four more reasons Pentax shouldn't make a ff d-slr...


1) I can't afford to buy it.
2) I can't afford to buy it.
3) I can't afford to buy it.
4) I can't afford to buy it.

and I'm one of the few photographers in my area making an actual living at this...

the one thing that truly altered the way I work and made a huge difference to my workflow and my business, had nothing to do with the camera... it was OSX and Aperture... prior to that I made less money due to workflow efficiency.

Rates went down for photo jobs but went up for Multimedia work with video.

It is the computer that matters more than the cameras.

I'm not agreeing nor disagreeing with any specific post or poster... I only quoted the ones I found interesting...
I'm more or less just saying.... How many people here would ask a surgeon what brand scalpel he uses?
Would you refuse the surgery if you didn't care for the brand of scalpel?
Would you turn away the surgeon and go with a veterinarian that happened to have the right brand scalpel?

my loyalty to the brand has two reasons.
It does the job.
It was what I started with, and I have an investment in equipment.
If Pentax had changed the lens mount and not maintained compatibility with my existing gear....
I'd probably be shooting Nikon.

But I wouldn't getting better results, just working with a different tool.

What I find hilarious is that as photographers we now argue about camera bodies the way we used to argue about film...

Oh Kodachrome has more natural colors and longer life in storage... Velvia has better color and is sharper...

Tri-x is more light sensitve and has less grain than ilford..

Agfa portrait 160 is more pleasing than Kodak porta 200...

blah blah blah...

at least swapping film brands was cheaper than swapping camera brands....
still didn't make you a better photographer though.... no matter how many times you swapped brands...

I sold many images with film.
I sold just as many images shot with my ds2 as I did with my canon g5.
I sell just as many images made with my k10's as I did before I owned the k10's
The tools may have differences, and some advantages, but it is the images that sell.
You have to sell enough to pay for the equipment, your wages, your taxes and a profit to replace the equipment as it wears out or you'll be out of business.


if you have to break out some hi-tech measuring equipment, test targets, and go pixel peeping to comeback and say Camera A is better than Camera B... my response is:
The customer has neither the time nor the equipment to measure the differences....
They only care about the final image.

Kinda the point I was making (see 'Lewis Hamilton' comment in my post).

Re: your Yam, its akin to the spending a few hundred on an old MF body which could quite easily give you better images than an FF or APS-C DSLR. My point still stands though, which is, you would expect the D3 to give better image quality than the K20D given their respective price points.[/quote]No I wouldn't.
Regardless of price points, specs sheets or other factors, it boils down to taking images that people will pay for and how much the people will pay for them. Certain models cost to much to justify.

You can argue that a lambo is a better car than a limo, and can argue performance, and specs.... but you won't have many limo drivers arguing they'd get more business if they traded up thier $50,000 limo for a $250,000 lambo....

But at the end of the day they are both just cars. A Toyota camry beats them both in terms of cost/function/value, if the goal is just to go from point a to point b.

At the end of the day the client looks at the images I create, not the camera or computer or software, just the final image.... I've never hear a Bride say anything remotely similar to "I would've looked better if you had used xxx-brand of camera..."

My yamaha fz1 with a re-jet kit and pipe totals less than a quarter the price of a used gti and is pulling performance numbers on the quarter mile faster than the Lambo....

Sooooo it is a moot point to compare specs sheets when we all know that a poor rider/driver will get his azz handed to him no matter how much money they spent on the wheels...

good advice.... gartmore and Gwyn,
make a working relationship with the florist....
buy the flowers, then make photo cards, then ask the florists to buy your cards, and sell them or use them to promote themselves...

possible there is a (not so)sweet spot where the SR and shutter speed collide?

if so, turn the sr off until you need it.... with a wide angle you should not need sr until you are well below 1/15 sec

I just hope that when the people bashing Pentax do jump ship, that they price thier gear according to thier rhetoric, and pass along some outstandingly low prices to those that just want to take photographs...

I've got Twenty bucks to put towards your ff canon, and will happily take that amateurish, no good picture taking k-7 off your hands...