citation" for violation of terms. (PM: "A rule reminder from the moderators: Mention of an available camera technically constitutes a sales solicitation, so I've deleted your message.") And here we have an Administrator apparently doing the same thing? Double standard?
.

I've experienced some variation in moderation, but generally no pushback on announced products for sale in the marketplace in other threads where it seemed appropriate.

No. Not a double standard.

[mikesbike]

As to Fuji, they do APS-C mirrorless. I looked into that quite thoroughly. Nice stuff, they have a couple of nice, small lenses to envy. Other than that, I'll put my KP and lenses over what they offer any time. I went over the comparison of systems a while back in another thread. With my KP, my DA 20-40mm, DA 70mm, FA 77mm Limiteds, and DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 lenses, among others. I get superbly detailed images with my KP. Many of the Fuji lenses do not have SR. No IB SR, and many others of their lenses are bulkier and/or weightier than some Pentax lenses of a similar FL, so any size advantage fades compared to the KP system, and that without a built-in flash, or having even close to the superior controls layout of the KP. And at much higher cost. There's no way I'd trade my system for theirs..

But each has their own reasons for what they select. I've known of cases where someone bought a brand of camera just to shoot with one particular lens.

[blackcloudbrew]

Thoughtful post and responses. Wishing you the best wherever photography takes you.

[c.a.m]

I think that the OP's post certainly sparked a lot of good comments, perspectives, and constructive counter-points.

Some of the discussion centers on AF performance. In recent years, it seems that the Pentax brand has been criticized for its relatively poor AF capability -- not by all users, but in notable numbers.

AF on Static Subjects. Concerning the present thread, I am having trouble understanding the problems that the OP has had in focusing on static or slow-moving subjects. I think it's reasonable to assume that the camera(s) were calibrated for AF Fine Adjust and that the problem camera was checked out for possible damage or component failure. The only comparison I can make directly is to my own experience -- I'm not an 'action shooter', and I've had very little issue focusing on stationery targets. But I'm a sample of one. It would be useful to know more about the conditions under which the OP had those somewhat surprising problem shoots.

Pentax compared to others. Concerning the AF performance of Pentax compared to other brands, it seems that most conclusions I have read elsewhere are based on hearsay or anecdotes. I do not refute that there are problems. However, despite my daily monitoring and reading of numerous camera/photo web sites during a number of years, I have never seen a credible AF test of recent Pentax cameras compared to other brands. By credible, I mean rigorous, well-designed and executed tests that are repeatable under controlled conditions and provide numerical data. I exclude the random wobbly-bicycle runs that are conducted variously in an alley or along a sidewalk.

Nikon issues. Finally, concerning the Nikon system, I understand that the D850 and many of the Nikon lenses are fine pieces of kit, indeed. However, the D850 is not without problems. A quick scan on the DPR forums reveals all sorts of issues: LV AF hang-ups; AF calibration; occasional freezes; AF release priority problems; "Autofocus Blues"; inconsistent focusing (requiring repair shimming); AF problems with third party lenses; "AF stops working"; "Low AF hit rate", and 3-D AF tracking failures.

I don't mean this post as a slam against the OP or to try to convince him to stay with Pentax. I think he'll enjoy the Nikon system, and wish the best.

---

Last edited by c.a.m; 01-17-2019 at 08:19 PM.

[vector]

I recently got a box full of negatives from my mother-in-law and scanned them in. They were taken with a 1930's Agfa box camera that her mother had saved up for and bought new in the 30's. The range of photos in the box covered probably 40+ years. Those photos are priceless and technically terrible. I totally get it, you have to run a business and you feel you don't have the tools for the job. Do what you want with your money - it is yours after all. No opinion here on the forum should matter. I am just a hobby photographer. I can't yet take full advantage of the K100D, or the K5, or the K3, or the K1 I have.

I have a few guarantees for you after the switch:
- At some point you will wish for a new lens that Nikon has not released yet (or the one you want will come in Z mount not F)
- You will find that sometimes Nikon AF is not good enough, and a set of photos will all be out of focus
- You will sometimes wish you had a different lens on the camera for that shot
- It will sometimes appear that other photographers are having an easier time with their gear


Not saying don't switch - you have specified some valid requirements. Just don't be mad when everything is not perfect. 60+ years from now that slightly out of focus (85% good) photo will be a priceless memory/keepsake to someone and they won't care one bit that it's only 85% good.

Good luck and have fun. It should be fun after all.

[calsan]

I just bought an olympus TG-5 waterproof camera. AFTER paying, I noticed an old ashiflex behind the salesman. I asked to look at it - that triggered discussion about my old KX and other Pentaxes I have accumulated. Despite me telling him that I mostly shoot pentax, the salesman proceeded to treat me to a 10 minute rant about everything that sucked or was wrong with Pentax, Ricoh and their cameras...A true "DPReview fanboi". Still, I find that sort of thing pretty boring and my eyes glazed over during the lecture, while I looked to get out the door politely...

This is the same in every other hobby. The mainstream is strongly enforced. I also do cycling - recently Peter Sagan (several times world champion) decided to use a 'cheap' aluminum framed bike in a race in Australia. This caused major upset to all the middle aged men who believe that they must have the best of the best. (Where the best is the most expensive.) He came second in that race, giving some confirmation that it's more the user that matters than the equipment.

[repaap]

I have a Nikon D850 for the body and the Tamron 85mm f/1.8 and 35mm f/1.8 and the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 for my lenses. We will find out how they do this weekend!

It does! I try stuff out and see how it does for me. If I'm liking it and it's doing what I need it to do, I keep it. I only look to replace stuff when there's something it's not doing for me I want it to do

But he also wasn't viewing his images on 4K monitors with tons of resolution. We just have higher expectations these days because we can.

Well, I can name a few names on the forum who might deny your initial point

Yeah, it's just like "How is this not fixed yet?" And skill and technique help no matter what, but the point is that sometimes, easier is better. I'm not great with motion focusing because I don't do it often. Sure, if I practice a ton I could master it, but I don't and instead, the one or two times per year I use that, I just want to be able to get something good enough without jumping through hoops. It's sad to not be able to get something that the parents with their iPhones next to me can get!



I've owned four Sigma lenses: the 17-70 contemporary, the 18-35 Art, the 70-200 HSM II, and the 150-500. Every one of them has had something wrong or strange with them. The 17-70 had some strange focal length misreporting that made it not work right with shake reduction and led to blurred images (until this was fixed with firmware). The 18-35 focused like it was using a dartboard. The 70-200 was fine on my K-5 but wouldn't focus AT ALL on the K-1. And the 150-500....well, I'm not sure about it, but it seems miscalibrated or misfocusing at certain focal lengths but is completely fine at others. I'm just done with Sigma after all this. I don't trust their products anymore. I won't buy one for Nikon either.

And thanks for the well wishes.



That's a rather dire stance, to say the least, but yes, I agree that "eventually" stops being an answer people will accept after a while. If I were a camera article writer, it would be really hard for me to recommend Pentax because there's more promises than products.



Oh, it's quite a sharp lens! I think it's very good. But it's even outclassed, although slightly, in fine detail and resolution by the DA*55. When I was looking at some of my buddy's Fuji images at full res...wow, I couldn't believe how much detail they had. Just zoom to 100% and the finest details are stunning. The 77 is nice, but it can't quite match these modern computer-aided designs and high precision optics. It's utterly amazing what new stuff can do.



I'm usually at f/2.8. It's quite thin with a 77mm focal length. I define my own style but some potential models actually pass on me because I don't have enough "super bokeh" in my work. I think it's overblown and a bit cliche (and people are obsessed with it rather sillily), but people do actually think I don't know how to do those kinds of shots because I don't do them. I'd actually like to try f/2.2 or f/2.5 even from time to time. The biggest reason I don't? I don't trust the AF system to nail the focus below f/2.8.

Oh, I think you have every right to hate zooms, especially if it was old sigmas.. while I think Nikon could give to you more kerpers, it also needs great technique. Sony could have been more easy?

I should have mentioned that I have FA 35, (now even FA 31), DA 55, FA 43 and 77. Along with my DFA’s and oh boy is there a difference, when using those modern zooms. In AF, sharpness, color. And when I do put my DFA*70-200 is is even more so. But stopped down, and using flash difference is less so, given that one get focus correctly). My all other lenses feels so old compared to those. I’m critical with my lenses. This is mainly the reason why I would like that DFA*50, because for what I have seen it really is in line with my DFA* zoom and more so.

I allways take several photos when I want to make sure about crusial focus, and if unsertain I use MF. In darker scene. Would I like sometimes it to be more easy? Sure.

Oh and what I do like about vintage lenses, their ’flaws’ give unique character to the photo, what can’t be done in PP. Also lack of extreme sharpness is pleasing to my eye. I believe it boils down to that. What one finds pleasing.

(edit: my english is not very good, so corrected some sentences to make it more readable)
Also one note is that with Pentax I have learned quite good MF technique also...
Side note to that, It is good to have good MF technique and handling gear properly. I could not live with out SR (or IBIS). Except for video where tripod or modopod is a must.

---

Last edited by repaap; 01-18-2019 at 01:40 AM.

[biz-engineer]

One last tick on AF: one thing that's also brought me to this point is I do a ton of big groups. My models are pretty patient (and no one has ever left me because of it), but it's a bit disheartening to hear a few sighs when we line up 10-14 girls in pose for a big group shot, take a few clicks, and then I review and.... "Ok, we need to get everyone in pose again! Focus isn't good enough...." It just takes so much time away to have to redo stuff.

Yes, that's a good point to mention. I had the same situation when photographing a group of people, some people were out of focus. I figured out the problem wasn't Pentax AF, the problem was insufficient depth of field because in a group of people not everyone is in a same plane. The solution is to stop down the lens.

I have a Nikon D850 for the body and the Tamron 85mm f/1.8 and 35mm f/1.8 and the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 for my lenses. We will find out how they do this weekend!

The selection of fast new primes 35mm and 85mm is what's currently missing for the K1/II. Although I'm afraid that the D850 won't be able to have everyone in the group of people in focus at f1.8. When I shoot portraits of one person I stop down the lens to f4 or f5.6. For a group of people, I'd use 35mm f4 or 85 f5.6/f8, so in that case the fast primes have nearly not advantage over the DFA24-70 or DFA70-200 zooms.

---------- Post added 18-01-19 at 07:47 ----------

But he also wasn't viewing his images on 4K monitors with tons of resolution. We just have higher expectations these days because we can.

Slowing down shutter speed to record an image of motion has nothing to do with the resolution 4K monitors., it's a photographic technique that is available for photographers. This idea of Morihei Ueshiba and other martial art artists is that the mind is you best weapon, not the camera gear. People who don't understand that martial art concept will never level very high. Photography has something in common with martial arts, photography is the art of seeing, not a competition of camera specs, we don't become black belt at a martial art by using a machine gun, in the same way, we don't become a better photographer by buying a D850. Pentax forces you to progress on the path on photographic master, Nikon give you the opportunity not you work on the path to personal mastery of the mind. People leaving Pentax when they can't resist the temptation of Nikon, have let Nikon control their mind.

[lesmore49]

Just a comment about focus accuracy. Whether it;s a person or an animal...I always aim squarely at the eye of the subject. If the eye is in focus, then generally the rest of the subject is in pretty good focus. I know, I know...probably every photographer knows and uses his method, but...I thought I would just add it to the mix of suggestions.

[biz-engineer]

I have a Nikon D850 for the body and the Tamron 85mm f/1.8 and 35mm f/1.8 and the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 for my lenses. We will find out how they do this weekend!

Are you sure you wanted to buy into an F mount system? At the moment, it looks like Nikon are going to leave the F mount behind and invest in the Z mount. The future is the Z mount. Nikon are going to improve autofocus on the Z system, in less than two years your D850 kit will lack perceived performance, so I can imaging you'll have to buy a complete Z system again. The Z system is able to focus over the entire frame area, while the D850 can only focus near the center on the frame.

[Wild Mark]

To the OP

I too am having these thoughts. I am ebbing and flowing between the negative and positive in a rather dramatic way. For example:

The FA35 is woeful (I am a lot harsher on this lens than most). But, the Sigma 35mm 1.4 does keep me engaged at that focal length.

The FA77 is a great lens, but I agree, it seems to be lacking what modern equivalents are delivering. HMmmmmmm - perhaps the compensator there is the new FA*50 mm f1.4 in crop mode???? Yet to try so I can't say much more there.

The DFA 15-30mm seems to be a ok but not stunning lens. No wide to ultra wide modern offerings do undermine this part of the Pentax lens range.

The DFA 24-70 seems ok, but I am not motivated to buy it (there seems to be better offerings in other mount systems)

You cannot fault the DFA 150-450 except the lack of reach - wildlife photographers do need more reach (and speed). If only Pentax had lens profiles for A* and F* fast tele primes!!!!

The K-1? I didn't upgrade and glad I didn't. The ergonomics of this camera are awesome. But, it needs to be a little smaller as the mirrorless competitors are exactly that.

Hmmmmm - it is a frustrating time to be a Pentaxian. So I share your thoughts and commend you on taking action! I hope you get what you seek with the move!

[foivosloxias]

May I ask why should I (or anyone) care?

Good Luck, and Have a Great Life! M

Because new photographers ask the opinion of experienced photographers on what camera/system to buy. And it is very helpful to see that other experienced photographers face similar problems with a brand so you do not give the wrong(subjective) advice. Pentax is not a religion, it is just a brand. It is not what it used to be and is certainly outdated in comparison to other brands. The reason is very simple, budget on R&D. If Pentaxians do not criticize openly and calmly, the product they love and used for years, who will?
That is "caring" for something you love.

[biz-engineer]

The DFA 15-30mm seems to be a ok but not stunning lens. No wide to ultra wide modern offerings do undermine this part of the Pentax lens range.The DFA 24-70 seems ok, but I am not motivated to buy it (there seems to be better offerings in other mount systems)

Nope, the 15-30 is better than the 24-70, I have both.

The K-1? I didn't upgrade and glad I didn't. The ergonomics of this camera are awesome. But, it needs to be a little smaller as the mirrorless competitors are exactly that.

Nope, the new EOS R and Z are larger than the Sonys for a reason: ergonomics. The K1 is the size of the EOS R.

I constantly look at what other brands offer, so there are thing that are true and can be verified, but other claims are simply not true (I have personal issue with erroneous assessments). Camera buyers , do buy most of the time with only a tiny portion of real information that reach their mind. The EOS R and 28-70 f2 is enormous, larger than a Pentax K1 and 24-70.

---------- Post added 18-01-19 at 11:13 ----------

If we look for a reason to not buy anything Pentax, we can always find a reason (that's applies to anything in life: what to get rid of your dog... just pretend the dig is crazy). Then do this (not buy anything) for as long as necessary and the switching to another system brand will not be a choice anymore, it will be imposed on you.

[Lev]

If my Pentax gear somehow will not satisfy my needs in auto focus area I'll do everything not to sell whole system but keep it and buy something that will to it better. but it's my subjective opition, not saying OP is doing something wrong.

[Merv-O]

This would be an adequate answer if cameras never wore out, if new photographers were happy to look past spec sheets and reviews, and if all anybody ever did was replace a working recent camera with a newer one. But that's not what is important. When my K-3II wears out or develops a fault...will I be happy buying another? Frankly no, there is much newer and better out there now, for the same price, and anyway it is now discontinued. Is there another flagship APSC for me to choose from in the Pentax line-up? No. Will there ever be? When? Nobody knows and in the interim, the competition is the only way to go. If that means selling my glass and buying fresh, that's better than just drumming my fingers waiting for the Ricoh glacier to calve a new camera.


What does a keen new photographer do when they've outgrown their phone, or is ready to move up to FF? Buy into Pentax? Why would they? There's some good kit probably coming some time in the next decade, so buy now, kids! In the meantime you can have fun hunting vintage glass on ebay to go with your shiny new FF camera!


For a company with a dedicated but small customer base, the most crucial thing is to replace those customers that are leaving, and bring in even more new ones. With nothing to sell them, that's a pretty tall order. It is definitely a chicken/egg scenario, but without a compelling product for them to buy, all is lost.

With all due respect, the K-70 is one of the best introductory cameras out there. More features, value and durability than your latest CanNikOny Rebel class. Even the high end competitors products feel cheap and tawdry in my hands. Another niche brand: Leica has no pretenses as to its cameras. They specifically use older style lenses and technology. Why? because their followers demand a certain ingrate and quality. I don't compare Pentax to Nikon, Canon, etc. because its not in that mass production realm. The K-1 ii versus the Nikon D850 holds its own--at a lower cost. Maybe because I have been shooting for 50 years and fell in love with the match system and tri-x pan film for my Canon FTBn do I realize how advanced my present day Pentaxes are.

I still shoot manual as my prime lenses are manual anyway. If you want a fast 'point and shoot" buy it. If you want to be a true photographer, learn, embrace and master manual control of the camera. I used my friend's D850 recently and was not impressed with this massive body. The results were fine, but the ergonomics was a bit off. Just because a lens is of old design does not mean it can not produce wonderful results or that the glass is defective. Nikon came out with a new line of lenses because they changed the mount. Pentax K-mount tin its several forms allows for a large array of photos.

In a nutshell, I still use my Canon FTBn (I worked a whole summer in a factory to buy that kit) and it is a great camera (for circa 1975) but when I use any of my 3 present Pentax cameras, I am blown away. I will stack my images against any other camera brand/shooter in any forum. RICOH could care less if you stay or go to another brand. Pentax will arch to it own 'drummer' and all of us who care about the images will keep shooting. If Pentax went out of business tomorrow, I would use my Pentax bodies until they died and then worry about a new kit. Most companies churning out new annual products have recently learned that people are no longer just buying the latest and greatest (i.e., Apple's X phone sales down significantly) as the technology is reaching an apex.