Paul, I've managed with my A300/4 and the DA60-250. I'd like the 500/4 for birding. The A300 plus the AF1.7X comes close, but the image quality could be better. I see the guys like Ken Waller running around with big glass on Wembly head and I'm jealous. Regards, Bob S.
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Paul Stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> wrote: > > On Apr 19, 2012, at 4:11 PM, Bob Sullivan wrote: > >> Tom, >> I have to say that I'm beginning to feel like you. >> I've faithfully upgraded my way thru Pentax cameras to the K-5. (DS, >> K-10, K-20, K-7, K-5) >> Now I'm beginning to wonder where/when I'll be able to buy long & fast >> AF glass for Pentax. > > I believe Pentax has a 500/4 on the lens timeline that will be available next > year. There's also a 300 and a 200, and of course the 60-250. No real > shortage of lenses IMO. > > >> The only option is to go Canon/Nikon. >> So I am beginning to lose the faith… > > What do you want to shoot that you can't shoot with your K-5? > >> Regards, Bob S. >> >> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Tom C <caka...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> From: Darren Addy <pixelsmi...@gmail.com> >>>> >>>> I'm certainly a value/bang-for the buck kind of guy. I'm terribly late >>>> to the K-5 party, but I'm hoping to snag one soon. I believe that it >>>> is *still* near the top of the heap (if not at the top) of the best >>>> APS-C cameras available today. I'm pretty pleased with the 20x30 >>>> prints I've seen from APS-C cameras and frankly, I don't think there >>>> are many images that I'm going larger than that with. I think it >>>> provides a lot of bang-for-the-buck particularly if one can buy one >>>> around $900 (body). I also think it is sort of amazing that I can get >>>> *still* probably within $75 for what I paid for my K-x (which I >>>> purchases as a low-mileage used kit) - which will help pay for the >>>> upgrade. That's value too. >>>> >>>> Comparing that to the Nikon 800/E (which is 3x the price of the K-5) >>>> is sort of like comparing a $25,000 Prius with a $75,000 Mercedes Benz >>>> CLS. They aren't really targeting the same demographic. If your >>>> discretionary income let's you afford some of the finer things in >>>> life, more power to you. A lot of people are going to have a harder >>>> time justifying an additional $2000 for a camera body, particularly if >>>> it also means they start from Square One on lenses and other >>>> accessories. (Frankly, a lot of the 800/E specs seem aimed more at >>>> videography than still.) If *Pentax* released a full frame camera with >>>> the 800's specs of only 4 FPS and top (real) ISO of 6400, you could >>>> hear the PentaxForums screams in Nebraska. >>>> >>>> I don't think the fact that there are far more expensive cars out >>>> there changes the bang-for-the-buck with the Prius and I'd say the >>>> same for the K-5. Should Pentax announce a full frame camera (I'm last >>>> of the true believers) particularly for in the neighborhood of $2700 >>>> that can take advantage of all your K-mount stuff, I'd think that >>>> would have to give one looking for another step-up pause. >>> >>> Well, I'm not saying the K-5 doesn't deliver bang for the buck even >>> now. For me it's just a bit late in it's life cycle. I bought late >>> into the K20D and late into the K-7 (had I waited a few more months >>> I'd have had a K-5). So I'm determined not to do that again. >>> >>> I appreciate the accuracy of your arithmetic. $1000 vs. $3000 and >>> $25,000 vs. $75000 are both factors of 3. :-) >>> >>> There's a $2000 difference in the first case and a $50000 difference >>> in the second. While being equivalent in magnitude, in real $ there's >>> a huge difference. >>> >>> BTW, I'm not being argumentative, just blabbering. >>> >>> Let's start from the premise that most people wouldn't spend $3000 on >>> a camera. I agree. In fact I can't justify it for myself (so I've >>> compartmentalized that and hidden it away so I don't feel unduly >>> guilty). The 645D is a $10,000 camera so even less people would >>> purchase that. >>> >>> The 645D is a 40MP camera. The D800/E is a 36MP camera. Cost per MP >>> calculation: >>> >>> 645D is $250/MP >>> 800E is $92/MP >>> (K-5 is $62.50/MP if priced at $1000) >>> >>> In those terms, the 800E is delivering a lot of bang for the buck and >>> there's a full compliment of AF lenses available. >>> >>> The D800E has 90% of the resolution of a 645D yet the cost is only 1/3 >>> that of a 645D. The K-5 has about 48.5% the resolution of the D800E >>> and the cost is slightly less than 1/3 that of a D800E. Both the D800E >>> and K-5 offer significant bang for the buck. >>> >>> I agree with your rationale on the K-5, It's why I continued to buy >>> Pentax after Pentax, K-mount after K-mount. On the other hand many >>> people will find themselves scrounging for, or purchasing new FF >>> lenses in K-mount, were Pentax to come out with a FF body. Using only >>> legacy non-AF lenses or APS-C lenses on such a body would negate many >>> of the potential benefits. >>> >>> For me though, I think the time has come where I ask 'do I keep on >>> spending money on Pentax?'. >>> >>> I think the 645D, the Q, and the K-01 are all further signs of a >>> company that's out of touch with reality (I don't deny the same for >>> myself sometimes). The fact that they don't have their DSLR's in >>> mass-market brick and mortar retail outlets is another sign. Have they >>> just awoken to the fact it may be a good idea? >>> >>> Looked at another way, if I'd not bought a K20D (or K-7), had not >>> bought about $2500 of K-mount lenses in the past 4 years, I could >>> easily have paid for a D800E. >>> >>> Tom C. >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
