Why do some people have multiple system gear?

[sleahy73]

I have been reading several post to the Pentax Forum lately - I'm on vacation

and apparently have little better to do - and I've noticed several of the more

prolific posters mentioning their Cannon or Nikon (or other brands) equipment.

Most of these people seem quite knowledgeable and helpful (thanks again Justin,

Godfrey and Lindy), and all seem to espouse the virtues of Pentax gear,

especially for the price. So, my question is why invest so much in another

separate system?

[sleahy73]

Oh, and thanks to Andrew, as well... not to leave anybody out.

 

I have learned so much from all of you, even many people I have not mentioned.

[godfrey]

<center>

<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/godders/.Pictures/London-Minox/tate-

0003.jpg"><br>

At The Tate Modern - November 2002<br>

<i>©2003 by Godfrey DiGiorgi<br>

Minox EC, APX 100 film, scanned with Epson 2450</i>

<br></center><br>

Sean, <br>

<br>

I have two systems at present as the two systems have complementary features and lenses

that I find advantageous to my work.

<br><br>

Basically I'm brand agnostic: I am more concerned with the story telling of photography

and the making of photographs than I am with loyalty to any particular brand. I use

whatever equipment I find that satisfies what I want in terms of ergonomics, lens quality,

and its dynamics in use.

<br><br>

These are often quite elusive things to articulate meaningfully but they are quite real

nonetheless. For instance, when I fit the DA*16-50/2.8 lens to my K10D, it becomes a

completely different tool in my hands then it feels to be with either the DA21 or FA43

fitted, even though my use of either the zoom or the pair of primes tends to be similar at

focal length settings. Similarly, with my Panasonic L1 fitted with a Nikkor 20 vs its

standard 14-50 zoom lens, I find the camera works very differently for me due to the

difference in its weight, balance, and how I consider focus and exposure settings. These

differences, in both systems, affect the photos I create and ultimately change the

expression I create as story.

<br><br>

For similar reasons in the past I had Nikon SLR and Leica RF 35mm film camera gear, along

with Hasselblad and Rollei medium format cameras and Minox subminiature cameras. They

do different things for me. As Marshall McLuhan once put it, "The Medium Is The Massage"

... my interpretation: the medium of the tools has effect on the results through their

intrinsic relationship to the photographer's process and use.

<br><br>

Godfrey

<br>

[mountainvisions]

The old days of marrying a system are over. This is of course assuming you aren't a fanboy, and are willing to use older technology, not make excuses for your work sucking (you will almost never see me blame any camera, even a Canon ;-) ), and buy used. With the plethora of used bodies, and with the amount of people that switch back and forth to the hot pro brand, you can often get killer used deals on older bodies and used lenses.

 

I've invested nothing in a separate system...here is the math.

 

1 Pentax 80-200 2.8 FA* would cost $1500+ (WOW)

 

1 Tokina 80-200 2.8 ATX-Pro would cost $800+ (still WOW for old glass)

 

1 Pentax MOUNT 300 2.8 would cost ~$3000 new or used, and good luck finding one used, heck good luck finding one in stock new

 

1 Pentax 300mm f/4 AF (any brand) good luck finding used or new, and forget HSM, as in the Sigma 100-300 f/4, a good lens, a fair price, impossible to find, and not being issued at this time in HSM/SDM

 

Now for Nikon:

 

1 D1h $350-500 or 1 D2H $500-850 (i shoot with a guy that earns a mortgage check from photography aka, he's a pro, and he still uses a D1X so so much for pros always upgrade to the newest stuff)

 

1 80-200 non AF-S/HSM pro quality f/2.8 (any brand inc nikon) $300-650 used

 

1 80-200 AF-S f2.8 used <$800, i even have my sights on one at $475 w/ bent filter ring

 

1 300mm f/4 less than $600 used (about $350 for the older D models)

 

 

 

Since I shoot with 2 bodies anyway, I now simply have a Nikon and Pentax body rather than 2 Pentax bodies. And both bodies play into there strong points.

 

Generally sports benefits from a faster frame rate and higher X sync. The D1H gives me faster frame rate (true 5fps) and unlimited X sync. Also, the D1H has a beefy AF motor in it, and while it's not AF-S fast, it can drive most screw drive lenses to the edge of being good enough.

 

Good example of use for this system over a Pentax K10D, 2-4 Vivitar 283/285 strobes, external power packs, and a set of Pocket Wizards or Sky ports and you can strobe just about any sports event in a gym or small arena shooting at low ISO and mid aperture (iso 320 and f/5.6 for instance). Realistically you can strobe a small college arena with this setup and get top notch results. Using external batteries and 1/2, 1/4th or 1/8th power you can even fire off a burst. Unfortunately 1/250th is pushing the limit of ambient light blur at brighter gyms (but still marginal for strobeless stop action), but 1/500th is just about perfect.

 

Now my Pentax system gives me all the wide stuff, plus, it's my travel system. When I travel, the 2.8 glass stays at home (well the longer stuff) and the slower zooms or compact primes come out. Pentax made some great f/4 (fixed aperture) zooms, still makes great primes, and the value of the K10D, IQ, and lens selection under 150mm is as much as I need.

 

To get all the K10D features in a Nikon I'd have to go D200, and even then I still fall short. No SR, and various other short comings. And yes, I do realize the D200 has areas where it is superior, unfortunately adding features I don't need (CLS for instance) doesn't make up for losing features I find useful.

 

Also, while I don't print really big with any of my sports shots, I do print my scenics and other genre stuff big. so the extra pixels work out well. The D1H can and will print fairly big shots but you don't have margin for error, and everything has to be right. But the smaller files are perfect for media print, and web use.

 

The SR on the K10D is priceless, but I don't use it in sports, nor do most people, so it's irrelevant to me on the D1H. Now that I've used it, I'd miss it on the K10D.

 

If I'm covering an event I have the Pentax with a wide angle, or medium tele (say 28-70 or 50-135 in the medium range on a DSLR), and the Nikon with a 200 or 300mm lens. Switching lenses is a pain during rapid shooting, much easier to have 2 bodies. And theoretically, without the battery grip, I could backup my system from catastrophic failure by putting a ist D in the setup with no lens attached. I used to carry an ist 35mm just for wide angle shots. If the K10D fails, I still can use all my Pentax glass.

 

In case no one has picked up Nikon, I actually used a N90 for some time in college when I borrowed a rig for lenses I didn't have. I've always found Nikon to be the most similar to Pentax in ergonomics and layout, and general design. The D1H isn't all that hard to switch from with the K10D, even the Nikon menus made sense to me. Only the AF button throws me off at this time, and since I shoot RAW, thats really I have to worry about. Actually it took me a long time to get used to the K10D AF button from the ist D so I think this will subside as an issue.

 

So really it's both smart economics and simply getting what I can't get, without cutting off my nose to spite my face. Giving up Pentax for Nikon all out is a lose lose for me, not being able to complete my system (that suits MY needs) is a lose lose. The compromise was work my way up the cast off DH series (D1h, D2h, D2Hs) as they drop in price and build a second system without replicating the first. I have no doubt I'll add a 28-70ish in the Nikon at some point but I don't expect to build a whole system from it. I plan on 80-300mm, maybe a 400mm or a 1.4x TC with a 300mm for daylight outdoor stuff, and a 28-70 for indoor sports like basketball and volleyball from the baselines/sidelines.

[ljt]

Because no one has yet made the perfect camera.

 

While I really like my K10D and Limited lenses, its metering is quite poor compared with my Fuji S5. And in low light the K10D's ability to focus doesn't match the Fuji.

 

My perfect SLR would be the K10D body squeezed down to the size of the K100D and with the Nikon D3's metering and autofocus system and the Fuji S5's dynamic range. For my kind of work, I need only three lenses (24 or 28, a 50, and a 75 with the 50 being used 80% of the time).

 

Even Elliott Erwitt has his work system (currently Canon bodies and lenses - used to be Nikon) and his hobby camera (Leica with a 50mm lens). Though apparently his eyesight is now failing and he relies entirely on his Canon's autofocus - this was from someone who worked as his assistant.

 

And then lots of photographers are gear-heads who love collecting cameras and lenses almost as much as, or maybe more than, taking photos and printing them.

[michael s.]

These are actually very good answers.

[trw]

I have multiple bodies and some really nice lenses from the Canon FD system. I had been

using a hybrid film/digital aproach (ie scanning my negs). I found in many situations I

wanted to not have to stop to load film, or needed faster turn-around, or lower per frame

cost, and wanted to use "strobist" techniques.<br /><br />

Thus I needed a digital with optical viewfinder, and from experience wanted a dSLR. Since

the FD lenses are not transferable to any digital system I was not tied to Canon. I looked at

all the systems on the market, and Pentax looked like the best way to get a pro body and a

few fast primes on a budget. I borrowed an istD from a someone at work for a few weeks

and decided I liked it.

[nick_bumgardner]

I too have several systems. I am a pj and for work I usually shoot my Canon 1DMKIII because of its 10fps and work allows me to borrow long fast lenses. My Nikon D70 tags along on assignment with me as a backup and for its better flash capabilities. The Nikon CLS is amazing. I also shoot a Mamiya M645 for portrait work and for landscapes. I also have a Olympus rangefinder for street photography. I could just use my Canon 1D for everything but their are times when I dont want to lug it around.

[mc2imaging]

Sometimes you just can't let go of an old friend. I have a friend that grew up using

Olympus SLRs. When he got a real job making real money taking real pictures, he found

great value in using the same system as his fellow co-workers. Most of the guys we were

working with were shooting N90's so he bought into the system too. We were in the

middle of a 4 week project and on the 2nd weekend he took a break to shoot a friend's

wedding and a 7 year old knocked over the tripod holding his N90. When we went back to

work on Monday, he was able to borrow another photog's N90 backup and keep working

like nothing happened while his body was shipped off for repair. We both agreed that

while the Nikon equip was a nice system, it was a bit over-hyped and overpriced on it's

own merit, but the situation he was in added value to his Nikon system.

 

While he could borrow just about anything he needed that he didn't already have for his

Nikon system, he would still whip out his old Oly from time to time...

[lightbox]

While I currently don't have multiple systems, I understand why some people do. No system has everything that everyone wants or needs, and each company definitely has its forte and weaknesses. So, while some people gravitate to one system, some people gravitate to a few different ones for different reasons. For example, on paper, Nikon and Canon look like all you would ever need, but neither of them make very solid and small SLR bodies. Pentax and Olympus do. I personally can't stand using the cheaper Canon bodies either - but that's just me.

 

Some people already have a system built up but need something the system doesn't offer. Most of the time, it's just easier to add another system than to try to switch.

 

Some people just like having a lot of gear and different gear works differently in different situations.

 

For me, it's really no big deal - I like buying stuff that works together, but if I really needed something in a different system, I'd buy it. However, that hasn't happened yet (so far), but I'm not shooting sports any longer either. :-)

 

The only thing that bugs me is that I think Pentax should be making some of the gear that is forcing people to use multiple systems. The only reason Justin has nikon gear is that there are no reasonably priced pentax lens equivalents on the market. He's not asking for a wildly strange piece of gear, or something that pentax couldn't/hasn't made. So, that's really the only frustrating part - pentax has made this stuff in the past and chose to discontinue it way before they should have. I still don't know why Simga/Tamron aren't stepping up to fill the voids either. Oh well. 2008 will be interesting. Hopefully I won't be in need of long, fast glass for a while longer. :-)

 

Oh, I should mention that it works the other way too. A lot of Canon/Nikon people are buying k100d bodies just to use the pentax limited primes. They're not making a switch - just adding on because no one else makes anything like them.

 

Just my 0.02

[mountainvisions]

Honestly, I'm not even terribly upset at Pentax, more at Sigma and Tamron for producing few Pentax lenses in FL's that we CANNOT get from Pentax.

 

Competition is great, but MOST Pentax lenses are slightly or greatly better than Sigma. Some are equal, and a few Sigmas are actually better both in value and quality. But instead of competing against Pentax current lineup why not reissue the 100-300 f/4 in HSM for K. Or the 70-200 HSM. Why not produce something odd like a 235mm 2.8 that gets a bit closer to the 300mm 2.8 without the price of a 300mm.

 

If it were just about bodies or just about lenses I'd probably have waited, but since my perfect body (flash and frame rate) are probably the K20D and the lenses seem at least 1-2 years away. I'm still 1-2 years from getting what I need, and I will take at least $3000 to add that.

 

Instant gratification is one thing, but 3 years is too long when you have specific need to fill, in a niche that isn't covered. There is decent money to made if you can take high quality indoor sports shots in places others can't. Those of you who have been to your kids high school gym know what I am talking about. Sometimes even a 50mm 1.4 at ISO 1600 doesn't get a well exposed shot, and at that DOF it's pretty hard to get a sharp action shot.

[JAPster]

Hi Sean...

 

A. Well, some of us are beginners who dont know any better! :^)

But we're learning all the time, as we experiment, and go

along.

 

B. And some of us are operating on a showstring budget, and

like to make a bargain purchase where-ever we find it. :^)

If we see a good deal in Salvation Army, we buy it, clean

it up, check it out, and use it. :^) We get pleasure and

satisfaction out redeeming the unwanted, and restoring it

to a functional place in the Universe!

 

C. Some of us think that its not the Arrow, its the Indian.

A very good photographer can take some awesome pictures with

even an ordinary camera, lenses, and equipment. To illustrate,

I saw a photography book in the bookstore a few weeks ago,

illustrated with great photographs people are taking, using

that rink-a-dink Holga plastic camera! (They even explained

how to correct its defects using (the equivalent of) duct

tape. But their pictures were really eye-catching, really great.

 

D. Finally, some of us like the idea of having more than

one camera in the artistic toolkit. We recognize that each

unit has its own set of form, features, functions, and physics.

Some are strong for some situations, but weak in others, and

we are wanting to be artistic in exploiting these dynamics.

And besides, we think it is FUN to use different models. Since

we are not operating in the upper-echelons of the photographic

spectrum, we do not insist everything be a Nikon, or adhere

mindlessly to a single brand. It may be quite unimaginable to

the "expert purist', but we simpletons are just as happy to be

using a Sigma, or a Samsung, or a Nikon, or an Olympus. Because

it is not the name on the front of the camera, as it is that

IMAGE, that picture, we want to capture, render, and express.

 

E. Finally, some of us are too cheap to throw away a good

camera once we have restored it to full functionality. You

could say we are cheap, or thrify, or rat-pack, or whatever! :)

But we like holding onto things. And we dont want to dish that

Olympus AF 35mm Compact vintage beauty, even though we were

dissappointed (after we cleaned it up), that it still wont

advance the film or release the shutter lock, and will

probably require a $100 repair, (but after we get a new job) :)

 

So, some people are just not systematizers, they would rather

just mix and match and experiement, and see what comes out of

the experimenting process... and that, we feel, is one of the

beauties of photography...

 

AP

[raul_naja]

While I respect canon and Nikon I've been a Pentax Loyalist For nearly

twenty years now. Collecting Cameras and gear is to expensive an endeavor for most normal people, so I try to get those Items that most benefit the type of shooting that I do. Now the good thing about investing in an expensive piece of photographic equipment is you never know when you'll actually need it. As is the case with most things in life better to be prepared and not need it than to desperately need it and not have it.<div></div>

[michael_kuhne]

I have known of Nikon and Canon shooters who liked the compact plus high-quality concept of the Pentax Limited series so much, they bought a Pentax compact model body specifically to use it with Limited lenses.

 

I have also known of Pentax shooters who purchased a mid-price Canon body to enjoy the benefits of telephoto lenses with IS- Image Stabilization.

 

In both cases, there was a special need to be met, and filled by another make.

[jonj]

A little over a year ago I switched to Nikon after having owned a istDL and K10. Why because I much as I wanted the pentax system to work for my wedding photography it was just not cutting it.

 

The Pentax system lends it's self more to landscape photography and not low light churches and receptions. I needed a fast telephoto but pentax only had a few that where out of my price range and dated technology. I was shooting with a 135mm f2.8 that was made 15 years ago.

 

The lens was great in it's day, but sluggish while focusing and the K10 just could deal with lowlight environments. When I saw that I could have a Nikon D80 with an 80-200mm f2.8 for around $2,000 I made the switch. I was also blown away by the Nikon SB 800 vs the Pentax 360.

 

I have no personal ties to any camera company nor to I think of myself as a Nikonian or Pentaxian. The camera is there to do a job and the camera company should meet the needs of their customers.

 

I see Pentax play on customers personal love of their camera despite their need for faster lenses (and don't cry the limited series either you know what I mean) and better flash systems.

 

I still have my K1000 and my istDL I sold the K10 the 135mm and the flash. The istDL is my wife's camera now which is great for her to learn on. The K1000 is going to stay it's what I learned photography on along with the 50mm f2.

 

Good luck to everyone and don't let the camera cause your work to suffer.

[mountainvisions]

Jonathan, what I find funny about that is the lab test show the D80 only 1 stop better in AF speed. That is, it gets equally as bad in low light as the K10D, but does so 1 stop later.

 

I guess your shots were at that 1 stop cutoff for you to see such an improvement.

 

As far as the flash system. The CLS is useless to me. If Pentax put the best FP CLS in their cameras I wouldn't find a use for it. Pocket Wizards with Vivitar 283/285 are the only way to go.

 

If you look at strobist, many people use Nikon and Canon products, yet don't use the CLS. Must be a reason why?

 

I'm not arguing with your reasons for switching, you had needs and you found solutions to them. What I am sort of debating is the fact that your post really differs from the thread topic because you don't use two systems, you switched systems. There is a big difference. I understand you kept a Pentax body or two, but not for your use. For your wifes.

 

And the SB-800 is a $400 flash I think. The 360 is a sub $200 flash most days of the week., I landed mine for $90 shipped, and it was used in great shape. Again, it's nice for fill, but I prefer wireless RF transmitters and hopefully for xmas I will be rid of FP flash and Ebay slaves forever. Skyports or Pocket Wizards for me!!!.

 

It's not about loyalty so much as value and features that I need.

 

And if I might qoute Gofrey, he sums up the things that make Pentax shooters a loyal bunch. Ergonomics and needed features, not fluff, specs, and full page adds showing all the lenses at a given event.

 

"I use whatever equipment I find that satisfies what I want in terms of ergonomics, lens quality, and its dynamics in use.

 

These are often quite elusive things to articulate meaningfully but they are quite real nonetheless."

 

If Nikon gave me everything the K10D gives me for $1000, I might just be compelled to switch, but unfortunately they don't. And the added fluff doesn't solve the issues but it tacks money onto the price.

[14mm 2.8l]

I've learned alot from Godfrey's posts. He is a real artist and great communicator. I recall a post months ago in another forum when Godfrey said if the D200 had been available before he bought a pentax dslr he would have skipped selling off his lifetime accumulation of Nikon lenses and instead bought a D200 like his brother did. I do worry why he buys and trys so many current Pentax lenses and sells them, thus keeping only a few.

 

I like my Samsung GX-1S pair. I have no complaints with Samsung K Mount digital slrs. My wife loves her Samsung GX-1S. I'd love to cash out of this system but that wouldn't make my wife happy. I am lucky in that I bought into Pentax a few years ago when I got her a ZX-L film body and we own items that are impossible to find now brand new. Theorectically I could be a another happy cheerlearder for pentax since I own older equiptment but as a company they let me down by promising on things they do not deliver. Blaming Tamron for not making PENTAX mount lenses makes no sense to me. Pentax used to have a "SYSTEM" now we hang on promises of a Pentax "System". So instead blame tamron as they don't make a vast array of lenses for Pentax mount.

 

Usually I find happy pentax owners have equiptment they bought before pentax began their 3 year production plant move to VietNam: 2004-2007. You know VietNam was so far from Japan we're lucky it didn't take 5 years...

 

I cop an attitude because PENTAX Corp promises product and misses deadlines. The wife and I have a decent kit, but silly me, I want more whether "I Need It" or Not. Nikon, Canon, Sony owners have a catalogue of product and not promises like:

 

200mm f2.8 SDM, 300mm f4 SDM and 60-250mm f4 SDM "due out September 2007".

 

I could care less about medium format but Pentax has really hung the 645'rs out in the cold. Maybe this is what the "Big" announcement on 1-24-08 will cover? Get it? "Big Announcement"

 

I look foward to the 1-24-08 announcement. In the meantime I also look foward to the Eos40D shedding issue price by 25% or the Eos full frame 5D getting to $2,000: 10% more ;^)

 

I cannot use all our pentax lenses on Eos 5D without clipping off their aperture levers but pentax aperture ring glass can be used on 40D, 30D, 20D, no problems. Canon hit a homerun with the 40D and its far more than a warmed over 20D and 30D. Being 10mp versus 12 mp makes me more hopeful it it shed issue price quickly as $1,299 is simply too much for it. I already bought a half dozen high quality brass PK to Eos adapters out of China. Heck of a deal for $10 a pop. I've got my escape route planned. We do a major phototrip once or twice a summer. So I've got a few months to watch to market settle. Those who bought K10D at issue and SDMs could learn from this fact, unless full retail cash outlays are not an issue for your pocketbook.

 

By the way, a limited 77mm 1.8 sells for $600 and Eos 85mm 1.8 sells brand new for 1/2 that. A used Pentax 80-200 2.8 goes for $2,000. A brand new 70-200mm 2.8 Image Stablized L series lens $1,600 brand new and full frame too. Inspite of comments otherwise lens based IS does spec better than body based AntiShake. But as crazy as it may seem I hand hold my shots, and for the most part I don't get ever get blurry pics. Years of Technique for me and my wife simply enjoying herself gets the same results. And we own tripods which is the tool photographers used up until 10 years ago when Canon launched IS glass. As time passed Nikon offered VR in response to canon IS and Minolta offered the first antishake body which pentax then improved upon like 3 years ago. Sony just launched the 3rd version of antishake, so they are one generation ahead of Pentax and in control of their own sensor making facilities, which is like Canon and possibly Nikon now concerning their full frame D3. Nikon's full frame cmos maker has not been leaked but Sony as its maker has been denied.

 

My attitude with pentax started when I couldn't get a paid for Pentax DS2 that I later I found out it was a Pentax USA website only item. I got my money back but it was good to find out the DS2 sold elsewhere in USA were grey market. So February 2008 is year FOUR since Pentax production stalled for their move to Viet-Nam and their long drawn out dance with Hoya has since been the norm. Isn't 3-31-08 the 3rd date to seal this merge/takeover, whatever. Will this merge occur 3-31-08 and thus suddenly pentax will be able to offer a "SYSTEM" or just more promises?

 

I love photography, but I don't like being mislead to keep me in their "system" and be expected to cheerlead for each baby step they take.

 

Lindy

[mountainvisions]

Please let us know when you leave Pentax...your deadlines have come and gone over and over, yet you still post about how much you hate Pentax.

 

Must be a slow time on the FD board.

[jonj]

Justin,

 

I don't know if my K10 was faulty but it had fits trying to lock on in low light. I responded to the post because for a while I used a D80 with the K10 as backup. I know the K10 very well and it's a top notch body less the front focusing/back focusing issues I discovered.

 

I feel certain that the money I spend on Nikon lenses is a wise investment rather than buying Pentax branded Tokina glass. Also you have to wonder why the price of the K10 is so low?

[godfrey]

<center>

<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/large/48b.jpg"><br>

Reeds - Baylands 2007<br>

<i>©2007 by Godfrey DiGiorgi<br>

Panasonic L1 + Olympus ZD 50-200/2.8-3.5<br>

ISO 100 @ f/3.5 @ 1/250 sec, M </i><br>

</center><br>

Thank you for the compliment, Lindy. <br>

<br>

<i>> I do worry why he buys and trys so many current Pentax lenses and<br>

> sells them, thus keeping only a few.</i><br>

<br>

Nothing to worry about. My "lifetime accumulation of Nikon lenses", having worked with

Nikon gear for 32 years, at the end when I sold them was eight lenses (20, 35, 50, 85,

105, 135, and 70-300). Over that time, I'd probably bought and sold forty different

lenses. My current Pentax lens kit is eight lenses of the twenty-five or so that I've owned.

<br>

<br>

It's not so very different: I'm particular both about the lenses' performance and about what

I want to keep. I only keep what I know I'll use. <br>

<br>

I don't see much point to having an attitude about a brand. Either they have what you want

or they don't. If they don't, someone else likely does unless your desires are unreasonable.

<br>

<br>

I like to concern myself more with the photography... ;-) <br>

<br>

Godfrey<br>

[14mm 2.8l]

Wow Godfrey, Thats impressive that in a just few years you've owned 25 different pentax made lenses. Which ones have you settled on now?

 

Lindy

[godfrey]

Lindy,

 

I owned of those Nikkor lenses during a two year period in the early 1980s when I had some money and was exploring

what I would actually use. Prior to that, I had very little money to buy good lenses with and used two or three for

everything, whether suited or not.

 

With the Pentax, I bought a bunch of older manual focus Pentax lenses when I first got into Pentax system at the end of

2004... that accounts for about 15 of the Pentax lenses I've owned. They were inexpensive and gave me a feel for what I

wanted to use. I sold all of them as I replaced the ones I wanted with current models.

 

My essential lenses at present are the DA14, DA21 Limited, FA43 Limited, A50 Macro, and DA70 Limited after much use

and whittling down my kit to just what works best for me. I also have the DA10-17FE, DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 on hand

that I'm using/evaluating.

 

Godfrey

[lightbox]

Godfrey - not to hijack the thread, but do you find the quick-shift feature on the DA lenses useful? I've been playing with the idea of picking up a 40 or 43, and price difference aside, this is the main dilemma for me - I want a fast-ish lens with QS. I know you chose the FA43, but do you miss QS on the lens?

[godfrey]

Nathan - Yes, I do miss QS on the FA43. It's the one lens I compromised on that because,

well, I just find the DA40 too thin and small for my liking. And the FA43 is such a good lens..

 

I flip to Manual Focus fairly often anyway, but QuickShift is quite helpful to me, particularly

with the DA70 and DA*50-135.

 

Godfrey

[dogbert]

In the ened camera's are just tools and different systems have different pros and cons.

 

I used to be a Pentax owner but gave up on them in 1999 due to their AF and metering being a decade behind that of Canon's entry level EOS 300, which at the time could be had for $300.

 

This was pretty agaonising at the time but its seems Pentax has given its loyal customer base another decade of grief since.

 

The shere avalaibaility of Canon's range, and it competitive prices on lenses keep me there. Though I have a few gripes with them, they deliver the goods and are mostly in front if not too far behind the comeptition on specific features.

 

Lately I have picked up quite a few old Pentax K and M lenses and use them via adapter on EOS digital bodies. I then picked up a Pentax MZ-3 to used the same lenses with film.

 

At some stage I may get a Pentax digital body so as to get the benefits of IS with my set of Pentax lenses. But as I am heavily invested in Canon and with Pentax failing to deliver the goods as far as lenses are concerned over the last few years, I would never switch back to them completely.