1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why Pentax?

Discussion in 'Pentax Chat' started by JerryNash, Mar 4, 2011.

  1. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

    I don't know if this plays into why people choose a particular maker.

    But when you look at lens tests by say DxOMark Pentax come way down the list. The top of the list is split between Canon, Nikkor, Carl Zeiss and Minolta/Sony.

    After all there has to be some reason why Canon & Nikon are at the top. /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
     
  2. lemmy

    lemmy Member

    To respond to the original question, after 35 years as a professional in Fleet Street/ magazine/music and show biz photography using Nikon and Leica 35mm/ Hasselblad and Mamiya studio equipment of the most expensive and exotic varieties (tax allowable toys as my accountant referred to them), I had become fed up with photography altogether.

    Ten years later, I quite fancied taking a few snaps again for my own amusement plus it seemed a shame to let all those years of experience rot away.

    I studied the market without prejudice since the digital revolution had taken firm hold. Pentax (Samsung branded) had with the GX10 the only relatively cheap camera which was properly weatherproofed. I do not value form over function and for a given price the GX10 seemed the least 'toylike' option, ie fewer silly modes and hand holding 'help' built in. The GX20 followed and I swapped one for the other. The rather restricted choice of lenses for Pentax compared to professional systems like Canon and Nikon didn't matter to me since as an amateur now I didn't need or want 400mm f2.8s or shift lenses.

    I bought 12-24mm, 60-250mm zooms, 35mm f2 Pentax lenses and a Sigma 105mm macro which comprise a full working outfit for my now restricted purposes. None of these lenses are exceptional performers really but they are all plenty good enough for my amateur needs.

    Having established this working outfit, when the K5 came out, I flogged the GX20 and bought one. It performed well, good noise performance, quiet, smooth, handy size. I was very happy and sort of 'settled' camera wise for a long while. That is my story of buying Pentax

    However then I noticed that I had one with a stained sensor. I sent it back as requested for replacement 5 weeks ago. Since then I have had no Pentax camera or any idea when I will get one back. I have just been on holiday minus Pentax K5 and shot no stock for my agency for 5 weeks. Neither have I had any communication from Pentax.

    If I had bought a good one I'd have been happy but given the appalling customer service they have given me, I doubt I'd buy another.
     
  3. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    They don't make their own lenses ... possibley (as I see a blinking Tamron in the upper right
    hand side of my screen :eek:

    [​IMG]

    Cheers,

    Jack
     
  4. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    Looking at my 'camera shelf' I have products from 6 different makers sat there, so 'brand loyalty' is an alien concept to me. ;)

    I use Pentax because I inherited an old one from my dad, and when I bought my first DSLR the K100D was the best for me, having handled all the rivals.

    I have recently been doing the handling test again, trying everything I'm interested in bar the K-r (not been to a Pentax stockist in ages). Unless it is awful I expect it to be my next purchase.
     
  5. harry_bee

    harry_bee Well-Known Member

    But they are tools with which you interact continuously, the tactile experience, the ease with which you can find your way around the features, how it fits in your hand, even styling are all facets of the consumer experience. We spend a fair bit of time with these things, you have to like them - I see no reason why someone shouldn't be loyal to Nikon in part because they like the red strip motif that remains from the F3 days, or why I shouldn't have been initially interested in my KX because I lusted after an ME Super when I was a kid and was reminded again when I felt the size and weight in my hands.

    Mods Note: Quote Fixed
     
  6. lemmy

    lemmy Member

    And equally, whether in their customer service, they have been loyal to their buyers, of course.
     
  7. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    Camera choice can hinge on little things, like Jack's hot shoe. I chose Nikon back in 1990 because of AA batteries. Pentax make some very good, easy to use, cameras. Everyone buying a first SLR should at least handle a Pentax, they have got backwards compatibility and compact size down to a fine art. I don't think Pentax had AF in 1990 but, if they had, I would probably have had their top model on my list.
     
  8. spinno

    spinno Well-Known Member

    SFXn and SF7 I believe were out then or even before if my memory serves me well
     
  9. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    And they were truly dreadful. I looked at them in 92, as someone who always had a soft spot for Pentax, and they were nowhere near in the same league as the fairly awful Nikon F601, never mind the Canon and Minolta market leaders at the time. Better than the Yashicas, though. Their AF was slower than a very slow thing indeed, and rather noisy. Probably the lowest point of Pentax's models over the last 3 years.
     
  10. spinno

    spinno Well-Known Member

    I hope you mean 30 Nick.... :D
    I must admit in hindsight my SFXn was a tad on the slow side. It also seemed to weigh a ton...Hardly of the "lightweight" Pentaxes of the era.
     
  11. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Whoops! :D Er, yes. :eek:

    Quite. Big, heavy, funny-looking, awkward to handle - but that's enough about me. :D Same went for the Pentaxes, though.
     
  12. spinno

    spinno Well-Known Member

    They are still popular on ebay though...I'm sure I saw one go for about £60 last year...expensive doorstop :D
    or if you had another, expensive bookend :D
     
  13. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    The other contenders were the Nikon F4 and the Canon EOS1 :D

    The Pentax LX was the top model around that time, I think, but it was MF so not on the list.
     
  14. PentaxManiac

    PentaxManiac Well-Known Member

    To be fair, the SFXn was a little better than the original SFX. And still not as good as contemporary Canon, Nikon or Minoltas, no. Yet, as you say, better than the Yashicas. And better also than one other: the Olympus OM707. I've often wondered how much Olympus had to pay Bailey to try and flog that turkey. More than a complimentary OM4Ti, I'd wager.
     
  15. PentaxManiac

    PentaxManiac Well-Known Member

    I think the demand for used SFX, SFXn and SF7s is down to the fact that they often come with the AF35-70 F3.5-4.5, which still commands a decent enough price itself. Good sharpness, no distortion either. I still use mine on my Z1Ps and my MZS and it keeps up with the later generation AF of both. Even popular with some digital users.
     
  16. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    When I went AF, back in 1994, I went from my MX's/ME Super's to a PZ-1 and picked up a
    F35-135/3.5-4.5 as a walk around lens to go along with my M-24/2.8 and M-200/2.5. Wow,
    what a trio :) until Dec 1995, when it all got stolen :mad: :(, and I was left with an MX w/winder and a M-35/2.8 lens :eek: which I used for a few PJ jobs and then, eventually, picked up another lens (Tamron 90/2.5) and, finally, another PZ-1 and a variety of lenses which I still use 14 years later :)

    Jack
     
  17. painterinlight

    painterinlight Well-Known Member

    Because I was bored with my then digital camera, a much missed Olympus C2000zoom and bought my first film camera (a Centon K100) which uses K mount lenses. This purchase led to the aquisition of several proper Pentax film bodies, a K1000, ME, ME Super and MX. I have since been lucky enough to find some used prime lenses for very little money. I suppose I stuck with the brand simply because my film bodies and lenses would be freely interchangeable without having to use adaptors or compromise on results. I went on to develop an interest in Fuji digital cameras having owned a DX10 for a while and now have several of their bridge cameras.
     
  18. johnriley1uk

    johnriley1uk Well-Known Member

    I understand that lemmy has resolved his issues, but he's not been back to tell us yet. I wonder how many half told stories there are on forums everywhere?
     
  19. LargeFormat

    LargeFormat Well-Known Member

    The only reason I can see for brand loyalty is the investment one has in a particular system. Like many I've gone from a 35mm system (my 4x5 never got to being a system and anyway most stuff is actually interchangeable) to a digital system. My 35mm was Olympus OM and there wasn't much compatibility with digital equipment. Now had I used Canon/Nikon/Minolta 35mm there might have been some transfer.
     
  20. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    Back to the original question. A long time ago my Exacta llb with 50mm Tessar, 100mm Triotar, and widish angle Kamura were pinched. I was in Kenya at the time and Ibrahim's in Kenyatta Avenue Nairobi was full of m42 Pentax gear. I was not aware that Pentax k stuff already existed so I bought a Spotmatic with 28mm f3.5, 50mm f1.4, 105mm f2.8, and 300mm f4.
    I also bought a bellows unit but regretfully not the 100mm macro lens which would have been ideal for the bellows. The Pentax gear served me well. The theft of the Exacta stuff was a blessing in disguise.
    For some reason I migrated to Nikon after returning to UK. That second move was not a bad move but certainly was not as fortuitous as the first. I still use the Pentax bellows connected to a digital Nikon with an adaptor(minus the concave lens) at one end and lenses from various sources at the other. You can still connect just about anything optical to anything else optical via m42.
     

Share This Page