Is the K7 already flawed?

Fair enough Stefan but depending where the original poster is living should we not be comparing prices from his home country (hoping its the UK now otherwise I am going to look really silly :lol

Fair enough Mike but do you know where he lives?

Ah well it's quite a general topic right, the K-7 and everything named is for sale in those country that UK prices need to be different (you always need to be different you know!) isn't my fault

The price comparison is pretty much the same between the rest of the EU and the US.

Who has most advertising pages this month?

Hi,

Just a point about the so-called brilliant Canon L lenses.

Many Canon owners think they are the most amazing lenses ever made. However, several less 'blinkered' users who also use other lenses on their 5D's etc will tell you that many of them (zooms usually), including the famed 24-105 L actually have horrible distortion, that many, many less discriminating Canon owners either cannot see, do not want to see, or seem to ignore.

Just because many of the owners say they are great does not automatically make it so. I am constantly amazed at the sheer volume of 5D & 5D2 owners who are utterly clueless about even basic photo technique and knowledge....

Not to mention the size and weight of those lenses. I am sure there are many pros who need the good L zooms, many amateurs probably do not.

I suspect the starting point of this thread was about creating products suitable for a pro market even though that (meaningless) word wasn't used.

I was on a film set today and the stills photographer was using a Canon eos 1 mark 111 body (huge) but I must say I saw two lenses he used : 85mm f1.2 and 50mm f1.2 . Both very nice but not small and he said the 85mm was heavy...add that to the heavy bulky Canon body and he can save his gym membership

But would I like an 85mm f1.2 and 50mm f1.2? Probably

has there been any scientific comparison between the pentax glass and the canon glass?

if the pentax glass is as good as the canon L glass then i am assuming some smart person would have created a pentax/canon converter and made a killing as all the canon users would just buy the cheaper pentax glass

how much better are the canon L lenses is the question we should be asking.

But all converters by there nature downgrade the image. The more salient point i think would be can anybody tell the difference in IQ when viewing comparible images at A3, which is about the largest size most people would print at.

Davex.

Comparable spec Canon L lenses are no better. The only thing they have are more exotic (from an amateur viewpoint) specs in some of the longer lenses in particular.

As we probably couldn't afford or need those anyway, it's a bit academic.

I am sure that the quality lenses from the quality manufacturers are much of a muchness. They will all be good. How can they not be?

Where there might be differences IMO would be in speed for example whereby Canon will offer an 85mm f1.2 but Pentax might not because the target market for Canon is more likely to have a need for this speed yet Pentax's target market would be satisfied with 85mm f1.8 or f2.

One point about lenses that seems to be missed is that most current Pentax lenses are made to suit the APS-C sized sensor and produce a smaller image circle than Canon's L series lenses.

This size difference makes them smaller, lighter, and cheaper to produce, yet doesn't compromise image quality.

This point alone, even if relative IQ's were identical, would mean Canon lenses will be more expensive than equivalent focal length Pentax lenses.

And another thing, Canon glass is expensive . . . because there are enough people around who are still prepared to pay. Whether they need it or not, or have the knowledge to use it, is food for a different topic.

I meant adaptor of course

And if the adaptor has no glass and just maps the metal tips from pentax fit to canon fit then there should be no degradation in quality - i think!

Depending on the design of the rspective bayonet mounts and the back focus distance the lenses are designed for, it can be well nigh impossible to do what you suggest.

ah, you are all quite right. i keep forgetting canon have stupidly fast lenses but comparing lenses of comparable aperture, the prices are more or less equivalent.

so are pentax hiking their prices to match canon ones? maybe we are not so different to the canon users