|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-14-2016, 02:37 AM
|
| |
You assume virtual people that for you act stupidly as ultimate argument. But no people here find their behavior stupid or would find your proposition better than their own. Most often you got the computation wrong because you try to make your case better than it really is.
For example in my case the FA31 was 700€. Not 1400€. K1 still 3 time more expensive and it would not hold its value as much in the 5 coming years than a made in Japan FA31 paid 700€. Was I to sell the FA31 and FA77, I would no longer have FF primes to put on that K1 that would be nonsence to have a body without lenses. You preffer zooms, that you choice, but if I had just a 16-50 + a 50-135 and a K3, upgrading to K1 and DFA24-70 and DFA70-200 would still be a huge investment. By today price this would be about 3500€ final balance. (K3: 500, 16-50: 600, 50-135: 600 vs K1: 2000€, DFA70-200: 2000€, DFA24-70: 1300).
Money just doesn't grow on trees. As you explain interrest rate are really low. There still the issue that money spent somewhere can't be used elsewhere. If I spend 2000€ more on a K1, there will be other thing I'll not be able to fund. There nothing arround that. Even for Barry that retired and alone, that the money to visit a country for a few weeks, that's maybe a part of the funding of a new car, maybe AC in the flat or an OLED TV to look at theses photos in the best conditions. There always something more, this is so always a question of priorities. And everybody as different set of priorities and different amount of available money.
And it is not like the K1 would keep its price for ever, would not be replaced by a better body in 2-3 years maybe even a smaller/lighter version of it... Even if a new FA31 version come around, reselling that used FA31 for its acquisition price going to quite easier than for a new K1 paid 2000€.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-14-2016, 02:06 AM
|
| |
Most people have no clue what a luxury camera is so nobody would notice. You'd be more spotted with a APSC and a 150-600 than with a K1 and an FA31. Nothing to worry here. Maybe the white lenses of canon could mean something to other photographers, but that would be about it.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-13-2016, 11:32 AM
|
| |
When you are young you have no money and lot of time. When you are old, you might have quite some money (not sure actually), but not much time remaining to benefit of it. In the middle you have neither money or time available. Too many things to do, too many things to acquire.
Not everybody yet retired and even among the retired, not all are wealthy ;). But yep would be stupid to keep that money forever in your case, I fully agree.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-13-2016, 01:09 AM
|
| |
The whole argument is funny. Either you don't feel concerned because you don't do it, either you have quite some reason to do it and may not be willing at all to give it up. Who can decide for you what is more important?
This is an argument saying that you have to basically loose something to get something else, because obviously this something else quite better. But really this is only valid in the eyes on the guy that say it... But the giving-up part is always true because whatever the way you see it theses 2000€ could be used to buy a used car, to go on vacations, on smoking, on driking, on musical instruments on whatever. And this whatever, you'll loose it. Pure and simple.
Better to have a fancier camera NOW than to smoke or drink, go the pub with friends or to to the restaurant and wait a bit for the prices to drop... Better to have a fancier camera than to spend too much on hobbies like buying many musical instrument, sport equipment or photographic gear... Oups ? Nobody see an issue ?
Yeah...
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-12-2016, 11:59 AM
|
| |
You can't save 30K on a 645Z system while you pretend to make 10K a day. You didn't even manage to aquire an FF before Pentax offered one. Basically that was really not that important, certainly not enough to change brand... Not that long ago, having terrible photos from very limited APSC gear was no issue for you.
Don't expect people that have to actually work 25-50 days full time (not counting food, transportation, savings for the scholarity of childs etc) to buy a K1 and the associated lenses just to do it just so that you biz-engineer would not criticize their practice of photography.
Trying to equate an hobby or a passion to an amount of money rather than the pleasure you may take from it is a bit depressing.
As for social assistance, nothing prevent your to put your wallet were you mouth is and give money to all theses poor people that can't even spend 2000€ on a K1... I am sure they'll appreciate it ;). After all helping one poor guy aquire a K1, is just 1€ a day... Really not that much.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-11-2016, 10:51 PM
|
| |
And that's from somebody that make $10K a day... For most the K1 is a rather big step financially.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-11-2016, 11:55 AM
|
| |
In fact we had the same discussions. There were the one saying APSC was more than good enough, the other that FF was stricly necessary. We could suppose the FF was made for the last population but a good share of them simply left years ago. A few came back, not all.
In practice, many of the guys that said it was not necessary at all are still there and a part of them now brought the K1 and explain now it is quite critical to buy one.
As some already said. One buy because he want it and can afford it. The rest is rationnalisation.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-10-2016, 03:54 PM
|
| |
- I don't think I could have found that easily an used FA31 for 100€ 3 years ago, so I think the 600€ increase in price is somewhat exagerated. I don't think I would have paid less in a bundle.
- most people get a regular small income rather than everything in one shot the first year they work. For them buying something today is not buying something else. If you can postpone something, that make things much easier. To get that money before has a cost. This is called a mortage, you pay interrest for it, meaning that in exchange of getting things sooner, overall you'll get less things because you pay more for it.
- Things like electronics loose their value overtime. For example you can now buy a used Canon 5D for 200€. It was more than 3000€ 10 years ago. The K1 will go the same route. In 3-4 years a used one will be 1000€ and a better product will replace it, maybe even with a lower introduction price. In 10 year it will be worth near 200€ and look anciant compared to what will be available then. There a good chance that even camera with smaller sensors would outperform it on all aspects related to image quality (but not shallow dof).
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-10-2016, 12:13 PM
|
| |
Nope until your resell the K1 (but then you don't have anything anymore, no K3, no K1...) you just spent 1500€ more . I mean, If your actually sold your K3, this may not be iactually the case today.
You hypothesis is that everybody will buy a K1 (and not something else that may become available by then), for at least 1500€. That many hypothesis here.
In fact, I could add that in my sig with your authorization. That would be fun ! :
"If even people like biz-engineer that can make $10K in a single day waited many years to get their own full frame body, you likely don't need one yourself that urgently."
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-09-2016, 11:24 PM
|
| |
Collector man...
Once you are a trader and once you expatriated yourself... You can buy an FF body!
But you know not everybody willing to expatriate himself or spend a life on a job they don't like so just they could afford a K1 3-4 years earlier.
 Quote: In 3 to 4 years, your K3 will be worth 50 euros and the K1 new will still be at 1500 euros. And during 3 to 4 years you won't enjoy full frame. You are better at selling stocks than to estimate gear price evolution...
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-09-2016, 12:14 PM
|
| |
Each to its estimation. I can sell my K3 for maybe 500€ today. It will be worth at least 250€ in 3-4 years. Total loss: 250€.
K1 worth 2000€ new today, not available used. In 3-4 years I am sure I'll be able to get one for €1000 maybe less. Waiting is 750€ saved. Even my father managed to get 80€ from an *ist DL. As long as the price of a new DSLR is at least 400€, you'll be able to sell very old gear for 200-250€ because when the old one stop working not everybody will be willing to spend 1000€ for a new fancy FF.
What more by that time there may be I don't know a mirrorless K-mount FF that would be only 500g and not 1kg and maybe there would finally a modern 24 and 135mm available... Maybe a limited design more so than an f/1.4 behemoh. Maybe there will be a DFA24-105 f/4 for a walkaround as well as a FF consumer telezoom like a 70-300... Many things will be different in 3-4 years.
Who know and who care? I'll quite certainly have significantly better salary, had time to acquire all the stuff I still have to for my flat, a new car and so the same amount of money would have quite different value to me.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-09-2016, 11:18 AM
|
| |
That's exactly that !!!
And if possible, don't try to make this is the graal to people that may actually be naive enough to trust you while it is just another incremental improvement on top of an already long serie of great cameras.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-03-2016, 10:35 PM
|
| |
I don't think this is especially your case, you post many photos and all. You have good reasons to take one. I just say that the novelty thing is not a big argument by itself to buy something and it is something that fade fast. It is not worse a few thousand dollars if you are not quite wealthy.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-03-2016, 01:35 PM
|
| |
Well if you get more joy from getting something new than doing the activity itself this is not a very good indicator for the activity, honestly.
I don't think K1 owers did it just for the new thing. But I see no reason to think that there much more K3 owner that rationnalize than K1 owner that rationnalize. Well you right there may be more K3 owners because they are much more numerous, but let's speak of percentages.
Hopefully people that truely benefit can upgrade if it is not too expensive for them and people that don't care... Stay with what they have.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-03-2016, 12:02 PM
|
| |
Nor any of them have any reason to switch because you find it was worth it for you... They have all the rights in the world to not want to upgrade and be happy with what they have.
Noelpolar quite well described the situation In think:
There no particular reason to upgrade or to not upgrade. Most people are happy with their current gear and the one that were not hopefully upgraded.
You'll always find people that did not want upgrade but should... and you'll find people that did upgrade but didn't need. But in a sense that their problem and responsability.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-03-2016, 11:33 AM
|
| |
The question is only of interrest for people that didn't switch yet and are not sure. People that were always sure and upgraded right aways are far less likely to have any regrets. They were sure of what they wanted to begin with.
But if one not sure, there reasons for that, and the reason are likely still valid. Reason that neverbothered people that switched without hesitation.
At least biz engineer case is a case of try it and then buy it. But unfortunately, this is not that easy to implement. How much would a 1 week rent cost with K1 and say 2 DFA lenses? 300€?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-02-2016, 11:37 PM
|
| |
Quote: Another thing the debate sometimes revolves around (but perhaps implicitly) is what accompanying equipment, such as lenses, people already possess.
Example: I had ordered the two recent Pentax long FF zooms for use on APS-C cameras long before I had decided to buy the K-1. So I already knew that the K-1 would make those lenses more effective, and they reduced the additional further cost of going for a comprehensive FF range.
At one extreme is deciding whether to buy a complete FF range including lenses. At the other extreme is simply deciding whether to buy a K-1 or a K-3II. Yep, if you have spent a lot on lenses, big one even, then they not much argument against size/weight anymore and there no argument against the amount of money to invest. You may not care honestly.
If you have less than $3000 total equipment for photography and don't want to increase that, current FF price doesn't necessarillly make it the best choice. What will you need to sell to acquire K1? Will you be able to really leverage it with a total of $1200 in lenses? Maybe half that? You may have to rely on MF lenses get unwanted holes in focal ranges... Have to do with slower apperture than you'd like...
Bellow $2000 invested in photography gear, it is simply not possible. but if you have $5000 or more, then it may make more sense to go for that FF... The cost of the body is not that big in proportion anymore and you can ensure you acquire key lenses and cover a wide variety of shooting conditions.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-02-2016, 11:17 PM
|
| |
Interresting, and what the take of the K3 owners? They are not overall satisfied?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-02-2016, 11:22 AM
|
| |
This is true and practical, no reason to not do it. I do that often on my K3 too because even 24MP is overkill for most situations. 12-16MP is enough.
But it will not work at high iso because cropping will only enlarge noise and because the lens also a bit less sharp wide open... It will also affect picture quality, obviously.
The whole argument for buying FF is you want more quality. Otherwise there not that much reason to spend more to get something heavier bigger. If you consider you have already more than needed with that K3, you'll not be that senssible to the quality argument.... And if you think you really need it, you'll not want to do cropping that will compromize the quality... Like the noise advantage for events, weddings, sports.
The cropping has value, but this is not a strong argument when you try to convince people they need to upgrade so they can discard the added quality just after.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-01-2016, 02:10 PM
|
| |
Man this is always the same. People explain why they'll not do it. And everybody provide whatever at a replacement that doesn't match one bit what one want.
- If I wanted MF, I'd not buy K1, you can't even replace the viewfinder! I'd take an A7 for 1000$ and buy many MF lenses for dirty cheap. For the price difference I'd be fully geared in old MF lenses and I'd get much better MF experience out of the camera thanks to the EVF. Let's be clear about it. I see no point to buy a DSLR that doesn't even support OVF replacement for proper MF and spend all my time in LV.
- If I wanted huge/heavy on top of MF I'd not say I want something small light. that may look obvious but apparently not.
- FA20 is hard to find and expensive and while good has not espacially good FF borders. But that could be a choice. I have one F135 and while it work well for portraiture, I can say it to you. It not BY FAR matching the quality of the FA77. I might get more quality staying APSC and with the FA77. You know I even tried FA*24 for my WA needs but overall DA21 is a better all around choice and times smaller.
The things are not there yet. There no ways around that. I don't feel going MF an upgrade. I don't feel having to spend month on ebay an ideal neither. I don't think I am alone there.
While i fully understand the one that want to upgrade, it is stupid to think this has to be for everybody and we cover all the cases. We do not cover all the cases. Pentax FF better than Sony FE for choice but far far far from Canikon. And what had arguably made the strength of the Pentax system: small & light is not yet available on the FF body.
Why should I buy right now, spend more and miss what I need while it may come by itself in 2-3 years?
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-01-2016, 12:55 PM
|
| |
All is in what you consider similar or different. For me a 18-36 with variable apperture is basically a poor man 15-30 so that very similar. Arguably 24-105 f/4 very similar to 28-105 but one is constant apperture, start 24mm and can be considered really as an all in one lens while the 28-105 f/3.5-5.6 will show issue for low light at the long end and issues to get the scene inside the frame at the short end and that would be one less lens to buy and take with me so a huge difference ;)
Ricoh as covered everything from 15mm to 450mm already with the DFA zooms so any other zoom they'll release will be by definition quite similar to what already exist. They need to check what are the lenses the customer are more likely to want and buy. On APSC for example the 16-85 was a tremendous success... I'am sure equivalent 24-105 f/4 would be also a huge success.
See the main different is the preference we show over one or another lens than anything else...
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-01-2016, 12:41 PM
|
| |
Honestly it is not FF I don't get the point of speaking of wonderfull picture quality of the FF if you use lenses not designed for it and 28mm is not 22 (what the DA15 provide) or 24. While I am not after UWA, I think covering 15-16mm at least on APSC so 22-24mm on FF to be damn conveniant for many of the shoot I take.
My 2 most used lenses are FA77 and DA15, And there no prime to replace the FA77 framing now (115-120mm without a macro rendering) or the DA15 framing. As zoom there an heavy an expensive UWA aznd a heavy and expensive transtandard.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-01-2016, 05:09 AM
|
| |
There no constest for weddings or action/sport to me that FF is a better compromize ;)
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-01-2016, 05:08 AM
|
| |
If weight was to go with no weight constraint I'd go sigma 24-70 and tamron 70-200. That would be 1300. Or otherwise keeping primes, try to pray somebody into selling his FA20 and give it a go with FA31, FA77 and F135.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
08-01-2016, 01:50 AM
|
| |
@Barry Pearson
I agree that different people will want different lenses. A 24-105 f/4 is great because even if it might be bigger/heavier/expensive it can be really a single lens solution for many outings. f/4 at the long end is quite fast already even for some low light with a modern FF, the shallow dof is reasonable and 24mm is quite convenient for some landscape or tight interiors at time. 105mm give reasonable reach and can be cropped a bit as necessary. You get the same pratical reach at the 18-135, better wide angle and quite decent low light and bokeh. Something that doesn't exist on APSC.
Other people might prefer a 15-30 f/4-5.6 in addition. More possibilities but likely also finally heavier and more expensive if you have to get both. The good thing is you may not get with both all the time and may not buy both at the same time neither.
Me I am more after primes, so I have DA15, DA21, FA31, FA77, F135 but I am not likely to take the 5 at the same time. Likely only 3. Using 2-3 primes max is what give me the most joy.
So to get matching on FF there a missing 20-24mm lens that should be small and light and a 200mm... That should be small and light too. that's possible with the right aperture, not sure it will be what we get...
|
