Tom, I have to say that I'm beginning to feel like you. I've faithfully upgraded my way thru Pentax cameras to the K-5. (DS, K-10, K-20, K-7, K-5) Now I'm beginning to wonder where/when I'll be able to buy long & fast AF glass for Pentax. The only option is to go Canon/Nikon. So I am beginning to lose the faith... Regards, Bob S.
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Tom C <caka...@gmail.com> wrote: >> From: Darren Addy <pixelsmi...@gmail.com> >> >> I'm certainly a value/bang-for the buck kind of guy. I'm terribly late >> to the K-5 party, but I'm hoping to snag one soon. I believe that it >> is *still* near the top of the heap (if not at the top) of the best >> APS-C cameras available today. I'm pretty pleased with the 20x30 >> prints I've seen from APS-C cameras and frankly, I don't think there >> are many images that I'm going larger than that with. I think it >> provides a lot of bang-for-the-buck particularly if one can buy one >> around $900 (body). I also think it is sort of amazing that I can get >> *still* probably within $75 for what I paid for my K-x (which I >> purchases as a low-mileage used kit) - which will help pay for the >> upgrade. That's value too. >> >> Comparing that to the Nikon 800/E (which is 3x the price of the K-5) >> is sort of like comparing a $25,000 Prius with a $75,000 Mercedes Benz >> CLS. They aren't really targeting the same demographic. If your >> discretionary income let's you afford some of the finer things in >> life, more power to you. A lot of people are going to have a harder >> time justifying an additional $2000 for a camera body, particularly if >> it also means they start from Square One on lenses and other >> accessories. (Frankly, a lot of the 800/E specs seem aimed more at >> videography than still.) If *Pentax* released a full frame camera with >> the 800's specs of only 4 FPS and top (real) ISO of 6400, you could >> hear the PentaxForums screams in Nebraska. >> >> I don't think the fact that there are far more expensive cars out >> there changes the bang-for-the-buck with the Prius and I'd say the >> same for the K-5. Should Pentax announce a full frame camera (I'm last >> of the true believers) particularly for in the neighborhood of $2700 >> that can take advantage of all your K-mount stuff, I'd think that >> would have to give one looking for another step-up pause. > > Well, I'm not saying the K-5 doesn't deliver bang for the buck even > now. For me it's just a bit late in it's life cycle. I bought late > into the K20D and late into the K-7 (had I waited a few more months > I'd have had a K-5). So I'm determined not to do that again. > > I appreciate the accuracy of your arithmetic. $1000 vs. $3000 and > $25,000 vs. $75000 are both factors of 3. :-) > > There's a $2000 difference in the first case and a $50000 difference > in the second. While being equivalent in magnitude, in real $ there's > a huge difference. > > BTW, I'm not being argumentative, just blabbering. > > Let's start from the premise that most people wouldn't spend $3000 on > a camera. I agree. In fact I can't justify it for myself (so I've > compartmentalized that and hidden it away so I don't feel unduly > guilty). The 645D is a $10,000 camera so even less people would > purchase that. > > The 645D is a 40MP camera. The D800/E is a 36MP camera. Cost per MP > calculation: > > 645D is $250/MP > 800E is $92/MP > (K-5 is $62.50/MP if priced at $1000) > > In those terms, the 800E is delivering a lot of bang for the buck and > there's a full compliment of AF lenses available. > > The D800E has 90% of the resolution of a 645D yet the cost is only 1/3 > that of a 645D. The K-5 has about 48.5% the resolution of the D800E > and the cost is slightly less than 1/3 that of a D800E. Both the D800E > and K-5 offer significant bang for the buck. > > I agree with your rationale on the K-5, It's why I continued to buy > Pentax after Pentax, K-mount after K-mount. On the other hand many > people will find themselves scrounging for, or purchasing new FF > lenses in K-mount, were Pentax to come out with a FF body. Using only > legacy non-AF lenses or APS-C lenses on such a body would negate many > of the potential benefits. > > For me though, I think the time has come where I ask 'do I keep on > spending money on Pentax?'. > > I think the 645D, the Q, and the K-01 are all further signs of a > company that's out of touch with reality (I don't deny the same for > myself sometimes). The fact that they don't have their DSLR's in > mass-market brick and mortar retail outlets is another sign. Have they > just awoken to the fact it may be a good idea? > > Looked at another way, if I'd not bought a K20D (or K-7), had not > bought about $2500 of K-mount lenses in the past 4 years, I could > easily have paid for a D800E. > > Tom C. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
