Perhaps so. Perhaps the reason most pros choose a fast camera - a Canon or a Nikon. Or maybe it's the excellent lenses? Or maybe it's the wide spectrum of lenses offered? Or maybe the user interface?
Anyway, when I point my lens at a moving subject, I want it to focus as fast as possible. Maybe I'm the only one wanting this. Maybe not. Cameras are about capturing what you see. Capturing the moment. The crucial moment. This is basic. A camera that doesn't do this won't be sell really well. If I wanted to create an imaginary vision - created in my mind, I'd be a painter or make drawings (some times I do). But I don't. I'm not an artist, I'm a photographer. I don't want to be an artist. I want people to see things through my eyes. That's all. My eyes have AF. As well as Auto Exposure (AV). This is what most people expect from a camera. My self included. Fast AF and accurate AE is the best camera selling argument. Number two is of course the price tag - or perhaps it's the other way around. It's really that simple. Pentax make nice cameras. Some great, and many mediocre lenses. Pentax has a nice sympathetic user inter face. Photographer oriented. I like that. But the technical features (abilities) are behind the competition. It's a poor mans Canon/Nikon - with a slight touch of "Leica" (read: conservatism and quality at moderate pricing). Funny policy! Most people think of Pentaxes as an affordable "family camera". I believe Pentax think so too. Pentax should be making excellent lenses for other bodies (Samsung??). Just like Tokina and Sigma and forget the expensive, yet under featured and non competitive camera bodies. Pentax was/is a glass manufacturer. Perhaps they should stick to what they are really good at. And stop making mediocre lenses (F. 3.5-5.6 or otherwise compromised) for mediocre Pentax bodies. Anyway, I often wondered why Pentax makes pro lenses (expensive - priced equal to more expensive, pro body makers lenses) for amateur bodies. A fried of mine gladly paid 2000 USD for a AF 17-55 F.2.8 Nikon lens. He would never have bouht a lens like for a (slow) Pentax body, I wouldn't either. It would be like wearing rubber boots with a tuxedo, isn't it? Regards Jens Regards Jens http://www.jensbladt.dk -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Pål Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 14. januar 2006 01:49 Til: [email protected] Emne: Re: new AF system soon (when D2 arrives)? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Your comparison is not very well chosen, Pål. > Ther's only 1 pro dog photographer for every 1000 sports photographers. > And > he dosn't really need the speed. I was attempting to adress the tendency of equally the needs of the sport photographer with the need of a "pro". Probably less than 1% of all pros are sports photographers. It wouldn't surprise me if less than 1% of all professional photography rely on AF at all. For most of this use Pentax AF is more than adequate. The AF issue is blown way out of propotions in my opinion.
