Pentax presence

<p>I was at the Hunt photo retailer in Melrose, ma , I ran it to a Pentax <br>

sales person that was there but had small sales area as opposed to others<br>

But Pentax was there just the same. there may be hope after all:</p>

<p>despite the quality and dependability of pentax products.<br>

bentax seems to be well below canon and nikon in their <br>

quality perception ( to give it a name)<br>

I do not understand WHY.<br>

maybe because a pentax sells for less money that the other brands?<br>

Despite claims by some Ricoh is a solid company<br>

and should help not hurt pentax.</p>

<p>It's nice to see them back; there is a lot of negative vibes out there amongst camera shops and Pentax at least at my local shop (Roberts) in Indianapolis. It had everything to do with the lac kof information and lack of contact with sales reps. Richo/Pentax will have their work ahead of them to mend those fences and get those sales people to start recommending Pentax products again</p>

<p>Walter, it's simple advertising. When people go to Best Buy, they see Nikon and Canon plastered everywhere, and in the Target/Walmart camera sections, so they decide that they must be better cameras. Basically, it's because people are gullible.</p>

<p>It's similar to the situation in the high end audio video industry. The really high performance products are handled by custom installers or boutique retailers, not big box stores. I doubt the majority of Canon and Nikon owners have ever heard of the extreme high end photography brands such as Phase, Mamiya, Alpa, Horseman, Rodenstock, etc., because they aren't carried by the box stores. Leica and Hasselblad are usually as far up the camera brand name recognition ladder as it goes. Pentax is in the unenviable position of producing both consumer and professional products and not having a huge presence in box stores for their consumer products.</p>

<p>I have a gallery where I retail my own work. Much of my work was done with medium format (Pentax) and large format film. When I initially switched to digital I went through my Canon period before going back to Pentax. When customers ask me the standard <em>what camera do you use? </em>question, and I answer Pentax, their eyes usually glaze over or are amazed I didn't answer Nikon or Canon. If I'm not too busy that often gives me the opportunity to give the questioner a reality check.</p>

<p>It's not simple advertising--it's performance. That's why I sold all my Pentax gear. They are simply too far behind in terms of AF and processing speed. All you have to do is pick up one of the other brands and try them. Their ultrasonic motors are slow and prone to mechanical problems. They've chosen to have a lens lineup that features nifty and overpriced pancake lenses instead of bread-and-butter lenses like a reasonably-priced 100 or 85. They have much less aftermarket support. Nikon has a more sophisticated and accurate exposure system. It's not advertising, but competition.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It's not simple advertising--it's performance. That's why I sold all my Pentax gear. They are simply too far behind in terms of AF and processing speed. All you have to do is pick up one of the other brands and try them. Their ultrasonic motors are slow and prone to mechanical problems. They've chosen to have a lens lineup that features nifty and overpriced pancake lenses instead of bread-and-butter lenses like a reasonably-priced 100 or 85. They have much less aftermarket support. Nikon has a more sophisticated and accurate exposure system. It's not advertising, but competition.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is right. I shoot manual so I don't care about those aspects and Pentax was a great fit for me for a while. Pentax provides some great features that Canon and Nikon don't in their similarly priced cameras: great build, great controls, great features (intervalometer, weather sealing, for example). But their autofocus (AF-C in particular), metering, auto white balance is just not as good and these features will matter more for beginners that don't have the time or interest to adjust settings.</p>

<p>I'll second what Laurentiu posted. If you're a sports shooter or trying to grab quick shots of kids, then there are better choices from Nikon, Canon or SONY. If you're a landscape shooter or one who takes a more deliberate pace and doesn't need to engage in machine gun-style shooting, then the K-5 series bodies are simply as good as it gets with APS-C sized sensors. Pentax implementation of the 16 meg SONY sensor outperforms all other brands. It is quieter, more accurate in color rendition, has better dynamic range, etc., and combined with the weather proofing of the K-5 body plus other software-implemented features, and cost, make it a no brainer. I shot with Canon bodies and L series lenses for years. My last Canon was a 5D2 and I have no regrets whatsoever for making the switch. For shooting situations where I believe the resultant image will be worthy of a very large gallery print, I use a Pentax 645D.</p>

 

<p>It has nothing to do with quality. It's all about marketing. <br /><br />Pentax never was able to market, they have some great cameras, great lenses, reliable gear and generally stuff that just works, but it means nothing if you can't market it. </p>

<p>The US, at least, has shown we don't care about quality or value. Give us a brand name we can rally behind and we will support it, but never expect us to choose something that doesn't fill magazines with clever ads. </p>

<p>As far as shooting sports, not that many people really shoot sports. So I never got this whole sports shooting thing. If you are really shooting sports than Pentax isn't the best gear for you (maybe), but most sports shooters are soccer moms shooting their kids games, and I guarantee I can get better shots with my Progam Plus and a roll of film than most soccer moms shooting a Nikon or Canon and a kit lens. </p>