[KiloHotelphoto]

How much does that cost, out of curiosity?

CPS Gold is $100 a year but you also need to have 20 points worth of gear. So as you would expect the more expensive the gear the more points it’s worth.

You also get discounts on service and a try it before you buy it loaner program. You can borrow any piece of gear for 10 days to see if you want to spend the money on it, you can only borrow the item once though.

It also provides on site support at select events, Super Bowl, Daytona 500, Kentucky Derby type of events. They will have techs on site for repairs and loaner equipment. If you ever seen the Olympic support site it’s impressive with all the equipment.

They also have training available, I took advantage of the one on one training at Canons Long Island office a couple months after buying my 5dsr and 600/4 IS II. It was such a huge help getting to know all the features of the new system and best way to use them by a Canon trained rep compared to just reading the manual and watching YouTube videos.

[bkpix]

I've owned and shot both Pentax and Canon gear -- sometimes side by side on the same project -- for going on a decade.

Each system has strengths and weaknesses. If you do a lot of varied photography, it's nice to be able to use the right tool, etc.

I use Pentax for most of my work, in part because I enjoy it more. It has amazing image quality, it's small and tough, it's relatively inexpensive if you stay in the crop world, and the cameras just feel great in the hand. If all I did was landscape and casual travel, Pentax is all I would need or want.

Canon, though, has strengths that can't be ignored. The autofocus really is more nimble, even on low-level gear like the 6D. If I'm shooting an event or a dynamic portrait session, I'm a lot happier with the 6D than with any Pentax I've used (K20D, K-7, K-5. K-5IIs, KP, K-1). I recently shot a professional ballet rehearsal using the 6D and KP side by side. The KP missed most of the dancers in motion, and the 6D got almost all of them. Not much to choose between there. (I almost never shoot sports or birds in flight, so that kind of blinding fast continuous autofocus is not an issue for me, though I do have and occasionally use a 7D2 I got for a good price.)

Canon also has a lovely flash system. I can, without muss and fuss, control two (or more -- I own just two) separate off-camera flashes reliably and easily from the camera. This is great for portrait shoots and, sometimes, for carefully composed and lit nature/landscape work.

Pentax is weatherproof, and I live in Oregon, where it rains a lot. The 6D has died twice on me in light drizzles. All of the Pentax bodies I listed above have withstood steady downpours. They've wallowed in mud and been covered in salt water spray, and one had concrete sprayed on it at a construction site. I hosed it off. Never had a problem.

Someday I'll probably sell off the Canon system as I do less and less portrait or event work now. Also, I recently bought a copy of the 55-300 PLM lens. This could be a game changer -- on my KP you could mistake the AF.S autofocus for Canon's. I hope Ricoh will bring out more PLM glass.

Anyway, the two systems are simply two different tool kits that have different abilities and represent different mind sets when you're shooting. They're not, or shouldn't be, religions or cults.

[sqrrl]

For me the reason I use Pentax is because i bought a k10 fairly cheap whilst travelling around Australia, by the time I came to upgrade I'd picked up a few decent lenses which I liked. Now I shoot with Pentax and with M4/3 (they do different things).

Having worked at a photo school I can see why Canon & Nikon are so popular - Both historically have made deals with educational institutions, thus the institutions tend to have collections of those brands lenses (which sorta locks them in through finance and inertia), therefore most people who go through those institutions are trained on them - thus when they leave school and go into the industry they buy what they have become used to, therefore that gear becomes industry standard by default. This is a lot like how most design schools use mac computers due to mac making deals with them, thus they have become the computers 'that designers use'.

Both also provide decent pro services for repairs and suchlike, have good marketing, and because they are larger can sink more money into lens development.

In practice I could pick up nearly any recent camera from any major manufacturer and within a few minutes get it to do 90% (within reason) of anything I might realistically be asked to make it do, that was kinda my job for a few years, showing people how to use their cameras, usually with no time for research. The camera itself usually isn't so much of a stumbling block as a persons familiarity with it is.

Most cameras will do all of the regular expected things a typical user might want, and each brand or tier has a focus on some more specialised areas besides that core set of functions, most people don't really have a desperate need for the specialised things that each brand focuses on, and most non-professionals (and many professionals) also frankly lack the practice and patience to get the full functionality out of the gear they own.

[lesmore49]

In the film days I mostly used Pentax film cameras from my first, bought in '68 till 2007 when I decided to get a DSLR. BTW, still use film cameras.
Anyway in 2005 my wife had bought me my first digital camera, it was a Panasonic DMC8 or something. I got it because it had a 'Leica' lens. I have an old Leica RF with a 50mm Leitz Elmar collapsible and I was very disappointed in this camera. The lens was certainly no where near my RF Leitz lens, shutter lag was poor, picture quality wasn't great and it hadn't been that cheap. I know unfair, comparing an old Leica RF to a Panasonic, but there you have it.

I went down to the local camera store in 2007. I handled the Canon and Nikon DSLRs, then the Pentax K10D. Wow was I impressed with the solid feel of the K10D, the build quality...I liked it. I found the Canon felt cheap and plasticky, although I did like the Nikon, but not as much as the K10D.

I bought the K10D, as I really liked the ergonomics best and also I had a long track record with Pentax film cameras, lenses. I also had my A 35-105 Macro Zoom...which although I've had since '84 is an excellent lens and I felt I'd use it with my new K10D...which I have.

Since then I've got the Km, the K5 and the K1. The K5 and K1 follow the K10D as Pentax's top line cameras in their time.

So what's the draw of the other cameras. Well they're available to handle, try out for people to see ...locally. Pentax..no. Most people when they buy a new car, go down to the dealer and buy off the lot. Few people anymore...pore through a dealer catalogue and pick out the options, colour, etc and order,,,then to wait a number of weeks for it to come in.

With Pentax equipment nowadays...it's like your special ordering one from a dealer... Most people don't want to do that. They want their new purchase...NOW. They want to check out their new purchase, handle it, kick the tires as it were...NOW.

I understand why Pentax does what it does..I think. But for most people who are not aficionados...they don't really care that much which brand they get...when their first time buyers..or even 2nd and 3rd time around. They want to go down, check out the showroom...Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Panasonic, Sony, etc...and buy from available stock.

Pentax doesn't do things that way. Nor does Ricoh. Couple months ago I bought I was looking for a small carrry around with a great, fixed W/A lens , big sensor, small package. I looked at the Fuji at the store, read about the Ricoh GR ll in the Pentax forum and other online sources. I handled the Fuji, kicked it's tires, but I had to order the GR ll and rely on the kindness of online strangers who wrote about the GR ll and it's abilities. Most would of bought the Fuji, not special ordered the GR ll.

That to me, is the 'draw' of other manufacturers vs Pentax/Ricoh. I don't mind as I know what I want in a good camera and I can wait for it to come in. I don't need it...NOW. Couple weeks will do the trick for me.

Need to add. Marketing/Advertising isn't what it used to be...in fact it's hard for companies to find a magazine/newspaper to place an ad these days as print publishing seems to be in it's death throes. So we don't see the adverts in Popular Photography/Shutterbug etc...as these mags no longer exist...and I can't recall the last time I saw a TV ad about any camera.

[stevebrot]

How much does that cost, out of curiosity?

For Nikon, at least, a minimum commitment in the form of high-end gear purchase will get you started. Oh, and you have to make a non-trivial portion of your income from your cameras.


Steve

[fehknt]

My brother, who I convinced to get a K3 as the best overall price/performance and ergonomics and durability, recently tried a mutual friend's new Z6 and he said it was "the first autofocus he's seen that felt like it could actually keep up with moving people" and it's supposed to be worse than the latest sony.

I recently had my first (in 4 years of using Pentax digital) "oh crap" moment where the equipment felt like it was holding me back when I almost missed the most important shot of an event because my K-1 buffer was full and it takes a good 4-5 seconds before you can take even a single frame more. Many times I wished for a higher frame rate or an equivalent pixel pitch of the K-3 (24mp crop, ~54mp FF) but this was the first time I really felt like it was nearly a wrecked shoot because of the long buffer clear time.

(Side rant: I really wish time to next frame after buffer exhaustion was a published spec.)

I've never handed my camera to someone who didn't like the ergo but I have handed it to a few who wouldn't touch it due to weight.

[biz-engineer]

Marketing is nothing but making you think that what you have is inadequate (trash,) and that the product advertised will bring you joy.

An example is the PC and software industry, computing and memory efficiency is decreasing, more of the code waste memory and cpu processing power. New software offer more features but the level of abstraction of coding waste even more of the hardware resources, making old hardware insufficient, driving sales of computing platforms again after a few years. If the processing efficiency was as good as 20 years ago, we wouldn't need to upgrade our PC and Mac. When I started programming, we have 8bits processors, a few Mega Herz of PCU clock and Kilobytes of memory, memory was expensive, a lot of care was given to code efficiency. But in 2019, you need 1Gbyte for a basic configuration, the GPU clock at 2Ghz even when you don't touch your notebook does nothing. Camera makers could release free firmware upgrades that choke your camera (like smartphone makers do), release another camera model with more computing power and sell you the increased speed of operation. Proliferation of 4K displays drives sales of 4K cameras with 4K video, even if at normal viewing distance most people can't tell the difference between FHD and UHD. In US and EU, the condition to sustain economies is to sell more and more vaporware (China makes the hardware essentials for us).

[ThorSanchez]

Canon make good cameras, but so do several other companies, including Ricoh/Pentax. Market share is way out of proportion with quality. When I see all those people at popular tourist spots sporting Canon cameras, am I to think that their choice was deliberate and well-informed? Based on what?

I better-understand the growing number of Sony shooters I see. MILC have their attractions (e.g., novelty). Maybe as I get older and more frail in body and mind they will appeal to me too.

I think it's a good idea to extend the same courtesy to others as I would hope they do to me. In this case, that the reasons we ended up with the cameras we have might actually have been because we did a little research and maybe had a bit of knowledge. I don't think it reflects particularly well on Pentaxians to continually suggest that anyone who ended up with a Canikon or Fuji did so because they're shallow, mis-informed and/or senile.

Many Canikon users probably just wanted the best camera they could get that they could actually try out in a store. For most Americans that completely eliminates Pentax from the competition. I doubt that all MILC users are in that camp simply because they mindlessly follow around shiny objects; it is possible to be a well informed and reasonable human, and still end up with a mirrorless camera.

[TER-OR]

It's true enough that professionals will go where they have the support. Same with those who need specific lens ecosystems for their work. I don't think anyone is arguing that Pentax can't hold a candle to the big boys for professional use - the support isn't there. For high-level amateurs and hobbyists the story should be different.

It does seem that inadequate buffers are an unforgivable limitation. For sports and some wildlife when you're really burning through exposures, it's a crippling inadequacy.

[normhead]

It's true enough that professionals will go where they have the support.

I've never actually heard that complaint from any of the Pentax shooting pros on the forum.

The only pro support I can think of that would matter would be that huge stall of telephotos Canon guys can use at the Olympics etc. but what's out there for the average pro with a small studio in a small town?

Is Nikon and Canon pro support so good you don't need overlap and redundancy on cameras and lenses? To my mind you have to have a back up no matter what.

It's interesting, on a site compose almost solely of amateurs, that the "pro support" issue comes up over an over, like a mantra. Isn't the pro support just paid service in any case? Pentax also doesn't have a tilt shift lens in the current lineup. If we're going to start nit picking small deficiencies.

I keep hearing about this "pro support" thing, which is a business on it's own, which I wouldn't pay for. You make it sound like you can't be a pro, without "pro support" from your camera company. I used to have a "Pro Account" at Henry's, and those guys bent over backwards when called on. Does your pro support have to come from the manufacturer?

The innuendo is insidious.

[biz-engineer]

I keep hearing about this "pro support" thing, which is a business on it's own

Ricoh does offer a pro support contract for the 645 series: https://us.ricoh-imaging.com/advantage-program/

[KiloHotelphoto]

Is Nikon and Canon pro support so good you don't need overlap and redundancy on cameras and lenses? To my mind you have to have a back up no matter what.

You still need to have back up but if your gear goes into service you can get it back in a couple days or they send you a loaner.

There is a thread here about someone waiting, I think it's up to 8 weeks now for Precision to get a part to fix his K1. If he was a professional he would need to have three bodies so he can have a back up for his back up and that eliminates any cost savings by going with Pentax if you need to buy more copies. So in a thread about what draw other cameras have pro support, or even just support for repairs is a draw.

The K1 is a current body and they can't provide parts and service now, what will it be like in 5 years? I could understand if it was a K5 not having parts but not a current body.

[Wasp]

I have been thinking about joining the dark side myself. It is mostly a monetary thing. Here in South Africa new Pentax bodies are very expensive. On the used market, very few Pentax come up or sale. Those that do appear tend to be overpriced. Used Fujifilm bodies such as the XE2 are around. They are now at a price level that makes them increasingly hard to resist.

[normhead]

My brother won it in a contest. In addition to the D850 + four high-end Nikkor zooms, they also threw in $17,000 cash, a nice CF tripod, one of the better Nikon flashes, a very nice bag, and a photo vest. Pity they did not include extra batteries, CF/SD cards, or a hat.


Steve

Now all he has to worry about is can he pay to repair everything. My studio instructor asked what was the difference between cheap and good cameras said "The expensive ones cost a lot more to repair."

---------- Post added 06-22-19 at 08:38 AM ----------

There is a thread here about someone waiting, I think it's up to 8 weeks now for Precision to get a part to fix his K1. If he was a professional he would need to have three bodies so he can have a back up for his back up and that eliminates any cost savings by going with Pentax if you need to buy more copies. So in a thread about what draw other cameras have pro support, or even just support for repairs is a draw.

What does a person pay for that and how long would it take him to acquire a third body is he wasn't paying it. Because a lot of times you work these things out and a pro support plan isn't really viable. They do make money on these plans. You pay someone else to manage your repairs, or you do it yourself. Especially important if they aren't getting you support within a few hours. You're better off with back up gear, than having to cancel your gig and spend time talking to some pro support service.

Every body makes it sound like these plans are free, and perfect.

I'd be seriously interested in finding out what percentage fo Canon and Nikon pros actually make use of these pro services. It sounds to me like one of those issues like 36 MP. You don't use it much, but you're happy because it's there. Peace of mind for those intimidated by the world.

You invest in pro services instead of buying back up bodies, and after 5 years, you probably have nothing to show for your investment. They only offer these plans so they have the opportunity to get money for nothing from the folks who never need them. If they paid out in services what they took in in fees, they wouldn't do it. So I have to ask... I'm out in the park on a14 day trip, and my Canon breaks. (I've had both Nikon and Canons break, gear owned by clients.) Are they going to psychically understand I need something and fly it in on a float plane? You really have to analyze if pro supportt means anything to you before you start trotting it out as a solution to anything.

You certainly don't get free pass just tossing it out win a discussion as if it's the greatest thing since sliced bread and every Pentax shooter would buy it if it was available. A very small minority of Canon and Nikon users buy into it. Pentax can certainly pass on attracting that demographic.

This is a favourite game of the anti-Pentax crowd. Services for sale are called "support". They certainly are support, support for Canon's and Nikon's bottom line. You can almost certainly save money by avoiding them, in all but the rarest of circumstances.

[Lowell Goudge]

If , and it is a really big IF, I was to start over, I honestly don’t know what I would buy, but with almost 40 years shooting Pentax and Pentax compatible lenses, it is too late to start over.

Having said that, I got into Pentax by buying Ricoh (funny how things work out), but I bought an XR-2s in 81 and afterwords switched over to Pentax, fully, the XR-2s at the time was priced with the best features / performance for the dollar with a ton of compatible lenses on the market, new and used (sound familiar)

I continually added to the system, with lenses, a second body (KX) then to autofocus with the PZ-1, and digital with the *istD.

I still have my 3 film bodies, and all 5 of my digital bodies (now shooting K1 and K5 together, but all the cameras still see some use, and I have 60 lenses.

Over the same time, I know someone who had canon, then changed over everything when they obsoleted the FD mount, to the newer canon electronic film bodies, then changed to Nikon, when canon obsoleted their first generation AF mount, and has now sold off the Nikon to go to Sony. I figure eventually, he might just end up with Pentax, but currently he is preoccupied with Leica for compactness

What makes people change, or buy other brands, for some it is the desire to be always on the leading edge of technology, regardless of the cost. For others it is all about brand recognition (Something Pentax lacks) but for me, I am happy with what I have, and I always look back at an incident that happened to me in Prague , I was taking shots of the statues on the Charles bridge, and a person was following me, he stopped me and asked why my shots were better than his ( he could see the LCD check shot). He was holding a canon!

I was tempted to say, because it’s pentax, but the reality is he bought the camera because it was a canon, and assumed just because he had a canon, it would take better photos, Welcome to reality