Why ?.

Lotus every time. The engine's in the right place...

Hello John,

I have often wondered the same thing, it seems that Pentax are stuck at 300mm.

I have a DA 18-55mm II version, and a DA 55-300mm.
Both are good lenses, but it seems one must go to a "BIG MA" if a longer focal length is desired!

Kindest regards,

Peter.

Hi Peter

Yes, it's a shame really. I'm stuck with always carrying a TC with me for when I need the extra reach. Although I'm still considering a Sigma option.

Regards,

John

I switched a while ago from Olympus to Pentax. My main reason was the high ISO noise of the E520 I had which was otherwise a great camera. My wife had a Pentax Km so switching to Pentax seemed a logical choice and I have no regrets. The weather sealing of the K7 and the two kit lenses was what sealed it. i have now a collection of 7 lenses covering from 10mm to 400mm including macro which I bought for a total of about a grand. Three of these are fasti(sh) primes , albeit fairly old ones. The same capabitility on Canikon or even Olympus had I stuck with them would have cost me a lot more money for the benefit of a couple of stops on a few of the lenses perhaps.
I am not a professional but if I was I might look at another brand. However the sheer bulk of the Canon full frame cameras might still put me off. As I travel a lot weight and size advantages are at the top of the list and the crop factor of Aps-C and smallish size of the K7 has distinct advantages in this regard. i dont see that switching brands again wouldl make me a better photographer but for some people there seems to be the idea that the costlier your kit the better results you will get. The only thing I would perhaps like is a fast 500mm lens but I would not use it enough to ever justify switching brands. I will stick with Pentax because for me its the best compromise between capability, quality ,size and price, and a vey good one at that.

I bought my first pentax an mz5 in 2004 becuase it was at the right price in the local freeads and i knew nothing about photography except that a guy in work who used to be a pro photographer had one and recommended the brand. Over the next couple of years I trawled ebay and picked up some good "m" and "A" lenses when they were cheap - i then logically bought a K10d when i came in to a small amount of unexpected money and upgraded to a K7 to mistakenly improve my photography.

I use pentax because of the backward lens compatibility and the weather sealing plus i have a good selection of lenses however i am finding that i especially like landscape photography and would like a full frame camera so i can use smaller apatures before diffraction becomes an issue but its unlikly i will have enough money and i love the k7 plus i am knowhere near the capibilities of the camera - if i had the money i would get a canon full frame alongside the pentax but its unlikley to happen any time soon - I think a lot of people switch because they think it will improve thier photography - advertising and marketing make a big differance

I use both pentax and canon dslrs simultaneously, but must admit canon is my more used gear. The reason is rather simple: for my needs, c suits more. I shoot a lot indoor (family), always moving children and sport events and high ISO and AF speed-wise c is better. Two more things why i feel people change to c from pentax. First, though pentax has got excellent lenses, but lacks the affordable priced prime range of c. Second, lots of generally used photo software does not really support pentax.

Yes, I can see this being a problem for some people, especially if more software includes lens profiles. However, I suspect it is a two-way trade: if Pentax wants better software support then it needs to get out there and invest a bit of money in code so that Pentax can supply what software developers need. If you make it easy for developers, they are far more likely to include your products even if you have only a small market share compared to Canonikon.

I have to admit I am having a bit of a wobble here. My principle photo enthusiasm is aircraft.

Please do not take this the wrong people but although there are some very good pictures of aircraft posted here, if you have a look at UKAR we simply lack the long lenses and fast autofocus compared with the opposition.

As such, I feel a C***n coming on. N***n probably have the better lens, but the price is outside my budget.

I will almost certainly keep my K20 as I would find it hard to be without my DA*50=135 or my DFA100.

Out of curiosity, is there anything to legally stop a camera maker making a model which fits other lenses?

It happens the other way of course with Tamron, Sigma etc making lenses for other cameras, but could Pentax make a camera which took Nikon/Canon lenses?

The holy grail would be a camera which didn't have a mount of it's own, but which came with a set of 'adapter mounts' which would allow any lens to be used fully-functioning...

Or even a common mount used by all body and lens manufacturer. That would force me to re-evaluate my views on Santa.

Would that be the work of Santa or the work of Satan!!!

If that ever happens MikeP will probably need to read this thread;

link

Santa.

Next question?

Now that is a fascinating thought. When I change my car it is rather fun to look at models from different manufacturers, have some test drives and decide which car I like best within my budget. With cameras the investment in lenses is a great impediment to choosing another brand.

If all SLRs had a common mount I imagine there would be a lot of mixing and matching. To some extent this may already be happening with the four thirds mount which is used by Olympus, Panasonic and Leica. However it is unlikely that all manufacturers will adopt the four thirds or micro four thirds standard.

Archie

The nearest anything ever came to the universal bayonet mount was the Pentax K mount.

In the 1970s Asahi licensed its use to a wide variety of manufacturers, but of course Canon, Nikon and Minolta would never have taken it up.