|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
07-11-2011, 05:41 AM
|
| |
Shooting (very carefully) with a friend's D3X felt like I was holding an unbalanced rock. At the same time, the friend was shooting with my K7. He loved how the camera fit into his hand - but complained about the perceived picture quality (sigh).
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
02-24-2011, 09:01 PM
|
| |
I have a Pentax Credit Card in my wallet (a used rebate). I love to flash it at camera club meetings. It always gets a laugh.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
02-16-2011, 12:55 PM
|
| |
+1
spec for spec the K5 has it all over the D7000. The first firmware update already addressed some of the bigger issues with the K5. Hopefully Pentax will issue a couple more AND do something about the price gap.
Pop Photo compared the K5 only against the Olympus E5 because of the pricing. I guess the E5 is in the same competitive space, but I think Pentax was targeting the D7000 and Canon 60D, not necessarily the E5.
But to get back on topic, "How rare are we?"...
If you shoot Pentax and live in the Niagara area (either side of the river, say from Hamilton to Rochester) make yourself known here. Maybe we can have a Pentax-a-thon.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
02-13-2011, 12:38 PM
|
| |
My beef with the K7 is noise. I don't like it at ISO 100, and although I expect it, I don't like it at ISO 6400. A Pentax rep tried to tell me that although the K7 sensor is inherently noisier that competitors, there is less downstream noise in the electronics. Well I don't care where it comes from, if it's on the memory card that slides into my computer for post processing I don't like it. And I don't think it stacks up competitively.
So to my point, if Pentax is to remain relevant, it should focus on the optical path, and not the bells and whistles. It is optics that have kept me loyal, it has been Pentax' strength in the past, and it's where they have to outcompete.
Re Sony ... The "get it right" part is their superior integration of glass and electronics. The wrong part is the corporate mindset that they can force the world to adopt their proprietary "standards" - and charge huge licensing fees. At that hasn't changed since BetaMax.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
02-11-2011, 02:32 PM
|
| |
So true. My instructor told me a camera is nothing but a box with a hole in one end, and a film holder in the other. My dedication to Pentax over 35+ years is because of its glass and the backwards compatability thereof.
IMHO the ONLY significant change to that advice today is sensor "quality". We used to have a lot of choice in our "sensor" (the wide variety of film characteristics). Now we no longer can make that choice as easily, and were stuck with it unless we are willing to throw our all our babies with the bathwater. I am not a film bigot or DSLR luddite, but unless Pentax really screws up in the sensor arena (and they are dangerously close with my K7), my glass will keep me loyal.
If Pentax is to survive I hope they check out their roots, and outcompete Canikon again with the components of the optical path. Everything else is fluff. IMHO Pentax' possible demise won't be at the hands of Canon or Nikon, who still dont't get it, but by Sony who I think does.
Simply put, "It's the light stupid."
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
02-10-2011, 03:26 PM
|
| |
That's making rusty gears move a bit in my brain. I remember the basement darkroom, but I thought it was in the south west corner. Didn't it get moved to the O'Keefe building on Victoria? Which basement corner had the swimming pool?
The "campus" really wasn't a campus in those days. I had one class in the old Pharmacy building on Gerrard and remember racing to the next one on the 7th floor of the Eaton's warehouse (Journalism building?) on Terauley Street. There was even an elevator operator.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
02-10-2011, 03:04 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
01-31-2011, 07:57 AM
|
| |
Didn't mean to hijack this thread for a walk through a walk through a memory lane at the Ryerson Quad (if it still exists). There still is a lesson there for Pentax. A simple SLR at a low price targeted towards students is what builds brand loyalty for life. I believe I make more technical errors today because my K7 has some incongruous default setting that I forget to change. Maybe there is no market, but it would be nice to see a digial SLR that records just DNG, allows adjustment of only aperture, shutter speed and sensitivity, and is kitted with a 37mm f/1.4 manual focus lens. Oh yeah, with a price tag of $299.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
01-27-2011, 08:39 PM
|
| |
Hmm. I'm a Rye High grad of 1972. Everyone in Photo Arts shot with Pentax in those days - and I'm pretty sure it was not optional. I can't remember what model was my first, but probably an ME or MEF. Maybe Ryerson IS why there is still a substantial Pentax family in Toronto. Oh yeah ... I still use the 50mm lens that came with that first Pentax. Until I just bought a 55mm Limited, that old 50 was the best glass in my bag.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
01-26-2011, 01:20 PM
|
| |
Living just on the US bank of the Niagara River, I visit Canada often. IMHO Pentax Canada does more marketing than Pentax USA. I attend an annual show and sale in Calgary, and Pentax is always well represented. There is one rep who attends, and is the most knowledgable Pentaxian I've ever run across - better than anyone I've found in the US.
Still if Pentax spends $1 on marketing in Canada, and 25 cents in the US, Nikon and Canon spend $100.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
01-26-2011, 08:51 AM
|
| |
I sometimes make presentations at camera clubs. The usual kick-off joke is to ask if the left side of the room is Canon, and if the right side is Nikon. That usually launches something akin to a food fight, but somewhere in the crowd is the one Olympus, one Sony, and the one other Pentax shooter. Often the one other Pentax user comes up at the break to share stories.
On the other hand, an old marketing joke is that that "insert name here" would market sushi as cold dead fish. It reminds me of the earlier days at HP. Stress excellent product engineering and build quality, and ignore marketing. Good for the few customers that found HP and bought its products, but better for IBM that did the opposite. Same methinks goes for Pentax.
|
