Ignore Damn Brit too. He is the worst kind of Pentax fanboy!. He is the type that is right most of the time!

Besides, he only think that Pentax is good because he owns a camera that I touched.

......I love you too Gary

[Pentaxor]

Zues - At least here there is 'some' dialog about the issues and how they relate to the real world shooting... (but we have our share of fannies too...)

Over at Fanboy Central, you can be attacked if you bring up any issues. As always, some are actually smearing the DPR reviewer of the DA* 55mm lens.

My review --- "The most overpriced 'good' lens in the history of pentax glass. Honest to goodness I will pit my $20 Helios 44M 58mm against it any day of the week! I am not sure that the AF speed beats my MF speed"

If you want to be influenced in a more postive way about buying into the Pentax system, I recommend some time there. There are Dinosaurs who have been standing knee deep in the Tarpits, bellowing about Pentax superiority for years... But please don't read the actual reviews. They will only confuse with you with facts... We all know the DPR reviewing staff are the Puppets of Nikon and Canon

But if you honestly want to be influenced in an 'informed' postive way... hang around here and look at the photos and read the good and the "bad"... As I said, we have our "Fannies" too, but they don't tend to run in packs...

This is how I see it... I am not affiliated with anything - anyone - anywhere... sad for me.

HERESY !!! Destroy ! Destroy !!!

setting aside humor, I do in fact find this forum much more informative and have a share of fanboys. but never seen someone gang up on somebody unless the person becomes evident of just merely try to troll around.

there are times that I may appear like a Pentax fanboy, but I'm not. it's just that I just recently switched to a new system and some of the few things that I read are quite derailing or atleast try to find a way of derailing people. I came here to give Pentax a fair chance. for all honesty, I would frankly say that I considered Pentax to be a long dead horse trying to salvage it's remaining carcass on the ground. that notion was very much out years ago. the last time I've heard about Pentax was in 2002. yeah, that's how unpopular Pentax was, atleast in the eyes of a camera user. common people don't even know that there is or was a Pentax brand. even a p&s Ricoh was even known better in some instances,lol. how embarrassing but true.

anyway, as I said, I'm giving Pentax a chance, eventhough that means that I have to abandon some of my darkside colleagues. there's no way they'll change their mind and they are too dependent on measurebating and marketing popularity solely at Dpreview, in which opposite case, I read other review sites, aside from dpreview and see the real world photos which are my real target or basis of a camera's capability done by a competent user. that's where I got my initial references on Pentax.

as a neutral user, and basing from the results that I got from a Pentax system, it is competent and competitive again in the market. Pentax very much satisfied me so far from what they have to offer. and besides it would be easy to go back and I could go back whenever I wish.

I dont advise people to look or based their judgement on the score or ranking. but rather see the actual real world results. because there are times that the scores don't reflect the actual result.

[drewdlephone]

I too agree you never escape this sort of thing. There's always someone ready to harp on or defend one camera or another, and it's usually because of the name on the front. My roomate (who uses a Rebel XTi) was confused why I was looking at Olympus cameras... he's never used one, and it's likely he's seen the output of one before without knowing it, but intrinsically because it's not a Canon, it sucks. I go through the same thing with him and my Pentax.

To be blunt though, Pentax has pissed me off as of late. The lens price increases... what was that? Why is an FA50 now $300 instead of $200 for an almost twenty year old lens design? Pricing your equipment up there with the big boys does not automatically enter you into their club.

An EP-1 is looking really tempting for what I enjoy doing, honestly. Yeah, it's more a point and shoot with removable lenses than an SLR, but I really like the way it handles and (at least from what I've dug up on the internet) I love it's output. Not sharp enough to be up there with the K7s of the world, but the color and the treatment of noise (i.e. it looks more like grain than noise) is excellent.

I simply can't afford a K-7, and next to it, all their other cameras come up wanting in some way or another. So really, I don't think it matter what you're shooting with. If you're comfortable with the investment and the handling of your camera and it does what you need it to, then frankly, why should it matter who's name is on it?

[Pentaxor]

OP - what is a "Petnax K-7"? I've never heard of that camera. Where can I get one?

are you kidding me? PANTEX K-7 is the real deal. it simply blows the competition off the face of the earth.

[séamuis]

To be blunt though, Pentax has pissed me off as of late. The lens price increases... what was that? Why is an FA50 now $300 instead of $200 for an almost twenty year old lens design? Pricing your equipment up there with the big boys does not automatically enter you into their club.

optically the FA 50 is likely a lot older than that. virtually all 50mm lenses are based on optical formulas from the 30's 40's or 50's. however, what does the lens itself being near 20 years old have to do with anything? canons EF 50mm 1.4 is over 500 bucks if it were to be purchased from canon. what you want to bet the optical design is no different from older canon 50's? you are paying an extra 200 bucks over the pentax for what? USM? the price me have gone up, but its still competitive for FF 50mm lenses based on optical formulas that have likely been unchanged for quite some time.

[pingflood]

optically the FA 50 is likely a lot older than that. virtually all 50mm lenses are based on optical formulas from the 30's 40's or 50's. however, what does the lens itself being near 20 years old have to do with anything? canons EF 50mm 1.4 is over 500 bucks if it were to be purchased from canon. what you want to bet the optical design is no different from older canon 50's? you are paying an extra 200 bucks over the pentax for what? USM? the price me have gone up, but its still competitive for FF 50mm lenses based on optical formulas that have likely been unchanged for quite some time.

Couple of comments...

The street price for the Canon lens is nowhere near $500 -- it's around $370-380.

Most of the 50s today are of older optical design. The new guy is the Sigma 50/1.4 which is brand spankin' new and a fantastic performer.

[séamuis]

Couple of comments...

The street price for the Canon lens is nowhere near $500 -- it's around $370-380.

Most of the 50s today are of older optical design. The new guy is the Sigma 50/1.4 which is brand spankin' new and a fantastic performer.

I believe I stated very clearly that the price listed was from canon. and yes I know they, are I said that. which is part of my point. especially for Pentax because older or newer for the lens is almost irrelevant regarding screw-driven AF.

500 bucks if it were to be purchased from canon. .

lets not get overexcited. The price of that lens is bellow 400 USD. You are paying about 80 dolars for USM which I think it is fair. Still, if I had to choose, I would choose the Pentax version.

Wow, I have been scooped already. Man this thread is going too fast for my aging fingers.

[séamuis]

lets not get overexcited. The price of that lens is bellow 400 USD. You are paying about 80 dolars for USM which I think it is fair. Still, if I had to choose, I would choose the Pentax version.

who is overexcited? you will pay over 500 dollars for canons, and over 300 for Pentax' based on manufacturer price. there are people out there who buy directly from the manufacturer you know. I quoted these prices for a simple reason: street prices fluctuate and do not represent the worth of the lens according to the manufacturer, which for my point is what matters.

[pingflood]

I believe I stated very clearly that the price listed was from canon. and yes I know they, are I said that. which is part of my point. especially for Pentax because older or newer for the lens is almost irrelevant regarding screw-driven AF.

Yeah, but no one buys from Canon and pays MSRP, so it's kind of a ridiculous comparison to make, and I suspect you did it just to exaggerate the price difference. Man, there's a lot of anger in the air today...

At least in the good old days a good rant in a printed newsletter could be used to line the bird cage or wrap fish.

I suppose today you can use the blog to line your avatar's cage or wrap trolls...

If newspapers didn't fit in the bottom of bird cages, do you think they would all go out of business?

[séamuis]

Yeah, but no one buys from Canon and pays MSRP, so it's kind of a ridiculous comparison to make, and I suspect you did it just to exaggerate the price difference. Man, there's a lot of anger in the air today...

im not angry, and do you have proof that nobody buys direct from canon? I exaggerated nothing. reread my posts for the reason I quoted those prices.

again my point is that because virtually all 50mm lenses are based on optical designs that reach back a lot farther than the rest of the lens, there is no reason to say that its not right that pentax's price is now 300 bucks simply because the lens series is 18 years old. especially when lenses from all the other manufacturers reach to that price and more. it really has nothing to do with current street prices of anything canon or otherwise. I think you are trying to make this into something its not with your assumption. so I will make one of my own: you just want to defend canon? because almost all of your posts here since switching have been subtle remarks doing just that. or is this assumption way overboard? :ugh:

[pingflood]

I'd say the same thing whether you were commenting on Canon, Nikon, Olympus or any other make. Making comparisons based on MSRP to prove a point about the price is just ridiculous.

[séamuis]

I'd say the same thing whether you were commenting on Canon, Nikon, Olympus or any other make. Making comparisons based on MSRP to prove a point about the price is just ridiculous.

how so? are we not talking about Pentax raising prices? ie MSRP? because as we all know and as I already stated, street prices fluctuate and do not represent the manufacturers suggested worth of the lens. I can still likely find an FA 50 1.4 for a lower price than the current Pentax price point. just as you can get the EF 50 for lower than what canon wants you to pay. so no I dont believe anything I have stated is ridiculous, you obviously do not read very well. again it wasn't about prices alone, which is all you seem to be looking at. (again to defend canon and their products?) it was about the lens and its age concerning price point. a BIG difference here in what you and I seem to be talking about. especially when you make completely unprovable statements such as "Yeah, but no one buys from Canon and pays MSRP" to help your argument.

Ill say it again. reread my posts.

how so? are we not talking about Pentax raising prices? ie MSRP? because as we all know and as I already stated, street prices fluctuate and do not represent the manufacturers suggested worth of the lens. I can still likely find an FA 50 1.4 for a lower price than the current Pentax price point. just as you can get the EF 50 for lower than what canon wants you to pay. so no I dont believe anything I have stated is ridiculous, you obviously do not read very well. again it wasn't about prices alone, which is all you seem to be looking at. (again to defend canon and their products?) it was about the lens and its age concerning price point. a BIG difference here in what you and I seem to be talking about. especially when you make completely unprovable statements such as "Yeah, but no one buys from Canon and pays MSRP" to help your argument.

Ill say it again. reread my posts.

Seamuis,

As much as like many of your posts and your avatars I think that you are being a little bit unrealistic here. You know that you are holding your argument from a very thin hair. Most of the people that would care for prime lens will never buy their gear at MSRP. And I have read your post and I know what you are referring to. If you look to pure MSRP some of the prices of the last Pentax lenses are just plain rubbishing (did I hear Pentax 55 f1,4? or 60-250?).

But you have a point, if I try to buy a pentax 50 from adorama via amazon it costs a whopping 337 USD while BH seems to have at 250USD. Almost 100 USD from 2 of the most reputable dealers.

For those who dont have one I urge them to run to buy it now while they can. As soon as Pentax stops to make them they are going to increase their prices on the used market quite a bit.