I agree, at least in context (what's a Garrard?) In the digital world, it does not appear that Nikon can really keep up with Canon on the high end. I do like the D70 much more than the D-Reb, however.
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/21/04 02:35AM >>> If I was going to switch brands... and I'm not... still contemplating a 67II, it would be to Canon... call it intuition... I have the general, unresearched, unstudied, undocumented, unverified sense that Nikon is very slowly becoming the Garrard of cameras... or maybe Pentax has... Tom C. >From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: why I haven't switched to canon >Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 08:27:13 +0200 > >I forgot to say: >You may be right about older, used Pentax lenses being quite pricy. But >it's >also true, that Pentax lenses somtimes are above a state of the art lens, >meaning that some Pentax lenses are in fact unmatched / perform better than >coresponding lenses from Leica, Zeiss, Nikon or Canon. >All the best > >Jens Bladt >mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > >-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sendt: 21. juli 2004 08:15 >Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Emne: RE: why I haven't switched to canon > > >Edwin. IMO a 6MP DSLR featureing: >. 11-area AF >. TTL Phase matching AF system >. Focus point selectable >. EV 0 to 19 (ISO 100) detection range Focus modes >. AF-Single >. AF-Continuous >. Manual focus AF assist via flash Shooting modes >. Auto-exposure with hyper-program >. Programmed AE Mode >. Shutter-Priority AE >. Aperture-Priority AE >. Metered Manual >. Bulb > >Program lines >. Normal >. Hi-S >. Depth of field >. MTF >Metering modes >. 16-segment >. Center-Weighted Average >. Spot >Metering range >. EV 0 to 21 (at ISO 200 with 50 mm / F1.4 lens) AE Lock >. Button (20 sec timer) >. Half-press shutter release >AE Bracketing >. 3 frames >. 0.3, 0.5 or 1.0 EV steps >Exposure compen. >. -3.0 to +3.0 EV in 0.5 EV steps >. -2.0 to +2.0 EV in 0.3 EV steps >Exposure steps . 0.5 EV >. 0.3 EV >Sensitivity >. ISO 200 >. ISO 400 >. ISO 800 >. ISO 1600 >. ISO 3200 > >is a state of the art camera. > >In 1980 LX was that. In 1983 the Super A was that. In 1992 PZ-1 was that. >In >2001 MZ-S was that too. >All the best > >Jens Bladt >mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt > > >-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- >Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sendt: 21. juli 2004 06:01 >Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Emne: Re: why I haven't switched to canon > > > >OK, I'm gonna play devil's advocate with Jens' post here. Obviously, I'm >not anti-Pentax, since I own a hell of a lot of Pentax stuff. I'm not >pro-Canon either. > >People should know by now that my other system is not Canon but Nikon. >I'll buy Canon gear under only two conditions: >1) my employer hands me a Canon DSLR instead of a Nikon one >2) Canon produces a better-looking and/or better-working cheap DSLR > that takes M42-mount lenses than Pentax (Nikon's not an option here) > > > My answer is simple. I don't want to. For many reasons. > > Pentax make brilliant user interfaces. > >My experience with Canon (all second hand) is that they are very good at >the top of the line, and very competitive at the bottom, but weak in the >middle. Pentax is arguably a better advanced amateur system both in >cameras and lenses. Pentax is more "traditional" in some desirable ways. > >In general, I'd agree that Pentax UI is good. Some of that is that they >stayed with the classic UI better than many. Give me a shutter speed >dial and an aperture ring and I can run almost any camera. > > > Good backwards compatibility (could be even better) - excellent old >lenses > > may cost less than a new consumer lens. > >Backwards compatability IS a strong suit. With an M42-K adapter you can >use lenses from as far back as 1957, which is as good as any brand gets >(although Nikon F-mount is close). Alas, NOBODY has kept complete >backwards compatability. Both Nikon and Pentax have modern cameras which >won't talk to older lenses (although they will mount, and work). > > > K-mount lenses are very easy to get, and not expensive. (I have a nice > > M*300mm, that cost me 700 USD. A new 300mm Pentax pro lens would drain >my > > budget by 12000 USD (list price). But I still have both options. > >I find that good Pentax equipment is harder to find on the used market >than Nikon or Canon, and often more expensive. Many of the legendary >K and A lenses are almost impossible to find. Granted, for basic "M" >primes and zooms there are plenty to be had cheaply. I'm still looking >for an M20/4 and a K105/2.8 whereas I find Nikon 20/3.5 and 105/2.5s >everywhere I turn. > > > Pentax cameras are very reliable. When ever one of mine broke, it was my >own > > fault (with only one exception in 23 years). > >This depends on what camera and how you use it, I suspect. I switched to >Nikon because I decided that pentax cameras were NOT reliable or easy to >get fixed given what I was using and how--I've had an MX, a K2, an SF-1, >and 2 super programs fail on me and been told that they were irreparable, >plus my ME supers were always in the shop for some fault or other. >I'm now using different Pentax cameras and using them differently, and >have not had problems. > > > I have a huge number of lenses available. A 20 year old 100 USD Pentax >lens > > can produce perfectly sharp photographs used with a state of the art >digital > > body. Are Canon offering this? > >A state of the art digital body? Yes. Is Pentax? > >(yes, I know this isn't quite what you meant...) > >From what I've heard, some folks would argue that the *istD does not >produce "perfectly sharp photographs" with many lenses. > >Canon has the largest array of lenses in current production, many of which >are inexpensive. I suspect you can fit pre-AF canon lenses to an EOS with >an adapter, although it's certainly not the last word in convenience. >Canon also offers a lot of lens options Pentax doesn't and never did, >especially at the high end. > >DJE > > > > > > >
