Well said. I'm in about the same place. I still shoot professionally but the bulk of my shooting is for personal enjoyment. The K-5 and DA* lenses are completely capable of providing top quality newspaper and magazine work, and some of my primes, like the K85/1.8 and FA 35/2 are a lot of fun. I don't work for top shelf glossy books like Vogue or Architectural Digest, but the magazines I do work for do't want any more pixels that I can provide, and the newspapers always want them downsized a bit. Since I shoot cars for the most part, the DA* 60-250 is an ideal lens, and, according to my clients and their art directors, it produces superb detail and sharpness. I would like a full frame camera to play with, but I don't need one.
I'm always somewhat surprised that so many photo hobbyists just can't manage with their Pentax gear and are endlessly seeking nirvana in multiple systems. Just taking pictures is more fun, IMO. Paul On Apr 14, 2013, at 1:43 AM, Mark C <[email protected]> wrote: > Pentax has gone through a lot of changes in the last decade. In the late 90's > Pentax offered a lens lineup that was easily on par with Canon and Nikon and > offered a lot of specialty items. On the long end - 600mm f4, 400mm f2.8, > 300mm f2.8, 400mm f5.6 - and short end - 15mm, 20mm autofocus and the F 17-24 > fisheye.... They also had an excellent range of macro lenses and enjoyed full > third party support from Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina. But they missed the > transition to auto focus bodies big time and were playing catchup in camera > bodies, particularly WRT AF and evaluative metering. Today the the lens > lineup is much weaker, though it is improving. Pentax still lags on bodies > though at this particular moment in digital camera design that is more in > regards to sensor format and megapixels. > > If and when I can't get Pentax gear to do what I want to do, I'll switch > brands. I spent a bit of money on a replacement for my A*200mm macro lens a > while back, but it was a calculate decision. I set my top purchase price at > something less than the cost of a comparable Nikon or Canon body, their 200 > or 180 macro, and flash and other essentials for a new system. For me, that > analysis highlighted the costs that come with switching. Making a total > transition from one system to another, if you are seriously invested in > lenses, bodied and flashes, is very expensive. Selling your old gear and > buying new is expensive. Trying to maintain two systems is even more > expensive. > > If one is lightly invested then it makes sense to move on. Or start a second > system. For me, buying into the Q system is really just going iwth a second > system since there is only limited overlap with the core Pentax gear that I > already have (mostly wrt flashes.) > > I am hoping that we see something out of Pentax - Ricoh that tells us that > they are serious about the K-AF mount and it's corresponding glass. I really > don't care if they lag the market regarding FF dslr, but let's face it - the > day is not far off when FF will be the consumer standard for DSLR. The most > worrisome thing that I can interpret form Pentax Ricoh's comments on FF > DSLR's is that they may think that FF is a passing fad. That would be > delusional thinking - something that the old Asahi Pentax might have indulged > in but Ricoh is a much smarter and hardened company. After all, Ricoh was one > of the first significant film camera manufacturer to get out of the film > business and switch to digital only. > > These days, I am just shooting as a hobbyist and all my needs are met with > the glass I currently own and the bodies I currently have. While I want new > toys and would love to have a full frame dslr, I don't need one and am happy > with the images I get from the K5. I didn't give a damn about the poor AF and > AE Metering of the PZ series of bodies back in the 90's either. But I am > reluctant to continue to invest in a system whose future is up in the air. I > would certainly never buy something like the DA 560 unless I knew what body > would be around to use with it in the future. > > There is a lot of uncertainty regarding Pentax's future direction regarding > bodies and glass. They seem to be aware of this and the lens roadmaps appear > to an attempt to address that. A road map WRT bodies would be even more > important. > > Mark > > > On 4/13/2013 9:38 AM, George Sinos wrote: >> I think I subscribed to PDML in 2000 or 2001. It seems like the last >> couple of years, and especially the last few months the topic of other >> brands supplementing Pentax gear or just plain switching to other >> brands has significantly increased. >> >> Thom Hogan started a series called "How to Choose a Camera (Intro with >> Homework)" on <www.bythom.com> He starts with this: >> >> "...at this point in the digital era, almost all cameras are highly >> competent. At the DSLR level, image quality even with the entry models >> surpasses what most people could have gotten from film SLRs (assuming >> you understand the camera, what it can actually do, and how to make it >> perform optimally). As I've written for a number of years now about >> all DSLRs: if you can't get a good-looking image at the largest size a >> desktop inkjet printer can create (13x19"), it isn't the camera that's >> the problem. Assuming your DSLR is not broken, it will be your >> decisions and your handling of the camera that are the gatekeepers on >> image quality these days." >> >> I don't disagree with him. >> >> If this is the case why so much talk of switching and other brands? >> Is it really all due to the lack of a full frame body? Is the >> increased talk of other brands really a trend or my imagination? >> >> GS >> >> >> George Sinos >> -------------------- >> www.GeorgesPhotos.net >> www.GeorgeSinos.com >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > 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 [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
