Originally posted by Papou my eye tell me what it thinks gives a better result..
I look at the ads for Nikon and Canon systems and wonder about that, up until the time I look at the ads for Sigma and Tamron etc, and then I don't wonder any more.
Digital fine tuning's a wonderful thing, isn't it?
I doubt that the best Nikon or Canon lenses are any better in overall result terms than the best of Pentax or Olympus, come to that. There are, of course, differences in functionality arising from quality of mechanism, maximum aperture etc etc, and those may help in some situations. That's why we find independent lens makers vying for market share.
Taking matters a stage further, the quality of Voigtlander lenses is hardly arguable, and they're available in Nikon, Canon, Leica and Pentax mounts. If a number of buyers didn't think they provided an edge for them, then such lenses wouldn't be available at the premium prices they currently command.
What I'd like from Pentax is the
range of lenses that the other makers produce, but that's more a convenience thing than a quality matter.
If I didn't have a Pentax, would I have a Canon or a Nikon? Possibly, but I think I'd be more likely to have an Olympus, simply because they're smaller, lighter and more innovative than the other offerings.
Price doesn't really enter into it, at least for me, though I might baulk at a Leica M8. Then again, my friends thought I was a bit loopy when I bought an old IIIf a few years ago, so you never know...