Comments on: Pentax http://inphotos.org/pentax/ no photoshopped images here Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:13:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Jim Humberg http://inphotos.org/pentax/#comment-208871 Jim Humberg Tue, 04 Aug 2009 08:05:38 +0000 http://inphotos.org/?p=3317#comment-208871 "PENTAX"....I started with a Heiland Pentax back in 1969, I had to cock the auto aperture, before focusing, and when the camera finally took the picture, there was a very noticeable "CHOCK" when the shutter and aperture went off! I like Pentax over Nikon/Canon because the latter two throw so much money at the photo magazines, that they dare not say the truth about a bad Nikon/Canon lens if it bit them. For instance...I checked out the $699.00 Tamron 70-200 F:2.8 and compared it to the Canon equivalent, and the Tamron was superior to the Canon! But for $1,595.00 it really sounds good...Right! "WRONG!" The $1.6K Canon was barreling and pincushioning to the visible extent, and my lowly Pentax accepted this lens happily! Another thing...Nikon/Canon don't have image stabilization in their lower end cameras....Yet they bad mouth Pentax for having it, and then foisting these exorbinantly priced lenses on "John Q. Public" who can't afford to take out a second mortgage just to get a lens that has image stabilization from either Nikon/Canon. I have an old manual SMC Pentax Bellows lens vintage 1978-82, and it is image stabilized, sharp as a tack!...$160.00 KEH! Try that with your Nikormat lenses on your D3million... “PENTAX”….I started with a Heiland Pentax back in 1969, I had to cock the auto aperture, before focusing, and when the camera finally took the picture, there was a very noticeable “CHOCK” when the shutter and aperture went off! I like Pentax over Nikon/Canon because the latter two throw so much money at the photo magazines, that they dare not say the truth about a bad Nikon/Canon lens if it bit them.

For instance…I checked out the $699.00 Tamron 70-200 F:2.8 and compared it to the Canon equivalent, and the Tamron was superior to the Canon! But for $1,595.00 it really sounds good…Right! “WRONG!” The $1.6K Canon was barreling and pincushioning to the visible extent, and my lowly Pentax accepted this lens happily!

Another thing…Nikon/Canon don’t have image stabilization in their lower end cameras….Yet they bad mouth Pentax for having it, and then foisting these exorbinantly priced lenses on “John Q. Public” who can’t afford to take out a second mortgage just to get a lens that has image stabilization from either Nikon/Canon.

I have an old manual SMC Pentax Bellows lens vintage 1978-82, and it is image stabilized, sharp as a tack!…$160.00 KEH! Try that with your Nikormat lenses on your D3million…

]]> By: Gamma Goblin http://inphotos.org/pentax/#comment-207335 Gamma Goblin Thu, 25 Dec 2008 01:18:13 +0000 http://inphotos.org/?p=3317#comment-207335 Actually, with the 70-200mm lens on, my camera is about a foot long alright :) ennislaw: yay for OM-2 lovers, it was my first slr and I still think fondly of it. I have it stored away safely under the bed. If only it were digital! Ed: I would argue that camera's were always 'cultish'. I freely admit to siding with Canon years ago simply because of the white lens barrels alone. The white barrel has gotten me into places I otherwise wouldnt have been able to, its also been a pain in the hole with dregs on the street 'jaysus, thats some camera mister... can I have a go... ah go on... go on or i'll bate ya!' 10 years ago, a photographer friend of mine told me to stick to Nikon or Canon because, while Pentax, Minolta etc. were beautiful cameras, the availability of new and secondhand accessorys was crap. Very practical advice but times have changed now. Actually, with the 70-200mm lens on, my camera is about a foot long alright :)

ennislaw: yay for OM-2 lovers, it was my first slr and I still think fondly of it. I have it stored away safely under the bed. If only it were digital!

Ed: I would argue that camera’s were always ‘cultish’. I freely admit to siding with Canon years ago simply because of the white lens barrels alone. The white barrel has gotten me into places I otherwise wouldnt have been able to, its also been a pain in the hole with dregs on the street ‘jaysus, thats some camera mister… can I have a go… ah go on… go on or i’ll bate ya!’

10 years ago, a photographer friend of mine told me to stick to Nikon or Canon because, while Pentax, Minolta etc. were beautiful cameras, the availability of new and secondhand accessorys was crap. Very practical advice but times have changed now.

]]> By: Ed Kohler http://inphotos.org/pentax/#comment-207330 Ed Kohler Wed, 24 Dec 2008 17:19:21 +0000 http://inphotos.org/?p=3317#comment-207330 Very cool shot. DSLR brands are getting kind of cultish. It reminds me of people who were buying while earbuds before they had an iPod because they could work the look even without the product. Very cool shot. DSLR brands are getting kind of cultish. It reminds me of people who were buying while earbuds before they had an iPod because they could work the look even without the product.

]]> By: Donncha http://inphotos.org/pentax/#comment-207310 Donncha Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:07:19 +0000 http://inphotos.org/?p=3317#comment-207310 I wonder if I can get a WordPress branded strap .. I wonder if I can get a WordPress branded strap ..

]]> By: ennislaw http://inphotos.org/pentax/#comment-207308 ennislaw Tue, 23 Dec 2008 14:52:02 +0000 http://inphotos.org/?p=3317#comment-207308 The first thing I do with a new DSLR is replaced the neon-emblazed brand name strap with a more discreet black one that does not say "Steal Me!" Currently that one is a Classic Strap from www.optechusa.com, which can be recommended. A black, screw-mount Pentax SLR was my first camera, and since the lens could not be switched easily, it forced more concentration on the shot with any given lens. However, the camera I most loved was the Olympus OM-2, just an incredible little SLR that took great shots measuring light from the actual film plane, quite an innovation back then. BTW, great site! The first thing I do with a new DSLR is replaced the neon-emblazed brand name strap with a more discreet black one that does not say “Steal Me!” Currently that one is a Classic Strap from http://www.optechusa.com, which can be recommended.

A black, screw-mount Pentax SLR was my first camera, and since the lens could not be switched easily, it forced more concentration on the shot with any given lens. However, the camera I most loved was the Olympus OM-2, just an incredible little SLR that took great shots measuring light from the actual film plane, quite an innovation back then.

BTW, great site!

]]> By: Jamie Lawrence http://inphotos.org/pentax/#comment-207304 Jamie Lawrence Tue, 23 Dec 2008 14:10:43 +0000 http://inphotos.org/?p=3317#comment-207304 My current strap says "Smugmug :D" so no prizes for guessing what photo gallery I use! It's also a very comfortable neoprene strap...and was free! The old one said "Minolta Dynax" and when I upgrade to one of the Sony Alpha range I'll either use the Minolta or Smugmug strap -- cos I'm kinda contrary that way. My current strap says “Smugmug :D ” so no prizes for guessing what photo gallery I use! It’s also a very comfortable neoprene strap…and was free!

The old one said “Minolta Dynax” and when I upgrade to one of the Sony Alpha range I’ll either use the Minolta or Smugmug strap — cos I’m kinda contrary that way.

]]> By: Donncha http://inphotos.org/pentax/#comment-207301 Donncha Tue, 23 Dec 2008 13:48:38 +0000 http://inphotos.org/?p=3317#comment-207301 Nah, near the Victoria Hotel on Patrick's Street. So many people walking on the pavement we were all packed in together. So true about the lenses though. If I was starting out again I might go for a Sony or Pentax because of the built in anti-shake system in the body. Either them or Nikon, their lenses are slightly cheaper aren't they? GG - please don't get your camera out if you're going to the Blog Awards. You might frighten someone! Nah, near the Victoria Hotel on Patrick’s Street. So many people walking on the pavement we were all packed in together. So true about the lenses though. If I was starting out again I might go for a Sony or Pentax because of the built in anti-shake system in the body. Either them or Nikon, their lenses are slightly cheaper aren’t they?

GG – please don’t get your camera out if you’re going to the Blog Awards. You might frighten someone!

]]> By: richard http://inphotos.org/pentax/#comment-207299 richard Tue, 23 Dec 2008 13:41:40 +0000 http://inphotos.org/?p=3317#comment-207299 Was that taken walking down the grand parade towards Daunt Square? Was that taken walking down the grand parade towards Daunt Square?

]]> By: richard http://inphotos.org/pentax/#comment-207298 richard Tue, 23 Dec 2008 13:35:17 +0000 http://inphotos.org/?p=3317#comment-207298 Canon. It's the lenses they catch you with. moving bodies is more of a choice once you have lenses. Canon. It’s the lenses they catch you with. moving bodies is more of a choice once you have lenses.

]]> By: Alex http://inphotos.org/pentax/#comment-207295 Alex Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:36:46 +0000 http://inphotos.org/?p=3317#comment-207295 Mine says "Pacsafe". It is steel reinforced. Maybe I should change it to say "stolen". Mine says “Pacsafe”. It is steel reinforced. Maybe I should change it to say “stolen”.

]]>