If I will go for Pentax, what's the point?

[chanchai_a.]

I mean if I don't have any system's gear what is the point if I choose to go for

Pentax 35mm or DSLR system? If you said Pentax is a better system to go,

what is the reason..

 

((I like the light weight and compact size of its first DSLR, but I can't see any

visible advantage of the system to take in consideration....Lens quality?

Accessories? Reliability? or something I don't know..))

 

Thanks

[Jochen_S]

Used lenses are cheaper. Tokina ATX 35-70mm f=2.8 for example: I got one with k-mount for 70 Euro. The Nikon-guy who made the deal for me told me with a AI-mount he 'd have to bleed twice as much.

Used bodys are cheaper. I got a MX with winder for 70 Euro; what might a FM cost?

I'll get the *istD, cause I have the rest of the system. Others without studio strobes and lenses I'd talk into a digital rebell.

[jamiew]

Unless you really realy need the small size of the camera, or have an extensive set of AUTO FOCUS Pentax lenses I would suggest you pass on the *istD. Here is a somewhat diased review against the *istD from a former Pentax user:

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax-istd.shtml

[andrew robertson]

Most used Pentax lenses can't be used in any convenient way on the Incompatibleist D

(the star is supposed to be a wildcard, right?). You can mount 'em and use stop down

metering, but that's a pain.

 

I think Pentax shot themselves in the balls with their lens mount. They're almost as

confusingly incompatible as Nikon.

 

If you are investing in a new Pentax system, the 67 is awesome. Expensive to shoot,

though.

[stemked]

I think a question one might ask is, why Pentax and not someone else. Here are somethings that I feel make Pentax 35mm special (I can't comment on the digital)

 

1) Compatability- No company, NO COMPANY, matches Pentax's backwards compatability on their equipment. If you have a MZ-S, ZX/MZ-3/5/5N/6/10, PZ-anything you can pull out a stunning 40 year old screw mount lens and get Aperture AND manual exposure. And then there are all those lenses in between. With Nikon you have to saw-off a peg and will only get manual. Then there is compatability with 67 and 645 systems; don't laugh I use them. The *ist ZX/MZ-30/50/60 do not entirely live up to this philosophy, but it still puts Pentax ahead.

 

2)Price-Yes Pentax's Pro glass is sometimes more expensive than N/C/M. But on the mid-level to low glass Pentax is almost always less expensive.

 

3)Camera quality in low priced cameras. I've seen just about every makers low priced cameras (I used to teach an intro camera class). In the sub $350 range Pentax cameras are just plain better built than other makers.

 

4)Gear size-It's generally smaller (save the Pro gear)

 

5) The special lenses-Nobody makes a 17-28 fisheye save Pentax. No one has a 200mm macro that matches Pentax's. The 20-35mm is ahead of the competition. A 1.7X TC that turns manual lenses into autofocus. And then there is the 85 f1.4 (A and FA) and limited lenses (31, 43, 77). the 600 f4 F and FA are at the top of their class, less expensive by ($1000), focus closer, you get the idea.

 

6) The LX. I could write a novel about this camera. A true jewel.

 

7) Snap focus-Pentax shares this property with Nikon autofocus bodies. But is really neat to use.

 

8) Hyperfocus- PZ-1(p)

 

9) Accessories (don't laugh)- Pentax made more bizzar accessories and because of their backward compatability there are more than Canon EOS or Minolta MD or Maximum. For example let's say you really want super macro with a reversed lens. How to light? Ringflash (Pentax makes two). But the lens is reversed! No problem, Pentax makes an adaptor for that too.

 

There are other strengths too, but my lunch break is almost over. There are, of course, weak points in the Pentax lineup, no one would argue that. But all in all, Pentax holds its own.

[stephen hazelton]

If you don't see a point in buying Pentax, then don't buy Pentax. Is it that complicated? Obviously, someone is buying all those Nikons and Canons and whatever else there is out there.

[ron c sunshine coast,qld,a]

Only favour the D *ist if you have some great pentax lenses you can use on it.Otherwise judge all contenders on their normal merits

[keith_merrill]

I was just checking B&H because I am thinking of buying some sort of digital slr and the price for the *istD is 1349.00. 200.00 less than the canon D10. I was surprised at this because everywhere you read (luminous landscape for instance) says the *istD is more expensive.

[james_oneill]

Keith. I would ignore the luminous landscape review. I don't know what the guy's agenda is. As he says himself "<i>Since</I> [the review's]<I> publication a number of *ist D owners have written and also posted their ire on various Net discussion boards, calling me "infantile", accusing me of being a shill for Canon, or calling into question my credentials. So be it. This kind of flack comes with the territory, and after some decades as a photographic educator and product reviewer I've developed a thick skin.</i>". On in plain English, Lots of people think I'm wrong but I've been doing it for years, so screw the lot of you. <p>

He ignores the fact that the Pentax is actually cheaper than everything except the Cannon 300D and the Sigma SD9 and 10. <br>It's better made than the 300D and smaller and lighter than ANYTHING else on the market (which matters if you're going to have it round your neck. <br>

He complains about the handling, but most people who have used the camera think that is the area where it stands head and shoulders above others. <br>

He likes the tethered rubber caps - I don't think the tethers are robust enough<br>

He doesn't like setting the ISO/Quality/Colour from the mode dial - actaully this works MUCH better than going into a menu (and less risk of leaving the camera in a shooting disabled state like ... I think it's Fuji). You don't even have to move your right hand from it's normal grip to do it, it's turn dial, click to set, turn dial back again. Nikon, Kodak and Fuji like the idea, but he calls it a <i>"human factor design faux pas"</i> Of course, everyone's wrong but him.<br>

His whining about the batteries - I don't know how he only got 30 shots out of the Alkaline ones that Pentax tell you not to use - the expectation would be 100-150. I get 500+ from a charge on NiMH. "No advantage of a proprietry battery" he says ... appart that is from the low cost of NiMHs, and the ability to press ordinary AAs into service in an emergency. <br>

"Wa wa wa I can't get the CF card out". It's a minor fiddle, and some subborn cards need a tape "tail" attached to help removal. <br>

The software is a festering heap of dingo's kidneys, and he lets them off the hook on that.<p>

In short it's a review which tells you more about the reviewer than the camera. When I read someone's defence in the face of critism is that they have "some decades as a photographic educator", I think first of "those who can, do. Those who can't, teach", and see it as a confesion that they need to retire. <br>

You can see my view of this camera in <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=006ntg"> Another thread</a>