Why not Pentax ?

JackAllTog (e2 Member)

3

9 Nov 2010 - 6:06 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Help - Why don't i want to buy a Pentax, instead of a Canon 60/7D or Nikon D7000?
My 1st SLR was a pentax, ages ago, with a film and manual focus. Then when i came back into photography a few years ago Pentax seemed to be small and quirky so was ignored.
BUT now the Pentax K5 seems to be a cracker and is being well advertised - yes its the latest release so is likely to be one of the best at the moment, it also seems like good value for money.
The DXO mark ratings show it much above canon. And a few rather good togs i've come accross on epz seem to rate it well.

It seems to have great Dynamic range, ISO performance, fps speed, and 9cross focus points, in sensor OS/VR/IS
I'm less happy with its SDHC cards and flash GN13 (vs50 canon). I'm unsure yet if it has full time movie focus, or radio triggers?
Lens range seems a lot less than canon, but the lenses there appear good (there are sigma versions too).

Whats your view is this a hidden gem?

franken (e2 Member)

9

9 Nov 2010 - 7:28 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

I've not had a problem with lenses for Pentax. I agree that their range is not as large as Canon/nikon.

Quite a few people that I know who use Nikon/Canon/Sony Slr's use mostly Sigma/ Tamron anyhow and these are always available in Pentax fitting.

Just had a quick look at the EPZ shop(Warehouse express) and there are currently 87 Pentax and Pentax fitting lenses.

So lenses should not really be an issue unless you must have camera branded lenses that is?

Ken

franken (e2 Member)

9

9 Nov 2010 - 7:46 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

I'm currently saving my pennies for this!


http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Pentax-SMC-DA-200mm-f28-EDIF-SDM-14943

One of the best lens reviews I've seen on EPZ (for any make!)

Ken

StrayCat

8

9 Nov 2010 - 10:10 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Pentax has big money behind them now.

strawman

8

9 Nov 2010 - 10:58 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Quote: The DXO ranking is interesting, It puts the Sony NEX5 as equal to the Leica M9, Now either the Sony is particulary good, Or the Leica is particularly bad, The one real difference that seperates them is the " Price "......Grin How many NEX5s can you buy for the price of the Leica......Smile

Or it means the DXO mark misses a trick or two, I wonder hmm.

JackAllTog (e2 Member)

3

10 Nov 2010 - 2:05 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Indeed Sony's SLT range it very interesting. I did not know they shared sensors - thanks.

To me there seems to be quite a few step changes in sensor tecnology at present so this is making me want to track the main players but not choose yet.
In the longer term things like global shutter, 4xHD 60fps, Full time movie AF, High EV range, High ISO sensitivity, Foveon 3 pixel photosites, 3D, Auto HDR, SLT and high fps.
As an amateur on a budget i'm very interested to upgrade and don't want to wait too long but i just can't yet see a clear winning package that will not be old in 2 years.
If i was buying from new today i'd choose the sony alpha 55 as a capable do all camera.

Thincat

5

10 Nov 2010 - 3:38 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Quote:
It is strange how sony seems to have completely messed up their marketing for the Alpha range, discontinuing the well received A700many months ago without a replacement, and the short lived venture into full frame with the now discontinued A900.

Sony know how to market games stations but don't understand the SLR market, which is a worry if you own Sony DSLRs. I don't think they've abandoned FF or pro-quality APS-C DSLRs although some think they have - it's just that they've temporarily forgotten about DSLRs while they play with new technology like SLT and NEX. These are the "real" Sony cameras and I think they regard the DSLRs as Minoltas. I welcome the introduction of EVFs because I think they have a lot of advantages over the OVF, but if Sony abandon the OVF they're making a big mistake. I don't think they will.

The A580 is a another "hidden gem". It's largely discounted even by Sony users because it doesn't have the buttons that the A700 has, but it has that new sensor and it outperforms the A700 even though it's much cheaper. It almost certainly outperforms the Nikon D300s (while being about half the price) but you never see comparisons because the A580 is not taken seriously.

strawman

8

10 Nov 2010 - 5:22 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

I get the impression that the camera manufacturers view the SLR (and for the moment lets include m4/3 and SLT etc in this definition) market slightly differently from the way we users would on this and equivalent sites. To them the mass market exists at a certain price level. If I give a slight example, in Japan about half the SLR Cameras sold by Canon are the 550D. And I bet that sales ratio holds true for the total SLR market. So what we consider the entry to mid level SLR cameras are probably about 70% to 80% of the market. also there is a large compact market and if they can just show them a little bit upmarket to the more profitable SLR niche there is more profit to be had.

So to Sony and Panasonic and Olympus the lower to mid level SLR type camera is where there is a chance to wrestle users away from the duo of Nikon and Canon. Plus for whatever reason, Nikon and Canon have not noticed the telegram being delivered by Olympus, but Sony did. And those companies look very focused on those markets and each has upset the hardcore type of photographer. Sony have not kept up the pace of development on the larger A cameras (A700 and A900/850) even to the extent of letting the A700 go without a replacement. Olympus have announced the end of 4/3 lens development, and Panasonic have made the GF series more compact user friendly and less serious photographer friendly plus frozen 4/3 products. But from those companies point of view they probably think they have never been more active. And the question, how important are those long term users of the more expensive cameras. To Nikon and Canon very as they buy L etc series lenses, but to the rest where the vast majority of customers buy 1 or 2 lenses......... But from a market perspective m4/3 and NEX are generating good sales so they probably feel very good about their choices.

All 3 have embarked on cameras aimed at that mid level and are pushing hard there. This means they have tied up a lot of R&D at this level and relative to their sales this and the price pressures this may not be a long term viable position. And Sony may well be looking at the position promised by Minolta and the position they have achieved. I doubt they will have totally given up on full frame, and they probably need a crop flag ship. So I expect there will be an A700 replacement and it should be the bells and whistles crop sensor camera. And there will probably be at least one more full frame camera. But if this does not grab a big % of the top market be prepared for Sony following Olympus and freezing development of the A mount and pushing even more versions of the NEX cameras, with of course an A mount adapter. Olympus looks to have already reached he decision. So the question to ask is do Sony/Olympus etc have the resources/need to look further up the market.

It has often been said the Sony approach is to apply the scatter gun approach, fire of lots of models/competing parts, see what sells and evolve from there. It will be interesting to see if they kill of the areas that do not generate the required profit.

To be honest it does look like Canon and Nikon missed the boat in one breath, but they have visions on where they do wish to operate, and it could be that Nikon have decided to secure their current position and not worry too much about the entry level if that is descending into a price war. Canon have stated previously they would not be drawn into a price war. Nikon look to have a path of trying to offer the most complete product and are evolving all aspects of cameras, Canon look to be stuck on a more pixels/lower cost path. Which is correct???? I get the impression Nikon is on the correct path for them, it may loose total volume market share, but then it may well protect the important sales at the key levels. i.e in Business you go for maximising the profit on cash invested, being No 1 in volume is not always important. Canon to me need to wake up but that is my view, but it could be that a policy of yet more pixels and subtle evolution is what the market buys. Canon look to be more exposed to the other 3 picking away at sales for models like the 550D, and Nikon giving them a battering at the D7000 to D3 level.

You say there are a lot of steps in sensor development, but from where I sit it looks like there is a levelling out of sensor development. yes there are more pixels but there are not the big jumps in performance we saw in the past. This strikes me as good news for people like Pentax as they can concentrate on adding camera features (which are not as high NRE) and use mass market pre-developed sensors and not be at a disadvantage to the rest of the competition. Go back 5 years and there was a big difference between the brands sensors, these days it is much closer. So I think that in this situation Pentax can compete very effectively and it may even allow people like Fuji back in the door.

So I think Canon and Nikon will loose sales % but probably retain profit. Sony Olympus and especially Panasonic will gain market share, but will they still offer the same range as they do today, or will they concentrate on lower models. and where will Samsung figure. in the new growth markets they could be well placed. Traditionally people have looked at Europe, Japan and USE as important markets, but increasingly the BRIC countries will be important.