Turntable, (vinyl recording media, used to be called records).
Steve Desjardins wrote:
I agree, at least in context (what's a Garrard?) In the digital world,
it does not appear that Nikon can really keep up with Canon on the high
end. I do like the D70 much more than the D-Reb, however.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/21/04 02:35AM >>>
If I was going to switch brands... and I'm not... still contemplating a
67II, it would be to Canon... call it intuition... I have the general,
unresearched, unstudied, undocumented, unverified sense that Nikon is
very
slowly becoming the Garrard of cameras... or maybe Pentax has...
Tom C.
From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: why I haven't switched to canon
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 08:27:13 +0200
I forgot to say:
You may be right about older, used Pentax lenses being quite pricy.
But
it's
also true, that Pentax lenses somtimes are above a state of the art
lens,
meaning that some Pentax lenses are in fact unmatched / perform better
than
coresponding lenses from Leica, Zeiss, Nikon or Canon.
All the best
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: Jens Bladt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 21. juli 2004 08:15
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: RE: why I haven't switched to canon
Edwin. IMO a 6MP DSLR featureing:
. 11-area AF
. TTL Phase matching AF system
. Focus point selectable
. EV 0 to 19 (ISO 100) detection range Focus modes
. AF-Single
. AF-Continuous
. Manual focus AF assist via flash Shooting modes
. Auto-exposure with hyper-program
. Programmed AE Mode
. Shutter-Priority AE
. Aperture-Priority AE
. Metered Manual
. Bulb
Program lines
. Normal
. Hi-S
. Depth of field
. MTF
Metering modes
. 16-segment
. Center-Weighted Average
. Spot
Metering range
. EV 0 to 21 (at ISO 200 with 50 mm / F1.4 lens) AE Lock
. Button (20 sec timer)
. Half-press shutter release
AE Bracketing
. 3 frames
. 0.3, 0.5 or 1.0 EV steps
Exposure compen.
. -3.0 to +3.0 EV in 0.5 EV steps
. -2.0 to +2.0 EV in 0.3 EV steps
Exposure steps . 0.5 EV
. 0.3 EV
Sensitivity
. ISO 200
. ISO 400
. ISO 800
. ISO 1600
. ISO 3200
is a state of the art camera.
In 1980 LX was that. In 1983 the Super A was that. In 1992 PZ-1 was
that.
In
2001 MZ-S was that too.
All the best
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 21. juli 2004 06:01
Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Emne: Re: why I haven't switched to canon
OK, I'm gonna play devil's advocate with Jens' post here. Obviously,
I'm
not anti-Pentax, since I own a hell of a lot of Pentax stuff. I'm
not
pro-Canon either.
People should know by now that my other system is not Canon but
Nikon.
I'll buy Canon gear under only two conditions:
1) my employer hands me a Canon DSLR instead of a Nikon one
2) Canon produces a better-looking and/or better-working cheap DSLR
that takes M42-mount lenses than Pentax (Nikon's not an option
here)
My answer is simple. I don't want to. For many reasons.
Pentax make brilliant user interfaces.
My experience with Canon (all second hand) is that they are very good
at
the top of the line, and very competitive at the bottom, but weak in
the
middle. Pentax is arguably a better advanced amateur system both in
cameras and lenses. Pentax is more "traditional" in some desirable
ways.
In general, I'd agree that Pentax UI is good. Some of that is that
they
stayed with the classic UI better than many. Give me a shutter speed
dial and an aperture ring and I can run almost any camera.
Good backwards compatibility (could be even better) - excellent old
lenses
may cost less than a new consumer lens.
Backwards compatability IS a strong suit. With an M42-K adapter you
can
use lenses from as far back as 1957, which is as good as any brand
gets
(although Nikon F-mount is close). Alas, NOBODY has kept complete
backwards compatability. Both Nikon and Pentax have modern cameras
which
won't talk to older lenses (although they will mount, and work).
K-mount lenses are very easy to get, and not expensive. (I have a
nice
M*300mm, that cost me 700 USD. A new 300mm Pentax pro lens would
drain
my
budget by 12000 USD (list price). But I still have both options.
I find that good Pentax equipment is harder to find on the used
market
than Nikon or Canon, and often more expensive. Many of the legendary
K and A lenses are almost impossible to find. Granted, for basic "M"
primes and zooms there are plenty to be had cheaply. I'm still
looking
for an M20/4 and a K105/2.8 whereas I find Nikon 20/3.5 and 105/2.5s
everywhere I turn.
Pentax cameras are very reliable. When ever one of mine broke, it
was my
own
fault (with only one exception in 23 years).
This depends on what camera and how you use it, I suspect. I switched
to
Nikon because I decided that pentax cameras were NOT reliable or easy
to
get fixed given what I was using and how--I've had an MX, a K2, an
SF-1,
and 2 super programs fail on me and been told that they were
irreparable,
plus my ME supers were always in the shop for some fault or other.
I'm now using different Pentax cameras and using them differently,
and
have not had problems.
I have a huge number of lenses available. A 20 year old 100 USD
Pentax
lens
can produce perfectly sharp photographs used with a state of the
art
digital
body. Are Canon offering this?
A state of the art digital body? Yes. Is Pentax?
(yes, I know this isn't quite what you meant...)
From what I've heard, some folks would argue that the *istD does not
produce "perfectly sharp photographs" with many lenses.
Canon has the largest array of lenses in current production, many of
which
are inexpensive. I suspect you can fit pre-AF canon lenses to an EOS
with
an adapter, although it's certainly not the last word in convenience.
Canon also offers a lot of lens options Pentax doesn't and never did,
especially at the high end.
DJE
