[Wheatfield]

Quite right.

Always find that those who moan loudest about equipment are the weakest photographers. They don't understand that a new camera or lens is not going to make their pictures any better.

Honestly, I think this is unfair and dismissive pigeon holing. I'm sure it's the last resort of something that isn't very nice.

I guarantee you that my pictures got significantly better with the D FA* 50/1.4. There is something about having a truly sharp lens that does wonders for a picture.
We always have to stay open to the possibility that a piece of equipment might contain the magic sauce required to move someone to the next level.
For me, the magic was in getting away from roll film and into sheet film. The process suited me much better, and the technical quality from sheet film was significantly better as well.
If your photography is technically oriented, then technically improved equipment will make a difference.
Someone trying to shoot BIFs with an *istD would hopefully get better results with a more modern camera with faster AF and a buffer that doesn't fill after 5 shots and takes a minute to empty.
OTOH, if all you do is take pictures of your cats and post them to Instagram, then there isn't a piece of gear in the world that will help you.

[reh321]

Always find that those who moan loudest about equipment are the weakest photographers. They don't understand that a new camera or lens is not going to make their pictures any better.

OK, so I'm not as good a photographer as you are.
In my case, my photography improved by several steps as a result of my getting the KP.
The KP allows me to take photos of wildlife, even in shaded areas, giving me both the DOF and motion control I've always wanted, but couldn't achieve.
The KP allows me to photograph by available light indoors, avoiding the harsh shadows that result from normal flash,

[normhead]

OK, so I'm not as good a photographer as you are.
In my case, my photography improved by several steps as a result of my getting the KP.
The KP allows me to take photos of wildlife, even in shaded areas, giving me both the DOF and motion control I've always wanted, but couldn't achieve.
The KP allows me to photograph by available light indoors, avoiding the harsh shadows that result from normal flash,

Well, OK then.
I've been shooting in available light since my *ist. It isn't the same for everyone.

[MarkJerling]

Honestly, I think this is unfair and dismissive pigeon holing. I'm sure it's the last resort of something that isn't very nice.

I guarantee you that my pictures got significantly better with the D FA* 50/1.4. There is something about having a truly sharp lens that does wonders for a picture.
We always have to stay open to the possibility that a piece of equipment might contain the magic sauce required to move someone to the next level.
For me, the magic was in getting away from roll film and into sheet film. The process suited me much better, and the technical quality from sheet film was significantly better as well.
If your photography is technically oriented, then technically improved equipment will make a difference.
Someone trying to shoot BIFs with an *istD would hopefully get better results with a more modern camera with faster AF and a buffer that doesn't fill after 5 shots and takes a minute to empty.
OTOH, if all you do is take pictures of your cats and post them to Instagram, then there isn't a piece of gear in the world that will help you.

I agree. The K-1ii has resulted in more keepers than the K5. Likewise, I have a fair bit more glass than a few years back and that has helped too. Better lens for the conditions and all that. Almost all my lenses are secondhand though. Some are older than me.

[BigMackCam]

I think the point in discussion above (which, in fairness to the OP, isn't what he was driving at in his initial post) is that "better" equipment - be it camera, lens, flash or otherwise - can most definitely improve your photography, but only if your use cases will benefit from it, you know how to use it, and (where relevant) you reproduce photos at a large enough size. It's the folks who aren't already getting the best from their existing gear, those who don't understand why they're not getting the results they want (and haven't yet developed the skills to do so), or those that really don't need "better" that won't benefit much from upgrading (some of) their gear and/or switching. And the fact is, a considerable percentage of amateur photographers (and even a small number of pros, I'd guess) are in that spot. Those folks would see way, way more improvement through learning and experience than they might from different (better?) and/or additional equipment...

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

I, too, read that Pentax was dying. I looked at my Pentax gear and I came to a decision. I gave up reading,

[monochrome]

Is it? I honestly have no idea I mean, any meathead (like me) can push the exposure slider in their PP program of choice, whereas in film developing there are more variables and greater skill required of the user.

Last I looked there isn’t an ISO adjustment wheel on my KX

[redrockcoulee]

Two things:

1. If you want to worry about the value of your gear declining buy 60 manual primes and watch them sit in a drawer.
2. My goal is to take pictures. My K10D, K-01, K5lls, KP and K-1 still take the pictures they took when new.
3. So do my KX, MX and LX.

OK, three things.

My newest Pentax camera is a MX I bought on the makers place I think my 1980s Hasselblad gear as gone up since Ibought I a decade or so ago. I can not think of a. Single Pentax product that I am even interested in buying, maybe a M150 or the GPS system.

I only care that pentax continues to make hood and I teresting products and stay viable .

[monochrome]

My newest Pentax camera is a MX I bought on the makers place I think my 1980s Hasselblad gear as gone up since Ibought I a decade or so ago. I can not think of a. Single Pentax product that I am even interested in buying, maybe a M150 or the GPS system.

I only care that pentax continues to make hood and I teresting products and stay viable .

M150/3.5 is a real sleeper lens that very few people know about. You’re only the second member I’ve read mention it. I got mine on a low-ball eBay bid that nobody countered.

All these cameras will last for at least ten more years so if Pentax goes away (it won’t) I can still take pictures with them, probably until I die. And then the value isn’t my problem.

[RonHendriks1966]

I, too, read that Pentax was dying. I looked at my Pentax gear and I came to a decision. I gave up reading,

Ow that is a good ending. I started reading your writing and was afraid you started to save your camera with mout to mout breeding and ended with a dirty sensor......

[agukha]

The way it's going, Pentax seems not interested in introducing really new stuff. Everyone is waiting for a K3 II replacement which probably will never come. They don't seem to be interested in mirrorless cameras even if that seems to be the new trend. Even Tony & Chelsea Northrup seem to think that Pentax is dying. For now, my K1 and lenses are worth something. If Pentax fades away, it will be worthless. Since I already have two Sony cameras, I might as well sell my K1 and buy an A7III with a couple of lenses. I might also be interested in a Nikon Z6. The Canon EOS RP wouldn't be a good choice because my K1 is a lot better. What do you guys think? Do you see Pentax fading away? How do you perceive that fact that they don't introduce really new stuff? I'm not thinking of the "new" KP which is not at all new. Are you thinking of moving away from Pentax? If so, what are you looking at?

It seems Pentax is the oldest brand to be dying, in fact it could be a new slogan "Pentax, dying since 1986".
There's no reason to think the new Pentax APSC will not come, they have always said they're working on it, seems it will come in 2020.
I am also waiting on it, meanwhile I bought a KP and I don't use anymore my K3ii, I regret not to have it bought earlier as it is a lot better for most things (quality, iso, AF), and worst in some less important things (battery, little grip that I don't like, no GPS).

I don't think mirorless superior, EVF have 'always' existed since digital cameras, this is what I used since 2001, then moved to OVF, and then suddenly 20 years later a lot of new buyers feel the need to tell everybody on forums that OVF is the past, I think it is just the need to reassure themself that they have done a good choice with their money, mostly, and now they are impatiently waiting for the new mirrorless versions of Nikon or Sony to replace their 'old new' mirrorless already outdated (in their mind).

[texandrews]

I need to say something here to my fellow forum members.

I've never understood the strong antipathy towards the Northrup's. Be that as it may, some of the comments above are DPR worthy---and I don't come here for that, but for a relief from that.

And, as a son, stepson, nephew of aunts, uncle of nieces, brother to sisters, husband to an accomplished wife (female in this case), father to 2 accomplished daughters---both in PhD programs at top universities, who graduated as undergrads from top schools and masters programs at top schools----as a colleague of a number of accomplished women, many of whom have done the same, and having been mentored over the course of my life by more accomplished women, including the best photographer I've ever personally met (well, excepting Sugimoto...)....and as a friend of a number of accomplished women, including ones who have "only" raised families, I also wish to say that some of these comments are running up close to misogyny with respect to Chelsea Northrup.

I respectfully request that here, at the end of the second decade of the 21st century and in the current #MeToo moment we check ourselves a bit on that. What are we saying about ourselves here? Nothing pretty, I would argue. What are we saying to our female members?---and I hope you all agree with me that we would like to have more.

You may roll your eyes that I am being PC here and off on a rant/crusade. I'd say that PC is really at root good manners, although it can also take leaps into wooly-headedness as I think we all know. But I always try to opt for good manners.

And I respectfully ask the moderators to keep an eye out here. It's actually important.

[BigMackCam]

I respectfully ask the moderators to keep an eye out here. It's actually important.

I'm keeping an eye on the thread as well as contributing to it

Some of the comments towards the OP have been a little harsh, but the OP has handled this well.

As for comments relating to Chelsea Northrup and the potential of offending our female members... I believe I can identify the comments you're referring to, but I believe they were made with tongue firmly in cheek. For now, I don't see anything that over-steps the mark - but I'll keep watching

[texandrews]

I'm keeping an eye on the thread as well as contributing to it

Some of the comments towards the OP have been a little harsh, but the OP has handled this well.

As for comments relating to Chelsea Northrup and the potential of offending our female members... I believe I can identify the comments you're referring to, but I believe they were made with tongue firmly in cheek. For now, I don't see anything that over-steps the mark - but I'll keep watching

Thank you. I knew you were watching. And perhaps tongue in cheek, but they didn't come across to me quite that way, and I'm a guy. More like the kind of off-handed, somewhat cutting remarks that are often made at the expense of women. I've started listening more to the women around me about these sorts of things.

[MarkJerling]

I need to say something here to my fellow forum members.

I've never understood the strong antipathy towards the Northrup's. Be that as it may, some of the comments above are DPR worthy---and I don't come here for that, but for a relief from that.

And, as a son, stepson, nephew of aunts, uncle of nieces, brother to sisters, husband to an accomplished wife (female in this case), father to 2 accomplished daughters---both in PhD programs at top universities, who graduated as undergrads from top schools and masters programs at top schools----as a colleague of a number of accomplished women, many of whom have done the same, and having been mentored over the course of my life by more accomplished women, including the best photographer I've ever personally met (well, excepting Sugimoto...)....and as a friend of a number of accomplished women, including ones who have "only" raised families, I also wish to say that some of these comments are running up close to misogyny with respect to Chelsea Northrup.

I respectfully request that here, at the end of the second decade of the 21st century and in the current #MeToo moment we check ourselves a bit on that. What are we saying about ourselves here? Nothing pretty, I would argue. What are we saying to our female members?---and I hope you all agree with me that we would like to have more.

You may roll your eyes that I am being PC here and off on a rant/crusade. I'd say that PC is really at root good manners, although it can also take leaps into wooly-headedness as I think we all know. But I always try to opt for good manners.

And I respectfully ask the moderators to keep an eye out here. It's actually important.

I think your post has merit. And I apologise if anything I've contributed about Tony and Chelsea was off the mark. I mean no animosity toward Chelsea. I think she's the better photographer of the two. But I do dislike their channel for the simple reason that they seem to be quite biased in their views, specifically in relation to Pentax gear. Hence, I do sometimes have a little dig at the two of them. Not at Chelsea specifically.