[mgvh]

PetaPixel just posted a comparison of getting a pro kit together HERE.
Sony, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Leica, Fuji, Pan/Oly
I'll let their site get the traffic so you can check the price comparison, but here's the bottom line:

“Pentax is hugely a winner as the lowest cost full frame system to buy into"

[monochrome]

Pentax has $7,000 of Price room to add FF camera features and FF prime * lenses vs. 3rd Party.

[biz-engineer]

The lenses contribute the most to the total cost. What happens in practice is that the camera body is used for every exposure, the 24-105 range lenses are the ones mostly used, than for other lenses the usage depends from person to person but they are used much less. So, a camera body and standard zoom lens costs a lot less that 13K, and the Pentax offer is one of the best for the money. The K1 grew on me, at the moment I'm really satisfied with it: versatile, adequately priced, deliver so of the best image quality. The kit to start with is definitely the K1 and dfa28-105, and with that kit a lot can be done already. If there would be a compact but optically sharp 70-200 f4:5.6 , wow I'd get it and that would be my travel kit.

[jimr-pdx]

Good of them to pick the 77 Ltd, saves cash and bulk over the 85mm choices. Pentax even gives you an extra 50mm at the long end for free!

[baro-nite]

Hooray for Pentax and all that, but let the other brands use the Rokinon 24 and 135 in the Pentax list and Sony, Nikon, and Canon close the gap quite a bit. And another takeaway becomes Pentax's literally limited pro lens line-up.

[ThorSanchez]

Hooray for Pentax and all that, but let the other brands use the Rokinon 24 and 135 in the Pentax list and Sony, Nikon, and Canon close the gap quite a bit. And another takeaway becomes Pentax's literally limited pro lens line-up.

The Rokinons they used for Pentax are both available in Nikon mount, and that would save $2300.

[reh321]

The Rokinons they used for Pentax are both available in Nikon mount, and that would save $2300.

Pentax would still have a $4K advantage
as I commented on another PF thread on this same subject

Of course different cameras have different areas of strength {focusing for Nikon, for example}, but people who like to complain about Pentax prices clearly don't understand what other companies charge.

[baro-nite]

And of course the D-FA 50/1.4 is a remarkable lens.

Thing is, who buys a complete camera system this way? Pentax has always had a price advantage for the functionality and quality, but so much depends on which functionality one values.

[ThorSanchez]

Pentax would still have a $4K advantage as I commented on another PF thread on this same subject

Yes, but just trying to make sure it's apples-to-apples. I think if someone was going to use this as guidance they would have to consider whether 3rd party, manual focus lenses met their requirements.

What I'd like to see is a comparison of Fuji vs Pentax prices in APS-C. Probably not that hard...

Fuji prices from article, Pentax from MSRP via Google:

16mm f/1.4 WR - $999. Pentax 15mm f/4 $440, Irix 15mm f/2.4 $400.
35mm f/1.4 - $599. Pentax 35mm f/2.8 - $496
56mm f/1.2 - $999. Pentax 55 f/1.4 - $647
80mm f/2.8 - $1199. Pentax 77 f/1.8 - $896
90mm f/2.0 - $949. Pentax 100mm f/2.8 WR - $496
8-16mm f/2.8 WR - $1999. Pentax 11-18mm f/2.8 - $1400
16-55mm f/2.8 - $1199. Pentax 16-50mm f/2.8 - $1047
50-140 f/2.8 - $1599. Pentax 50-135 f/2.8 - $1047
100-400 4.5-5.6 - $1899. Pentax uhh... 60-250 f/2.8? - $1297. Or the 150-450 at $1997.

Fuji XT-3 body $1499. KP is only current Pentax APS-C you could describe as pro-ish, and it's $800.

The hard part was that in some cases there is no direct equivalent. Pentax has no APS-C 35mm 1.4. Or 100-400. Or 15ish 1.4. But most of the Pentax lenses are cheaper, if also older designs with screwdrive autofocus, or SDM designs.

---------- Post added 03-08-19 at 03:26 PM ----------

Thing is, who buys a complete camera system this way?

Few people. But I think you'd get similar results with your own chosen subset of equipment.

[baro-nite]

Few people. But I think you'd get similar results with your own chosen subset of equipment.

I would, certainly, because my uses of the equipment are not that demanding. I'm not much concerned about autofocus performance or flash system bells and whistles, for example. I certainly don't need a large-aperture wide angle lens. This is more or less what brought me into Pentax in the first place; the K10D was well-regarded for performance-for-value, excellent weather sealing, in-body shake reduction, compatibility with older lenses. Still works for me, and I still prefer an optical viewfinder, and I'm delighted by the K-1. I'm strictly amateur, and of course "pro photographer" covers a huge range of use cases, but for a pro, if you need it, you need it. If you need, say, the best autofocus available, for professional work, you'll be willing to pay for it.

[VSTAR]

How low is the price for Pentax FF digital? So low that after K1 came out dpreview had a comparison of several digital FF cameras. The K1 was not included according to dpreview....because the price was too low to meet their price range requirement for the review. Not making this up.

So FF kit comparisons ...not surprising who came out the least expensive.

[interested_observer]

I read the article along with the comments. There are a (somewhat negative) number of comments about Pentax using 3rd party Tamron lenses. Overall, I don't look on that as a negative. Now, I don't know - but, when Pentax was planning the K1 and looking at their glass situation, which was a "make or buy" decision, they have had to have come across their lead lens designer Jun Hirakawa, who Hoya "retired early" during Hoya's ownership tenure, who now is at Tamron. The Tamron lenses that Pentax is using, have to have Hirakawa's fingerprints all over them - and probably a fair amount of his design skills. It appears that the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 is solely his design (see the above link).

Just my opinion, but I have to believe that with Hirakawa's involvement over at Tamron, Pentax was probably very comfortable with using Tamron's glass on their new K1 flagship body, thereby saving them a lot of schedule time, money and risk.

In addition with the DFA 50/f1.4, it does appear that Pentax is now back to their optics heritage, which the 85/f1.4 should confirm. Especially, since Tokina is using the 50 and apparently planning on using the 85 too.

If Pentax has been able to replace / recover from Jun Hirakawa's retirement with a new cadre of optical engineers, then that coupled with the new coatings chemistry, and the continued dSLR designs - Pentax, although smaller than what a lot of us would like to see, should be running on all cylinders - at a somewhat slower pace. That might not be bad, especially if they remain profitable.

If you think about it - this all bodes good for the future.
_____________________

I also wanted to link to this page that Douglas of Sweden put together on Pentax's Lens Designers -

• through the viewfinder: Known and Unknown Pentax lens designers and their lenses

[RonHendriks1966]

I don't know any pro-kit with only one camera body.....

I had a nice Pentax aps-c set some years ago that cost 8000 euro. With current prices that maybe would be a little more.

[Lowell Goudge]

PetaPixel just posted a comparison of getting a pro kit together HERE.
Sony, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Leica, Fuji, Pan/Oly
I'll let their site get the traffic so you can check the price comparison, but here's the bottom line:

“Pentax is hugely a winner as the lowest cost full frame system to buy into"

define "full pro" if you are into wild life, you are looking at probably 10-20K for lenses. the camera is incidental

[victormeldrew]

While this is all very laudable, there is one major piece of the puzzle that they have missed out. What a 'pro' actually wants. And by 'pro' I mean a jobbing photographer who makes a living by making images.


Of course they want a body and some lenses that do the job. But maybe more important, they need to make sure that their tool is there when they need it, and just works. They don't need to faff around trying to find a flash system that supports it. They don't need to worry about whether the lens they need is actually available in that mount. They want to be sure that if something breaks there is a store around the corner that will definitely have another in stock. If they need to rent a specialist lens they want it to a) exist and b) be available to rent today. If their camera needs a service, they want it back in days, not months. These are the things that are missing from the Pentax offering, not pixel counts and focus motors.


So frankly nobody whose living depends on a camera gives two hoots whether they can save a few thousand by going with Pentax, if that means losing a few tens of thousands because their camera has been sent by ship to Japan to wait for parts, or if they have to turn down work because they can't get the lens they need without trawling eBay for a rare barn find.