[Scottie137]

As someone who is moving from Canon back to Pentax, I can say that I will be happy to be in the minority again. I think there are far fewer impulse buyers in the Pentax community than there are in the Canikon communities. This translates to, subjectively, less uninformed posts in most of the forums I frequent. While I agree that the speed differences between the two camera's I am comparing (40d which I am selling, K20 which I just ordered) are real, for me personally, its hasn't been as dramatic a difference as many make it out to be...

[jct us101]

Can someone clear something up for me really quick, the cheaper priced old M42 Takumars and other lenses are said to be soft and have extreme CA on DSLRs. Is this true? I don't really want to argue the point that they don't (from what I've heard) unless I'm sure.

[smcclelland]

Boy, didn't think I would remember my pentax forums login there for a moment. Good seeing old faces like GaryM still around with a neutral point of view on the matter.

sflights, are you just trying to stir the pot on both forums or is there some actual point to your side of the debate? I don't think any of us ex-Pentaxians were remotely bashing Pentax, I loved my FA 50, FA 135 and other Pentax lenses when I used Pentax but the K10D/K100D offerings just did not live up to the AF standard I required for motorsports shooting. I moved to Canon because of the AF performance primarily and went to a 40D/40D setup for my work which proved to be far more accurate and now run a 1DMk3/40D and a 5dMk2 on the way... I'm sorry to be brutally honest here but all three of those cameras have vastly superior AF to Pentax (at a much larger cost aside from the 40D of course so yes, the 5D2 and 1D3 are probably comparing apples to oranges vs the K20D).

As far as lens selection and your debate about lenses being readily available, yes they are if you prefer the manual focus route which while some may find an art and creative aspect to it I sure can't make money trying to MF a 200mph car. I searched high and low for decent zooms, long & fast primes and there just wasn't a thing.. FA* 300 2.8 on ebay for $2800 was the only one I ever found and it was snagged up in a heartbeat.

Pentax has great glass, it's just very limited when you compare it to the EF and EF-S offerings for my needs and obviously others on POTN.

[jct us101]

How are their lenses limited to the small range of EF and EF-s lenses? That's just simply not true.

[Wethphotography]

Boy, didn't think I would remember my pentax forums login there for a moment. Good seeing old faces like GaryM still around with a neutral point of view on the matter.

sflights, are you just trying to stir the pot on both forums or is there some actual point to your side of the debate? I don't think any of us ex-Pentaxians were remotely bashing Pentax, I loved my FA 50, FA 135 and other Pentax lenses when I used Pentax but the K10D/K100D offerings just did not live up to the AF standard I required for motorsports shooting. I moved to Canon because of the AF performance

What he said!

[Marc Sabatella]

Can someone clear something up for me really quick, the cheaper priced old M42 Takumars and other lenses are said to be soft and have extreme CA on DSLRs.

Said by whom? That's nonsense. Check out the discussion of these lenses in the SLR Lens forum here. The Takumars are practically worshipped, and the K, M and A series are all well-loved too. Many of them are sharper than anything made since. Of course, the lenses with SMC coatings do much better than those without when it comes to flare, but there are a *lot* of SMC lenses.

[jct us101]

That's what the people on the Canon forums were saying, along with the fact that Pentax apparently only has a few lenses for their DSLRs.

[smcclelland]

How are their lenses limited to the small range of EF and EF-s lenses? That's just simply not true.

Please list me all AUTO FOCUS pentax lenses available as of right now that I can walk into B&H and buy right off the shelf. I'll happily post my extremely long list of EF and EF-S lenses I can readily purchase without having to resort to ebay/KEH hunting.

Fact is that Canon probably has the largest set of available AF lenses for DSLR's. Argue all you want about oldschool mounts and MF lenses but lets face it in that most of these lenses are obsolete given the current offerings that other systems have. I'm not knocking MF here by any means, but your debate is flawed and your point with these older MF lenses is repeatedly beating a dead horse.

If you want to be a fan-boy, that's fine and by all means go right ahead but please don't try and put users of another system in bad light or make false claims about us just because we put facts before our own personal favourites. I'm not sure if you're a hobbyist or a paid photographer but I know the big reason for my change was that photography is a source of my income and I absolutely must have tools that meet my demands day in and day out and I also need availability to walk into a store in a pinch and get a lens right then and there both of which I didn't feel Pentax offered me for my motorsports needs.

[jct us101]

"Argue all you want about oldschool mounts and MF lenses but lets face it in that most of these lenses are obsolete given the current offerings that other systems have."

Do they have the same image quality as those that you can find on ebay? No. I really think that your statement about the difficulty of going on ebay and having to go through tons of trouble to get a lens is really understated. Most of the time it's not worth going to stores that charge twice the amount that it's even worth anyways.

[KatyAZ]

This gave me a bit of a chuckle. I am a tried and true, loyal Pentax user and my daughter just bought the Canon 40D. Of course she thinks it's the best and we banter back and forth endlessly, but all in the name of a good, fun spar. Both cameras meet our specific needs. We just had a great client shoot in the park and we both scored equally well on the shots. We have side by side shooting wars all the time. You should see us at family gathings running right over the top of each other. The great things is...our family never lacks for lots of photos She's a great kid though. When she ordered her camera, she surprised her dear ol mom with a spankin new Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC

[Sailor]

Just stumbled onto this thread, which seems to have no real point that I can discern. Can someone explain to an old man what all of this is about (other than wasting electrons)?

Jer

[jsherman999]

...

...I'm not sure if you're a hobbyist or a paid photographer but I know the big reason for my change was that photography is a source of my income and I absolutely must have tools that meet my demands day in and day out and I also need availability to walk into a store in a pinch and get a lens right then and there both of which I didn't feel Pentax offered me for my motorsports needs.

Here's the deal - a pro sports photographer is almost assuredly a bit better off with Canon or Nikon, overall. A fashion or fine arts photographer -

- or any discerning amateur / hobbyist -

Is better off with Pentax, overall.

99% of DSLRs owners are in the latter category.

You really have to hand it to Canon/Nikon marketing departments - they've convinced a large portion of the public that they need their brand to be in any category.

Can someone clear something up for me really quick, the cheaper priced old M42 Takumars and other lenses are said to be soft and have extreme CA on DSLRs. Is this true? I don't really want to argue the point that they don't (from what I've heard) unless I'm sure.

Anyone who says so just doesn't happen to know what they're talking about.

The shots in this thread were taken with possibly the cheapest, single-coated Tak you can buy. Nothing spectacular, but the lens performs above & beyond.



.

[Marc Sabatella]

That's what the people on the Canon forums were saying, along with the fact that Pentax apparently only has a few lenses for their DSLRs.

I think both of the above claims are exaggerations of what people on the Canon forum were actually saying, and what they were saying are similarly exaggerations of the truth. Pentax has the number of lenses they have - more than most people will ever own. Whether they happen to have the ones a particular photographer wants is another matter, which is why it's kind of silly to make broad sweeping statements here.

Conversely, saying there are lots of good older $10 lenses for Pentax is an exaggeration. Most of the good ones cost more than $10 - a lot more. But there are quite a few very good ones for under $200.

[edl]

Just stumbled onto this thread, which seems to have no real point that I can discern. Can someone explain to an old man what all of this is about (other than wasting electrons)?

Jer

There's many points, we just can't figure them out.

I think he should just own both systems hinman-style...after all, you can make a decent K10D system with MF primes for under $1K, that's not a lot of money especially since it's all used and depreciated.

Hell, I'll sell you my K10D, M28/3.5, M50/1.7, M135/3.5, and M200/4 for $900. All minty mint. All great glass. I'll even show you how to use it.

Let me know!

[jct us101]

Hah, maybe just the K10D body?

You were thinking the exact same thing as I was though.

I'm selling my Canon 20D to buy a Pentax K10D, and I'm going to keep my 30D for now. I'm going to see which of the two brands is better for myself, that way I know for sure.