Good bye Pentax! Forever?

Simon,
Just to answer a couple of your questions:
John Riley is absolutely correct - it's the filesize that matters, not the CCD size. For instance, I met a photographer who was making a nice living from selling to Alamy... with his Nikon D70. Now this has the same CCD as all the Pentax cameras He just upsized in Photoshop.

If you want to get "pro" about it - use Phase One's Capture One Pro. This will upsize to 4x. i.e. 24 mega pixels. Believe me, you have to see the results - they are astonishing. Yes, I've tried this on Pentax DSLRs and the output is breathtaking.

As another example, I recently printed an *ist-D image at 16x20" at 402dpi - that's a crazy 51 mega pixels, upsized from a 6.1Mp output from Capture One LE. Could I see the pixels - absolutely not. Was the image "fuzzy" or "smooth" - positively not. It's by far the sharpest print I have produced, and a lot sharper than other "pro" images I've seen.
I'm counting the pixels on my *ist-D and *ist-DS... 6.1 million.
Is it a problem for professional work - absolutely not!

Now to be really picky. You mentioned that upsizing requires making pixels that just weren't there. This isn't entirely a valid argument I'm afraid. Even the Canon 1Ds-MkII has to make pixels that weren't there - it has 16.7 million pixels. BUT that's only 8.35 million green pixels, and 4.2 million red pixels, and 4.2 million blue pixels. The other 8.35M green, and 12.5M red and 12.5M blue have to be "guessed" So, even the 1Ds might not be enough for you... there's always the Phase One 39Mp digital backs for medium format

That's where the quality of the RAW convertor comes in. If you want truly pro results, then there's only Capture One. (Though Photoshop CS2 comes in a close second.)

I suppose you are referring to the fact that it takes a while to actually take the image. Simple answer: all Pentax DSLRs can disengage the "autofocus-on-half-press". Then, when you push the shutter it fires immediately.
You then focus with your thumb pressing the "OK" button on the back (or the dedicated AF button on the *ist-D).
Problem pretty much solved.

Other factors:
* If you check out the small print, then you'll find that Pentax's all have spot metering (true spot metering). Canon have been a bit slow about adding this - even then 20D doesn't have true spot metering. The 1Ds/5D have it (and I believe the new 30D). This can be a big deal, especially for the professional photographer.

* Nikon's and Fuji's have a tiny viewfinder in comparison to the large bright Pentax viewfinder.

* If you want to "look" like a pro - then you have no other choice - a Canon 1Ds it has to be

* If you are new to the digital domain - don't underestimate the difference your workflow can make. Learning the tricks of the RAW workflow, plus a good working knowledge of Photoshop can make the world of difference to your profitability (and flexibility)

* Pentax lenses are astonishingly good, especially the Limited series. Some aspects are down to personal preference (for instance, I much prefer the boken on my Pentax SMC-F 50mm/f1.4 compared to equivalent Canon lenses. The Pentax seems to produce a beautiful soft bokeh and lovely highlights. But, as I say this is down to personal choice.)

I have to say that the *ist-D is extremely well made. Mine has had a hammering and still feels great. The *ist-DS also has an excellent build quality, and the image quality is identical to the *ist-D. The DL will be the same quality.

With regard to buying - there's always Europe. I found buying from Germany completely painless. And there's no duty or VAT to pay.

(And then there's this great, friendly bunch of Pentax users on this forum that are always a great help )

At the end of the day - it's your decision...

Matt

Simon,

perhaps it would have been cheaper for you to have asked a few questions here before spending £1000+ on your nonamesupplied DSLR. Of course, as Matt says, if you have to 'look' like a Pro then you have to have the 'C' or 'N' name on your DSLR body.

Hopefully you've gained a little more insight into the capabilities of Pentax DSLR's. One thing you are right about, unfortunately not all models are now easily available but they are available if you want to look.

you know a couple years back, I blew the mirrors off a 2004 ninja zx12 on my old Yamaha fj1200. His bike had more horsepower and better handling and better breaks. A combination of factors at work. My experience, the fact that his horsepower advantage wasn't usefull to him (on a steep uphill stretch) after comming off a winding river road. Torque prevailed. All the things that made my bike obsolete (long, low, heavy, massive midrange torque) as a race bike proved to be little disadvantage in real world application where streets limmited the use of top speeds and long low and heavy transfers massive amounts of torque to the pavement without wheeling or wheelspin. Don't get me wrong..I would've still beaten him if I had the better bike....

But that's motorcycle talk where the more torque vs more horsepower, and lower speed handling vs highspeed instability debates rage.

Then there's the megapixel vs burst rate, sharpness vs lowlight noise debates in the camera circles.

then there's the I have more Beethoven works than Motzart arguments in the music debates....the list goes on and on, but guys it's about the music WE make, not the size of our pianist that counts...

i have just bought a pentax *istds from jessops 17/06/2006 just go in and ask them to search the company for them
this is to back up my *istd

i work as a proffessional photographer ive used pentax since i was twelve years old (now 39)

i use in my photographic business

2 ME supers
2super As
2MZSs
1*istd
1*istds

and when the new 10 meg comes out ill have 2 of those as well

i dont use many new lenses i opt to use what have been the finest lenses in the world since the year dot PENTAX SMC

i admit i bought a 300D wanting to upgrade to a more fashonable make the one every body else uses but sold it and got an *istds instead

ive worked in motorsport and the N & C owners used to take the P#ss because i was using two ME supers but i wiped the smile off their faces with the crysal clear trannies that i got back which i sold to large corperations Volvo Audi to name drop

i stick with pentax its not the camera that makes the picture its the photographer

REMEMBER THIS pentax could have done what N C & M did thay changed lens mounts in order to accommodate auto focus which okay thay have fast units now which have left pentax i the shade a bit but pentax are loyal to their users and you can still use SMC lenses on the new cameras so why change all your kit

you can garuntee the others will change mounts again if thay need to somthing which i dont think pentax will ever do

Hi all,

I admire Pentax products, especially the lenses and their place in camera history...but, this thread illustrates why they dropped such a huge clanger (along with Minolta & others) by not trying anywhere near hard enough to corner the pro market. It is no coincidence at all that the 'last two men standing' are effectively Canon & Nikon....

Cheers Steve (another minority and often abused user..Contax)

My guess is that it would cost a lot of money to develop and market a new pro system and that Pentax started their plans with cameras that would sell. That earns money and money can be reinvested.

So far we have had some very nice DSLRs and an ever increasing selection of very nice lenses. I think that's pretty good so far.

The next step may well be the 10MP body, and then if that is a success quite a lot will have been achieved.

if pentax sell the 10 meg camera for half the price of canon nikon or minolta who will be kicking themselves

WELL IT WONT BE A PENTAX OWNER WILL IT

the only thing i will have to change when i buy the new pentax digital camera is the batteries

but i wont have to through half my lenses in the bin unlike the big three and all my accsesories will fit to woohoo

I'm loving this thread and it really is bringing home the point that variety is the spice of life. Persish the thought that camera availability and choice were to follow in the footsteps of the British High Street for a day out shopping, where someone recently said that if western democracy means a free market with loads of choice, how come all high streets now look exactly the same.
Trouble is that there has always been, to some degree, a snobbishness in photography circles, with people more interested in being seen to have the latest 'pro' gear that is in vogue, than a system that suits their needs perfectly and quietly goes about getting the results they want without shouting about it from the rooftops.
I used to have a small Leica rangefinder system, alongside my Pentax gear, built around an M6 and whilst they are indeed a lovely camera, I recently got rid and replaced it with a Contax G2 rangefinder system, which for me was far better and, I reckon, produces as good, if not better, results, yet costs 1/2 the price.
As has been said earlier, by myself and others, if you think that having the latest 'must own' DSLR will in any way make you a better photographer without learning the necessary skills, then you are living on cloud cuckoo land and paying far too much attention to the power of advertising and thrill of posing.
Long live Pentax, the quiet photographers who own them and forums like these where down to earth reality remains and thrives.

Philip

PS Oh bty Don I bet you could probably also blow the socks of me on my CBR 1000rr 04 (with Scorpion can) with your lovely FJ1200, as I do rather admit to riding slowly a lot, as I'm not that skilled or brave & prefer to pose (sad at my age, but tinted visor helps to hide the fact) and I can't see the point of racing around, head down, a**e up, through our lovely countryside missing places to stop and take photos.

Maniitoba prairie has less to see, and you can easily see a whole lot of it ....
If a guy robs a bank in Winnipeg, and makes a run to the west, there'll be a cop in Regina standing on the roof of the Regina police dept, with binocculars watching for him...
I don't know why we have speed limits here.
What?... there a suicidal deer, hiding behind the only small shrub in a sea of grass, crying "good-bye cruel world!" and he sees a car and he's like "wait for it....wait for it....(six hours later)... it's almost here...ZZZZzzzzz....".

Why did you mention the 8mp senor? Only thing I said about the 8mp senor is that is the minimum standard required from agencies nowadays. That standard was not set my me.
That argument is quite different from the fact that with your camera, you need to create pixels that weren't orginally there to have a A3 300dpi pix.
No amount of argument will change that and don't merge two arguments

That is spot on!! Selling pix to mags etc don't normal go above 10x8 in anyway, so for a 300dpi image, a 6mp camera will do. Try telling that to agencies.

Common trend nowadays. The photographer should sort the image out, not photoshop otherwise you turn photography into grahpics art

Mag editors will also adjust an image to suit that includes the size. The argument is not about if a image is worth printing if it is done on a 6mp camera. The argument is that agencies require certain standards, rightly or wrongly, the standard is a minimum of 8mp which Pentax at the mo can't provide.

Is what you're saying is I could get a 1mp camera, then using photoshop, blow the image up to 16x12" 600dpi BMP image, that would be better than say a DL's image being blow up to 16x12" 300dpi JPG cos that's just silly.

Don't know much about canon cameras, so I can't comment about this. However, I do like to know where this info came from. If this £4500 camera is doing that though, what are pentax 6mp camera doing? How many REAL pixels do they have?

No! I'm referring to the fact that the focusing system is slow. So problem not solved

£1000+ well spent far as I'm concerned, but then again, you don't miss what you never had, do you?

Good old ME and MX, my MX is still going strong. Don't make them like they use to. As for the DS, it was my first choice before turning semi-pro. It was a job finding one, but when I did, Dixons had one left and it was faulty

That is silly, and you may notice that's not what I said, nor implied. I told you what I meant... so perhaps you should re-read it

Fair enough. But I thought I'd mention the feature, because I bet that Jessop's staff won't know about it.

It's not just Canon. The only odd one out is the Sigma with the Foveon sensor. Maybe you should have a read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosaicing
All cameras indicate how many photosensor sites they have. Each site is monochome - it just measures the amount of light. The bayer matrix turns it into "colour", and the camera (or RAW software) has to de-mosaic that information to turn it into colour.
Like I said, Pentax 6Mp have 6.1 million photosites - EXACTLY the same as the Nikon D100, D70 etc. (Because it's the same Sony-made CCD sensor.) So, like all the rest, they have 1/2 green, 1/4 red, 1/4 blue.


It's all horses-for-courses. If you're happy with your current DSLR - fine. But as you see there are plenty of pros, semi-pros, and amateurs using 6.1Mp Pentax (and other makes) and getting on with it

Matt

FUJI CAMERAS INVENT PIXELS THE CCD SENSOR THAY USE ON THE 12 MEG CAMERA IS EFFECTIVE THE ACUAL AMOUNT IS 6 MEG BUT THAY HAVE "FOURTH LAYER TECHNOLOGY"

the way i was trying to put my own desision to stay with pentax ws the fact that i have three cases full of equipment all dedicated to pentax and to replace it all by chganging manufacturers would be approx £35,000 - £50,000 depending on systems C being the lowest and N the highest i wouldnt even look at M or O

in the motorsport field i can understand switching two the C or N system as you can hire a £5-8,000 lens instead of buying one

at the end of the day its down to your chosen field for instance i use my MEsupers outdoors and the superAs indoors with studio flash thay are a better studio camera than the MEs

i use the MZS for weddingsand motorsport but only on manual focus indoors again the superAs are a better indoor camera

the *istds is not a good studio camera it can over expose even with the built in flash the canon 300d was better with studio flash but it carnt use my pentax lenses especaily the imortal 85mm SMC but the *istd is fine in a studio then it has a pc plug

my argument for megapixels is that ink jet printers can only print so small and it come to the stage where you reach the minimum size you can physical make drops of ink if you get 4 drops of ink to say every megapixel and that is pushing the parameters of the printer then why have a camera that is 20 megapixal the printer hasent got a cat in hells chance of faithful reproduction

Hi Simon,

I mentioned the 8mp sensor because you did.

I know you didn't set that standard. The point was made by John, who's a pro, that interpolation is an industry standard. To make a genuine A3 300dpi image without interpolation would require a 17mp sensor, and as the pros here don't seem to need that big a sensor to earn a living, then it's probably unlikely that you do. By the same argument, exporting the RAW file as a jpeg compresses the image data to around ¼ of it's original size, and exporting as a 16 bit TIF can increase the file size by as much 10 or 11 times. Both of which either create or destroy information from the original file, thereby acheiving a technically [sic] dishonest image.

Of course no argument will change that fact, and indeed it was the support of this argument upon which I based my reply.

The argument was a single one, but with the basic tenet being backed up with numbers.

Anyway argument is the wrong word.. debate is a far better definition.

Either way, I wish you well in your career.. with whichever camera you use.

Cheers

Liam

I feel that there's two sides here, one commonality is both sides defending the choices they have already made. Another comonality is the desire to create fine images. another comonality is the desire to sell those images.
If the poster Simon says he feels discriminated against by the industry because agencys reject his equipment then let him go buy more equipment. He's still gonna be faced with the challenges of selling against those of us who "cameras" aren't being rejected by the agencies. I seldom have need to discuss equipment with customers, sufficing to ask what image size/file format they use and submitt images that fit, how I get there is my business.
I'll upgrade when oportunity arises, and demand makes it feasable.

If I were a pro or even semi-pro photographer I'd consider spending an appropriate amount on my equipment and write it off as a business expense. The fact that I'm neither, just a mere amateur who enjoys his hobby, means that I, for one, can't justify spending that kind of money on a camera body that I don't need when Pentax offers a product which exactly suits my requirements.

You're right, we don't miss what we haven't had, but then again, I don't yearn for something I don't need either. I would expect that all who enter here did their homework before spending out their hard earned money. I personally think you are perhaps one of many who has believed the cow poo that is often spouted in camera shops.

If you seriously believe what you have written as the title of your original post (yes I know it was a question), then you will one day soon be proven very wrong.

I'm done with this thread.