Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
In a message dated 20/03/03 04:36:58 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I got the greatest MF camera ever, the T90 because of the descriptions I read in the old Modern Photography. The feature that I liked the best in the T90 was the AA battery power it uses. Had to have the shutter replaced recently. Expensive, but now I have a great camera again. Still a Pentax fan, however. Probably will never get the *ist D. Now if only Pentax would copy the Canon Powershot Pro 90 IS. Jim A. From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 15:47:45 -0600 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (2) Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Resent-Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 16:59:21 -0500 - Original Message - From: Andre Langevin Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (2) I recall the FD lens mount users gave a great big shit about it when the EOS system came out, Bruce. As a matter of fact, they were extremely pissed that they, and their equipment was being orphaned. I recall also, Canon had a pretty classy camera out at the time, was it the F1? They were trying to be pro when they orphaned the mount. The T-90... Still one of the greatest MF camera ever. Like the LX with its mirror syndrome, it has its classic bug that shows with an EEE (error) message and ask for magnet cleaning or a shutter rebuild. Just by the way... Actually, the T90 was the template for the EOS system, stylewise, but the F1 was the premier Canon body of the day. William Robb Good men after my own heart. F1s worked in the rain, T90s didn't. The reason I changed to Canon - spotmetering gave a lower failure rate and fast teles were available to hire. Plus I started work for a sports agency who used Canon so it just made sense. If Pentax had pulled out an equivalent back then to the F1 it might have been a more considered move, I suppose. Kind regards Peter
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
HI! FK For the life of me Boz I cannot see any reason for you to leave the PDML, I FK for one would never ask you too just because you using canon gear, and I FK don't think anyone else here would either. FK Feroze FK Boz wrote FK and I must say good-bye to this group. It's like being forced to abandon FK your domicile... I'd second that opinion, or is it like n+1 here. Indeed, especially if Boz is going to keep KMP alive... --- Boris Liberman www.geocities.com/dunno57 www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=38625
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FK For the life of me Boz I cannot see any reason for you to leave the PDML, I FK for one would never ask you too just because you using canon gear, and I FK don't think anyone else here would either. FK Feroze FK Boz wrote FK and I must say good-bye to this group. It's like being forced to abandon FK your domicile... I'd second that opinion, or is it like n+1 here. Indeed, especially if Boz is going to keep KMP alive... And if he's not going to keep it alive I hope he gives someone the opportunity to mirror it. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Hi Bojidar, on 18 Mar 03 you wrote in pentax.list: thank you very much for the nice answers to my previous mail! It is a really special feeling to know that I have done something worthwhile, We have to thank you - the KMP is a real bible for all Pentax users. I'm really sorry, that your focus leaves Pentax. So, the main factors are: ... I can understand you reasons. If you want state-of-the-art, then there's no other way than Canon. Canon is technology driven and technological leader. Even Nikon can't compete with Canon's development. And Canon is developping really aggressive - take the 10D: they build it in a new, full automatic facility. - Canon has a more complete AF system I think, that the new Pentax AF on the *ist/*istD is very competitive. change their mount any time soon (Pentax is moving towards a mount change [at least simplification]. The *ist does NOT work properly with K and M lenses, and it is NOT an entry-level camera --- it has the best AF system of ANY Pentax camera!) I don't think, that the crippled KAF-mount of the *ist is something that shows us the future of Pentax. We had such a crippled mount on the MZ-30, 50 and 60 but that was it. For me the *ist is a great camera but it is the *ist-entry-level. Take the *ist D with a fully compatible KAF2-mount (without Powerzoom) and work it out to an analog camera - that might be the flagship in fall. But I agree with you, that theese developments are slow and it is a really poor marketing of Pentax to leave us in uncertainty about the future (KAF3? USM? IS?). Now, where is Pentax? I feel that they have slowly but surely abandoned the market segment in which I am -- serious amateur. If we ignore the ... They seem to be concentrating in the segment of *ist and below. I have nothing against that, but I wish Pentax would ... In the end, it is all very simple. I feel that very few serious amateurs and professionals use Pentax gear, and therefore the few serious Pentax items do not sell very well. This then leads to Pentax not investing very much in development of such items, and more serious amateurs and professionals switch to other brands. I think there are many satisfied serious amateurs on this list. But not all amateurs a equal: I think Pentax serves the niche of amatuers, that prefer a more classic style of photography and user interface and are satisfied with a certain amount of technology. The MZ-5n and the MZ- S are the best examples for this. But it IS a niche of serious amateurs: Pentax wouldn't build the Limited lenses for consumers. If I could choose if Pentax should build Limited lenses or USM lenses, then I would prefer the Limiteds. Otherwise they wouldn't offer something that is outstanding. Or in other words: Otherwise I could choose Canon. Pentax recognizes and serves the consumer market as all other manufacturers. Because this is the market where they earn the real money to pay vor developping the real toys for us. With the *ist they will have good chances to earn more money there. And I'm quite sure that they will never drop the higher level products as those are necessary to hold up the company's image and sell in the consumer market. It's a vicious circle, and I am the real loser. No, you aren't. You have simply recognized, that the Pentax way is not the right for you. There are many more segments in the group of serious amatuers: one is that of the purists, maybe using Leica. Another that of the MF users. Or that of the technology driven users - that's for sure the Canon way. I wish you good luck and hope, that you will keep an eye on Pentax's development and certainly on your great KMP. Maybe you can share your Canon experiences form time to time with us. Alles Gute, Heiko
Thanks Boz was: Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
--- Bojidar Dimitrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, [snip] Now, where is Pentax? I feel that they have slowly but surely abandoned the market segment in which I am -- serious amateur. If we ignore the brilliant FA* 200-600/5.6, they don't have much for sports or wild-life professionals either. They seem to be concentrating in the segment of *ist and below. I have nothing against that, but I wish Pentax would come out and say if my assumption is correct, or they are simply lacking the money/people/resources to develop things faster. [snip] Cheers, Boz ___ Though I came to the PDML just recently, your own page has been an archive and working Encyclopedia at the same time. Wandering about trying to find your page, I discovered that PENTAX, like Kodak, has so many corporate irons in the scientific-space-medical fields, that Pentax pro or serious amateur cameras are just a sideline. PENTAX dominates in so many other imaging fields that mere photography is not enough of their corporate income structure to actually CARE about the needs of individuals like you and me or any latent pros who might want to shoot the Pentax brand. It would not surprise me at all if Pentax abandoned the SLR camera field entirely, including medium format. They do quite well with PSs and that is where they will probably draw the line. I too wish that you continue to monitor your page. While your page may have been a pure labor of love, I can sense that you might want to do for Canon what you've done for Pentax. That is, become the Canon archivist-historian-keeper of the flame. Sure there are plenty of Canon related pages out there, but few of them are as comprehensive, as incisive as your own Pentax page. Thanks Boz, Ed PS: No matter what else anybody thinks, I consider my Pentax PZ-1p and WR-90 PS my /most valuable/ Pentax bodies. = I get it done with YAHOO! DSL!
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Hi Boz, I am very unhappy that it were my K400/f5.6 and my M42/K500/f4.5 that made you turn away from Pentax. It is true that these wonderful all manual lenses need a lot of practice to get good results, however it is not only possible to get good results, you also would have gotten such results with just that: practice. Still I agree that especially with long telephotos auto-focus is very very helpful. I much prefer the F*300/f4.5 over the A/M*300/f4 for this reason (and for its better minimum focusing distance). However, it is not fair to compare an all automatic Canon EF400/f5.6 with an all manual K400/5.6. The answers that you get depend on the questions that you ask. I guess the FA*400/f5.6 would be a similar joy to use as is the EF400/f5.6, and the results would be more or less indistinguishable. OK, so now the FA*400/f5.6 is too expensive new (1600 Euros), and it is very hard to find used. I guess Pentax need not care much for customers that rarely buy their gear new, however, you could have gotten a used Sigma AF 400/f5.6 or a Tokina AF400/f5.6 in k-mount for about one third of what you paid for the used Canon, and you could have gotten a NEW Sigma 5,6/400 APO MACRO for less than what you paid for the used Canon EF400/f5.6, and I think the quality of this particular Sigma lens is quite good, too. You would still have switched away from Pentax but you would have stayed with the k-mount, and you would have been able to put that lens on your LX as well as on your Super A as well as on your MZ5-N. After all, two SLR systems (one AF and one manual focus) togehter are very hard to carry at one time. About the Pentax future I am much more optimistic than you are, and lately Pentax has given us reason for such optimism. Of course Pentax will never be good as Canon in being like Canon, and if you are fascinated by Canon's very own strengths then go for them. However, Canon will never be as good as Pentax in being like Pentax, either. See my email of yesterday for why I stick with Pentax.. Arnold
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Hi Boz, I believe I'm one of those close to your point of view. Pentax is good enough for what I do now, yet when trying to take on more specialized genres of photography I always look either to old lenses or to third parties. Pentax 35mm became a highly polarized system, and it's rarefied core leaves little to no options to advanced amateurs. However I couldn't bring myself to make the switch, at least not in the film realm. I still expect Pentax to pull themselves together and rebuild a coherent system. Should I see the sign, I will continue to support Pentax. If all they do is cutting corners and crippling mounts to grab first time SLR buyers, then I might just keep the current film setup - as you do with LX - and buy into another digital 35mm system. Anyway, I do hope you'll drop in pdml from time to time. You've done a terrific job with the KMP, and it'll be a pity to see it turning into the K mount museum. Servus,Alin Bojidar wrote: BD Now, where is Pentax? I feel that they have slowly but surely abandoned BD the market segment in which I am -- serious amateur. If we ignore the BD brilliant FA* 200-600/5.6, they don't have much for sports or wild-life BD professionals either. They seem to be concentrating in the segment of BD *ist and below. I have nothing against that, but I wish Pentax would BD come out and say if my assumption is correct, or they are simply lacking BD the money/people/resources to develop things faster. BD In the end, it is all very simple. I feel that very few serious BD amateurs and professionals use Pentax gear, and therefore the few BD serious Pentax items do not sell very well. This then leads to Pentax BD not investing very much in development of such items, and more serious BD amateurs and professionals switch to other brands. It's a vicious BD circle, and I am the real loser. BD So I switched... But like I said, I'll keep an LX, FE-1, two bright BD screens, a 17/4 fish, A20/2.8, A24/2.8, K30/2.8, A50/1.7, and A100/2.8 BD Macro. Sad as it may be, soon after my current eBay auctions are over, BD I will also sell the superA, MZ-5n, battery pack Fg, M24-35/3.5 and FA BD 24-90/3.5-4.5. BD Once again, thanks for all your positive remarks and nice comments to my BD previous mail. BD Cheers, BD Boz
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Bojidar Dimitrov wrote: For me the *ist is a great camera but it is the *ist-entry-level. Take the *ist D with a fully compatible KAF2-mount (without Powerzoom) and work it out to an analog camera - that might be the flagship in fall. This is a rather optimistic point of view, but for the sake of all of you and for Pentax, I hope you are right. Pentax insisted that the *ist is entry-level (much to Paal's pleasure). We also know that the D version has full compatibility. I can see that there's place for a *ist S, with glass pentaprism, full lens compatibility and maybe some other minor mods. It would be the next MZ-5n. Beeing said that, I do understand your decision. All I hope is that you could visit us once in a while and share some of your experience. cheers, caveman
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Hi Roland, Do you remember the time about three weeks? Pentax had said full compatibility for the *ist, and everyone was talking about how his personal Pentax sources were confirming that. Pentax-Europe's marketing director had confirmed it, and I was still not believing it because it was not fitting together with several technical observations of mine. It turned out that they were all wrong. I see how passionate you are about this, and I respect your choice. However, I do not share your optimism, and I have some technical reasons in my head. But the *ist D will have full compatibility with the older lenses. This we have only seen on paper, just like we saw similar texts about the *ist. The only HARD evidence (the early prototypes at PMA and CeBit) show the contrary. Now, I am quite certain that the prototype at PMA is a different one from the one at CeBit, and both featured the crippled mount. Are you feeling small waves of coldness on your back? I am... For the *ist D I have good-heartedly indicated Kaf2 on the KMP, but I could actually imagine how Pentax is thinking: those people have been raving for a DSLR for years. How about we save $5 on the aperture coupling and $5 on aperture rings, and they all go out and replace those fabulous 15/3.5, 18/3.5, 20/4, etc. lenses with FAJ equivalents... I hold that for unlikely but very possible. If the lens mount in the *ist D, with full compatibility for K and M lenses, scremount lenses (with adapter), 645 (with adapter) and 67 (with adapter) are crippled mount, then why would this be a bad thing? The crippled mount cannot meter properly with K and M lenses. Either part 1 of your statement is true or part 2 but not both. My explanation is that someone re-edited the MZ-D press release, updating the text hier and there. Compare the Lens compatibility sections fo both press releases... Not true. It's possible to make a full electronic lens mount with aperture ring on the lenses. One simply has to have a mechanical to electrical decoder for the aperture ring in the lenses, so that the lens can send aperture ring information to the body. Now read your statement a few times loud and ask yourself how likely that is... This might be what Pentax are working on. It's probably less expensive to have electrical decoders around the aperture ring instead of a complete mechanical system. I am no expert but consider myself relatively compentent about the workings of the Pentax mounts. What you are saying sounds unreasonable to me, and I hold it for unlikely. Having said all this, I realize that neither of us has hard facts, so until we hear new definitive information, this will be my last e-mail on the subject. Piece, Boz
Crippled mount; was Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Roland posted, among many other good things: But the *ist D will have full compatibility with the older lenses. So, there's still no signs that Pentax are about to abandon support for aperture ring. You can't judge Pentax future mid and market bodies by the entry-level body. What bothers me, (I am not Boz, and I am not switching to Canon anytime soon) is that the film *ist is now the FOURTH entry-level body they've introduced with this mount. My only reaction to the ZX-50 was well, whatever, I'm not buying that particular body. Maybe they'll see it's a mistake to have one that doesn't fit in with the compatibility that makes this system. I'm still not buying the crippled-mount bodies, but each time they produce a new one they seem more committed to this path, and I start to worry about where it will end.
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
From: Caveman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 10:27:20 -0500 Pentax insisted that the *ist is entry-level (much to Paal's pleasure). We also know that the D version has full compatibility. I can see that there's place for a *ist S, with glass pentaprism, full lens compatibility and maybe some other minor mods. It would be the next MZ-5n. We have the answer when we look at the *ist D. *Why*, oh tell me why, does it looks like a filmbased SLR? It's a digital, so it doesn't have to look as a film-SLR. Could it be because it's based upon a filmbased SLR? Could it be possible that Pentax took an existing design and re-made it for digital? So, if this design exist - what is this then? The replacement for the MZ-5n and MZ-3. The design for the *ist D is the evidence. But I don't think that it will be called *ist S. I believe more in *ist L, because the MZ-6 is called MZ-L in Japan, and the MZ-S has the S. So, 'L' fits logically between 'S' and plain *ist. *ist - *ist L - *ist S I like that. :-) Speaking of names, I'm surprised that no one has commented upon the fact that the *ist is *ist everywhere, all over the globe. It's not +ist, or /ist or even ~ist, not to mention 'ist. It's simply *ist. In Europe, Japan and in the U.S. Best wishes, Roland _ Lättare att hitta drömresan med MSN Resor http://www.msn.se/resor/
Re: Crippled mount; was Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:35:31 US/Central What bothers me, (I am not Boz, and I am not switching to Canon anytime soon) is that the film *ist is now the FOURTH entry-level body they've introduced with this mount. But it's still entry level. Pentax has not made a mid or pro-market camera without full K and M compatibility. They could have done it with the *ist D, but everything points that the *ist D will have full K and M compatibility. Feel no fear, my friend. Don't worry, be happy. Best wishes, Roland _ Hitta rätt köpare på MSN Köp Sälj http://www.msn.se/koposalj
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
From: Bojidar Dimitrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 16:11:29 +0100 Do you remember the time about three weeks? Pentax had said full compatibility for the *ist, and everyone was talking about how his personal Pentax sources were confirming that. Pentax-Europe's marketing director had confirmed it, and I was still not believing it because it was not fitting together with several technical observations of mine. The press release from Pentax U.S stated that K and M lenses could be used. But the press releases from Pentax Canada, Pentax Germany and Pentax Scandinavia didn't. Obviously Pentax U.S made a misstake, they have done this before (in the first press release for the ZX-L, K and M lenses weren't in the lens compatibility chart. This was, as we all know by now, wrong). So, never listen to Pentax U.S. They have a tendency to get things wrong. But everyone, not just Pentax U.S, are stating K and M compatibility with the *ist D. That's why I believe it. I don't believe Pentax U.S, but since Pentax Scandinavia tells it - I listen. You see, when I first read Pentax U.S press release, I asked Pentax Scandinavia. They said that they hadn't got any information about compatibility. They didn't knowed, so they didn't say anything at that time. I believe this is true for Pentax U.S also, I believe that they simply *assumed* that the filmbased *ist were full K mount compatible. But they didn't have any information to back this up. (I don't believe that Pentax Japan tells Pentax U.S more than Pentax Scandinavia). This difference to the situation with the *ist is very important. I have learned not to listen to Pentax U.S, but I do listen to Pentax Scandinavia. They don't release information if they haven't got it confirmed by Pentax Japan. This we have only seen on paper, just like we saw similar texts about the *ist. The only HARD evidence (the early prototypes at PMA and CeBit) show the contrary. Now, I am quite certain that the prototype at PMA is a different one from the one at CeBit, and both featured the crippled mount. Are you feeling small waves of coldness on your back? I am... No, because I have a strange feeling (not waves of coldness :-) ) that Pentax has things hidden up their sleeves, and this is about the lens mount. They haven't showned the true lens mount on the *ist D, because this would reveal secrets that Pentax are not ready to reveal yet. One can always discuss when to show new technology, to preview and not to preview. Previewing new technology to the public means that the technology is previewed to the competition too, and I believe Pentax doesn't want this. It's better for them to release the secrets when the camera is ready to go on sale. Anyway, don't judge future *ist models by the entry level model. It's not fair. Best wishes, Roland _ Hitta rätt på nätet med MSN Sök http://search.msn.se/
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Still my favorite camera and lens combo. There's just something therapeutic about loading up a roll of TriX and taking a walk with it... -Mat Caveman wrote: I'd suggest a ME Super with a 50/1.4 lens. You won't burry too much money into that combo, so you won't be tempted to sell it. And when you get angry on the world or pissed off by some quirks of the digital, take that one out and spend an afternoon in a nice place. Works miracles.
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
That's because the un-satisfied ones left (for the most part). There are about half the number of people on this list now as there were when I first joined about 6 years ago. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think there are many satisfied serious amateurs on this list.
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Boz, Welcome to the world of modern photography! BR
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Don't I owe you a Program Plus body if the Ick D ships by Sept.? The PP is probably more reliable than the LX. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Maybe I'll get an LX so I can stick around here...
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Can you imagine the expense involved when he drops one of these things! Bill For now I'll still be shooting the 645n mostly, but for things I would shoot 35mm with, I'll be switching to Canon digital. Once I get my workflow down, I'll stop shooting the 645 in favor of the 1DS. Maybe I'll get an LX so I can stick around here... tv
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
For anyone who has started photography with the EOS system since 1988, and that's millions of people it's a total who gives a shit? Pentax users put great importance on things about the Pentax system that other folks couldn't care less about. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pentax does not abandon compatibility. You can use A-mount lenses since 1982 on the *ist. Can you use manual focus lenses on a Canon EOS?
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
- Original Message - From: Bruce Rubenstein Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (2) For anyone who has started photography with the EOS system since 1988, and that's millions of people it's a total who gives a shit? Pentax users put great importance on things about the Pentax system that other folks couldn't care less about. I recall the FD lens mount users gave a great big shit about it when the EOS system came out, Bruce. As a matter of fact, they were extremely pissed that they, and their equipment was being orphaned. I recall also, Canon had a pretty classy camera out at the time, was it the F1? They were trying to be pro when they orphaned the mount. William Robb
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Hi! All I can say is that you probably made a right choice. I am not sure about Canon since I think I never actually held any Canon SLR camera for more than one minute. But your reasons for abandoning Pentax seem pretty sound. That's exactly the point that seems to be worth repeating over and over. Once one's equipment cannot satisfy one's technical demands, and once the hit rate, so to say, becomes forbiddingly low, one should make a global change. As for the discussion about *ist*. I think it is indeed a little too early to arrive to any conclusion. Though the number of crippled mount cameras grows dangerously. And now the new lenses. I hope no one would add me to their kill file if I were to say that in time, say several years, if and when I become a better photographer than I am now, I may repeat your reasoning... Or may by that time Pentax will simply grow enough to buy Canon so that we again would be on the same side of the fence bg. I wish you all the best with your new endeavor. --- Boris Liberman ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
RE: Good-bye Pentax (2)
I might invest in a strap, but that's a big decision. I'll have to think about it. tv -Original Message- From: Bill Owens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 12:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (2) Can you imagine the expense involved when he drops one of these things! Bill For now I'll still be shooting the 645n mostly, but for things I would shoot 35mm with, I'll be switching to Canon digital. Once I get my workflow down, I'll stop shooting the 645 in favor of the 1DS. Maybe I'll get an LX so I can stick around here... tv
RE: Good-bye Pentax (2)
-Original Message- From: Bruce Rubenstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Don't I owe you a Program Plus body if the Ick D ships by Sept.? The PP is probably more reliable than the LX. Doubt it, I've owned 3 Program bodies, and each one developed a wonky meter. But I'll still take it... tv
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
From: Boris Liberman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 21:14:55 +0200 I am not sure about Canon since I think I never actually held any Canon SLR camera for more than one minute. A friend of mine, who is a professional photographers, has an EOS 3. For me, it simply feels like a big, bulky and empty tank. The build quality is very low, my MZ-5n feels much better built. And the shutter noise... Hard to describe, but it's annoying. But it has a chassi of aluminium. I know this because the thin plastic has scratches so one can see the bare aluminium. Everything about it feels so cheap. As for the discussion about *ist*. I think it is indeed a little too early to arrive to any conclusion. Though the number of crippled mount cameras grows dangerously. And now the new lenses. There has always been one MZ-body with crippled mount (MZ-50 became MZ-30 which became MZ-60). And it will exist one *ist with crippled mount. So I can't say that the numbers are increasing. I'm not worried about the new lenses. They're entry level. My MZ-5n would be angry at me if I put entry level el cheapo plastique lenses on it. It deserves better than that. :-) Best wishes, Roland _ Hitta rätt köpare på MSN Köp Sälj http://www.msn.se/koposalj
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
I remember when Canon changed from FD to EOS. Many users were not happy about this, since they couldn't use their old equipment any more. They had to have twin systems, or they had to sell all their manual focus gear if they wanted to stay with Canon. The EOS system was a slow starter, a slow seller - in the beginning. It wasn't until the release of the EOS 650 that sales started to take off, and the rest - as they say - are history. Roland. Absolutely. Minolta too, after all they were first. Wasn't the 650 the first Canon? I did have a 620 for a while, that was a cool camera apart from the slow af. Kind regards Lord Mayor the Rt. Honorable Peter of Brighton
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 15:27:57 EST Roland. Absolutely. Minolta too, after all they were first. Wasn't the 650 the first Canon? Hm, I don't think so but, you know, it was a long time ago. :-) Memories seems to fade away... :-) When I started with SLR photography in 1988, I choosed a P30 because it was manual and Pentax had a nice system back then. I didn't want to pay for things that I wouldn't use. At that time, I saw autofocus as something very useless. The P30 felt more tempting, and it had depth-of-field preview. I remember visiting a shop and they recommended me a Nikon F501 (I believe it was called so). More expensive but the glass is better, you can clearly see the difference between Nikon and the others.. Well, we all know that Pentax has some nice glass too. :-) I jumped onto the AF-train with the MZ-5. I was never really temped by the Z-serie. I liked the Z-20 but, well... I liked my P30 more. But the MZ-5 felt just right. I changed it to MZ-5n only because I wanted to have depth-of-field preview. Best wishes, Roland _ Hitta rätt på nätet med MSN Sök http://search.msn.se/
RE: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Or at least his assistants will. :) * Ahhh, but that is the beauty of the LX - at least the ones I own - they can take a beating. A couple of them have fallen quite a distance with no complaints. People on this list can attest to my original 'beat to hell' LX's appearance. It has gone in for a CLA once, and then another time when the rewind shaft got bent. Not bad for over fifteen years of hard service. But knowing TV he will find ingenious ways to test the LX... César Panama City, Florida *
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
For the life of me Boz I cannot see any reason for you to leave the PDML, I for one would never ask you too just because you using canon gear, and I don't think anyone else here would either. Feroze Boz wrote and I must say good-bye to this group. It's like being forced to abandon your domicile...
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Agree'd From: Feroze Kistan [EMAIL PROTECTED] For the life of me Boz I cannot see any reason for you to leave the PDML, I for one would never ask you too just because you using canon gear, and I don't think anyone else here would either. Feroze Boz wrote and I must say good-bye to this group. It's like being forced to abandon your domicile...
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Come on, what do the rest of you say, I think Boz should stay Feroze - Original Message - From: Paul Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 11:57 PM Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (2) Agree'd From: Feroze Kistan [EMAIL PROTECTED] For the life of me Boz I cannot see any reason for you to leave the PDML, I for one would never ask you too just because you using canon gear, and I don't think anyone else here would either. Feroze Boz wrote and I must say good-bye to this group. It's like being forced to abandon your domicile...
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Feroze Kistan wrote: For the life of me Boz I cannot see any reason for you to leave the PDML, I for one would never ask you too just because you using canon gear, and I don't think anyone else here would either. Hey, we let Cotty hang around... (why does it seem like all my input of late have been Cotty jokes? :) -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
RE: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Just for the record, I've never broken a camera, just lenses and flashes. Mostly flashes, which almost invariably cost $93 to fix. The PZ-1p's took a serious beating, no problem. The MZ-S's never really got tested, the 645n's have survived some dings. tv -Original Message- From: collinb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 3:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Good-bye Pentax (2) Or at least his assistants will. :) * Ahhh, but that is the beauty of the LX - at least the ones I own - they can take a beating. A couple of them have fallen quite a distance with no complaints. People on this list can attest to my original 'beat to hell' LX's appearance. It has gone in for a CLA once, and then another time when the rewind shaft got bent. Not bad for over fifteen years of hard service. But knowing TV he will find ingenious ways to test the LX... César Panama City, Florida *
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
- Original Message - From: Greene Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (2) Canon #1 eh? Not Nikon? Definitely not Nikon. William Robb
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
- Original Message - From: Andre Langevin Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (2) I recall the FD lens mount users gave a great big shit about it when the EOS system came out, Bruce. As a matter of fact, they were extremely pissed that they, and their equipment was being orphaned. I recall also, Canon had a pretty classy camera out at the time, was it the F1? They were trying to be pro when they orphaned the mount. The T-90... Still one of the greatest MF camera ever. Like the LX with its mirror syndrome, it has its classic bug that shows with an EEE (error) message and ask for magnet cleaning or a shutter rebuild. Just by the way... Actually, the T90 was the template for the EOS system, stylewise, but the F1 was the premier Canon body of the day. William Robb
Re: Crippled mount; was Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:35:31 US/Central, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What bothers me, (I am not Boz, and I am not switching to Canon anytime soon) is that the film *ist is now the FOURTH entry-level body they've introduced with this mount. I have a suspicion that there's a translation problem going on here. I think it may be that the term we've translated to entry level may actually be a term that means first of a new series entering the market. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
On 03.3.19 5:47 PM, Carlos Royo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By the way, as this thread started with Boz's message saying he will leave the list, I join the chorus to ask him to stay. I'm sure that all the info he can give us about his experience using Canon cameras and lenses will be welcomed. I know he will not be sending F.U.D. messages to the list like some others who have switched to other brands have done. Hi folks, I think the same way. I am sad that Boz, one of the institutions of the PDML, is going to leave for another brand but that's his decision. But I do appreciate his dropping in here from time time as his time permits and giving us his honest opinion about Pentax and Canon too. THAT, I believe, would be very invaluable to all of us, as we all know that he is the expert on K-mount and can give us objective opinions about different brand of cameras and/or comparison with Pentax based on his own experiences, not taken from other internet sites. That will make our discussion more interesting, enjoyable and informative, than just a lot of unfounded slanders with no credibility or authority because of it. However, I do understand that Boz might be too busy to drop by here. Boz, I thank you for giving us such an informative bible site which I hope will be updated and maintained somehow. Cheers, Ken
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 15:02:37 -0500, you wrote: I might invest in a strap, but that's a big decision. I'll have to think about it. tv I have a Pentax strap on my D100. Much more sexy than the Nikon strap, and it makes better pictures. -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
For the life of me Boz I cannot see any reason for you to leave the PDML, I for one would never ask you too just because you using canon gear, and I don't think anyone else here would either. Hey, we let Cotty hang around... (why does it seem like all my input of late have been Cotty jokes? :) LOL. Boz, as of this moment I have 2 MXs, and 4 lenses. I consider myself a Pentax user with some Canon gear. You shoudl do the same g Cot Oh, swipe me! He paints with light! http://www.macads.co.uk/snaps/ Free UK Macintosh Classified Ads at http://www.macads.co.uk/
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Yep, the style strap that is on the ZX-5 is nice. I have them on my F100 and N80. Pentax wipes right off with a little acetone. Don't like any brand names on my straps. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a Pentax strap on my D100. Much more sexy than the Nikon strap, and it makes better pictures.
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
That's cause you're such a jerk most of the time nobody can stand you. c. On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, at 10:57 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 12:29:07 -0500 From: Bruce Rubenstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Good-bye Pentax (2) Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit That's because the un-satisfied ones left (for the most part). There are about half the number of people on this list now as there were when I first joined about 6 years ago.
Re: Crippled mount; was Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
My guess is the *ist is a new series that will eventually replace the MZ/ZX series. IIRC, the MZ/ZX replaced the Z/PZ series and the Z/PZ replaced.something. Bill - Original Message - From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 6:05 PM Subject: Re: Crippled mount; was Re: Good-bye Pentax (2) On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 09:35:31 US/Central, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What bothers me, (I am not Boz, and I am not switching to Canon anytime soon) is that the film *ist is now the FOURTH entry-level body they've introduced with this mount. I have a suspicion that there's a translation problem going on here. I think it may be that the term we've translated to entry level may actually be a term that means first of a new series entering the market. TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Good-bye Pentax (2)
Hi all, thank you very much for the nice answers to my previous mail! It is a really special feeling to know that I have done something worthwhile, and I am deeply moved that you all appreciate my work to such an extent. I took no offense to the one or two mails that spoke about the results count, Canon is a gadget maker, don't worry. I actually expected more resistance... :-) What can I say? It was not an easy decision, and I have been contemplating it for over a year now. I have thought about it long and hard, and have had several (heated) discussions with PDML members Arnold Stark and Knut Kampe. But in the end even Arnold's strongest and solid arguments could not overpower my will to move on. The real turn came when I recently decided that I want to try photographing birds and animals (nothing exotic, creatures in our garden or in the zoo). The only lens that I was able to afford was a second-hand 400/5.6, and it had to be AF. I have never seen a used FA* 400/5.6, so I look at eBay for a Canon. Well, in the last 6 weeks there have been 8 of them for sale, and I got mine at a wonderful price. Adding a body and a flash was a breeze, so I was all set. Let's say it like this: My only Pentax experience with longer lenses was a day-trip with Arnold where I got to use his K 400/5.6 and M42-K 500/4.5. Those photos were a disaster! Manual aperture were manual focus too much for me!!! Using the EOS 30 with the 400/5,6 USM is much more convenient. I can dial in exp. comp. via the thumb dial in the back, flash exp. comp on the flash, AF is very fast, and can see well even through the small AF-type viewfinder. Program shift is very convenient via the index-finger dial, and the eye-control AF gimmick work wonderfully for me! So, where are those that say that better technology does not lead to better photos? Yes, each photo made with the greatest USM, IS, etc. lens can be made also without. But the chances of doing that are almost non-existent! So, the main factors are: - Canon has a more complete AF system - Canon delivers new products and technologies faster - it is far easier and more cost-effective to buy (second-hand) Canon gear (for example, I will soon be able to buy a like-new second-hand D60 for about $800) - one has certain security that one can never outgrow the Canon system - counting from 1986 until now, Canon actually has better system compatibility than Pentax, and there is NO INDICATION that will have to change their mount any time soon (Pentax is moving towards a mount change [at least simplification]. The *ist does NOT work properly with K and M lenses, and it is NOT an entry-level camera --- it has the best AF system of ANY Pentax camera!) Now, where is Pentax? I feel that they have slowly but surely abandoned the market segment in which I am -- serious amateur. If we ignore the brilliant FA* 200-600/5.6, they don't have much for sports or wild-life professionals either. They seem to be concentrating in the segment of *ist and below. I have nothing against that, but I wish Pentax would come out and say if my assumption is correct, or they are simply lacking the money/people/resources to develop things faster. In the end, it is all very simple. I feel that very few serious amateurs and professionals use Pentax gear, and therefore the few serious Pentax items do not sell very well. This then leads to Pentax not investing very much in development of such items, and more serious amateurs and professionals switch to other brands. It's a vicious circle, and I am the real loser. So I switched... But like I said, I'll keep an LX, FE-1, two bright screens, a 17/4 fish, A20/2.8, A24/2.8, K30/2.8, A50/1.7, and A100/2.8 Macro. Sad as it may be, soon after my current eBay auctions are over, I will also sell the superA, MZ-5n, battery pack Fg, M24-35/3.5 and FA 24-90/3.5-4.5. Once again, thanks for all your positive remarks and nice comments to my previous mail. Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Boz, As others have said, sorry to see you go. We will miss you, and wish you well. Thanks for the wonderful efforts on you Pentax pages. It is a bible for many of us. Finally, I have always enjoyed your quote from A.Einstien. It is one of my favorites. Keep imagining... Regards, Bob S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Once again, thanks for all your positive remarks and nice comments to my previous mail. Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Boz, in all sincerity, I hope you get what you want out of the new system. To me that would mean more keepers and less in the circular file. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: Bojidar Dimitrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: PDML [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 5:45 PM Subject: Good-bye Pentax (2) Hi all, thank you very much for the nice answers to my previous mail! It is a really special feeling to know that I have done something worthwhile, and I am deeply moved that you all appreciate my work to such an extent. I took no offense to the one or two mails that spoke about the results count, Canon is a gadget maker, don't worry. I actually expected more resistance... :-) What can I say? It was not an easy decision, and I have been contemplating it for over a year now. I have thought about it long and hard, and have had several (heated) discussions with PDML members Arnold Stark and Knut Kampe. But in the end even Arnold's strongest and solid arguments could not overpower my will to move on. The real turn came when I recently decided that I want to try photographing birds and animals (nothing exotic, creatures in our garden or in the zoo). The only lens that I was able to afford was a second-hand 400/5.6, and it had to be AF. I have never seen a used FA* 400/5.6, so I look at eBay for a Canon. Well, in the last 6 weeks there have been 8 of them for sale, and I got mine at a wonderful price. Adding a body and a flash was a breeze, so I was all set. Let's say it like this: My only Pentax experience with longer lenses was a day-trip with Arnold where I got to use his K 400/5.6 and M42-K 500/4.5. Those photos were a disaster! Manual aperture were manual focus too much for me!!! Using the EOS 30 with the 400/5,6 USM is much more convenient. I can dial in exp. comp. via the thumb dial in the back, flash exp. comp on the flash, AF is very fast, and can see well even through the small AF-type viewfinder. Program shift is very convenient via the index-finger dial, and the eye-control AF gimmick work wonderfully for me! So, where are those that say that better technology does not lead to better photos? Yes, each photo made with the greatest USM, IS, etc. lens can be made also without. But the chances of doing that are almost non-existent! So, the main factors are: - Canon has a more complete AF system - Canon delivers new products and technologies faster - it is far easier and more cost-effective to buy (second-hand) Canon gear (for example, I will soon be able to buy a like-new second-hand D60 for about $800) - one has certain security that one can never outgrow the Canon system - counting from 1986 until now, Canon actually has better system compatibility than Pentax, and there is NO INDICATION that will have to change their mount any time soon (Pentax is moving towards a mount change [at least simplification]. The *ist does NOT work properly with K and M lenses, and it is NOT an entry-level camera --- it has the best AF system of ANY Pentax camera!) Now, where is Pentax? I feel that they have slowly but surely abandoned the market segment in which I am -- serious amateur. If we ignore the brilliant FA* 200-600/5.6, they don't have much for sports or wild-life professionals either. They seem to be concentrating in the segment of *ist and below. I have nothing against that, but I wish Pentax would come out and say if my assumption is correct, or they are simply lacking the money/people/resources to develop things faster. In the end, it is all very simple. I feel that very few serious amateurs and professionals use Pentax gear, and therefore the few serious Pentax items do not sell very well. This then leads to Pentax not investing very much in development of such items, and more serious amateurs and professionals switch to other brands. It's a vicious circle, and I am the real loser. So I switched... But like I said, I'll keep an LX, FE-1, two bright screens, a 17/4 fish, A20/2.8, A24/2.8, K30/2.8, A50/1.7, and A100/2.8 Macro. Sad as it may be, soon after my current eBay auctions are over, I will also sell the superA, MZ-5n, battery pack Fg, M24-35/3.5 and FA 24-90/3.5-4.5. Once again, thanks for all your positive remarks and nice comments to my previous mail. Cheers, Boz -- _\\|//_ Imagination is more important than knowledge... 0(` O-O ')0 A. Einstein ===ooO=(_)=Ooo=== Bojidar D. Dimitrov author and editor, Pentax K-Mount web page [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://kmp.BDimitrov.de/ = __ __
Re: Good-bye Pentax (2)
Bojidar Dimitrov wrote: Hi all, thank you very much for the nice answers to my previous mail! It is a really special feeling to know that I have done something worthwhile, and I am deeply moved that you all appreciate my work to such an extent. I took no offense to the one or two mails that spoke about the results count, Canon is a gadget maker, don't worry. I actually expected more resistance... :-) What can I say? It was not an easy decision, and I have been contemplating it for over a year now. I have thought about it long and hard, and have had several (heated) discussions with PDML members Arnold Stark and Knut Kampe. But in the end even Arnold's strongest and solid arguments could not overpower my will to move on. The real turn came when I recently decided that I want to try photographing birds and animals (nothing exotic, creatures in our garden or in the zoo). The only lens that I was able to afford was a second-hand 400/5.6, and it had to be AF. I have never seen a used FA* 400/5.6, so I look at eBay for a Canon. Well, in the last 6 weeks there have been 8 of them for sale, and I got mine at a wonderful price. Adding a body and a flash was a breeze, so I was all set. Let's say it like this: My only Pentax experience with longer lenses was a day-trip with Arnold where I got to use his K 400/5.6 and M42-K 500/4.5. Those photos were a disaster! Manual aperture were manual focus too much for me!!! Using the EOS 30 with the 400/5,6 USM is much more convenient. I can dial in exp. comp. via the thumb dial in the back, flash exp. comp on the flash, AF is very fast, and can see well even through the small AF-type viewfinder. Program shift is very convenient via the index-finger dial, and the eye-control AF gimmick work wonderfully for me! So, where are those that say that better technology does not lead to better photos? Yes, each photo made with the greatest USM, IS, etc. lens can be made also without. But the chances of doing that are almost non-existent! So, the main factors are: - Canon has a more complete AF system - Canon delivers new products and technologies faster - it is far easier and more cost-effective to buy (second-hand) Canon gear (for example, I will soon be able to buy a like-new second-hand D60 for about $800) - one has certain security that one can never outgrow the Canon system - counting from 1986 until now, Canon actually has better system compatibility than Pentax, and there is NO INDICATION that will have to change their mount any time soon (Pentax is moving towards a mount change [at least simplification]. The *ist does NOT work properly with K and M lenses, and it is NOT an entry-level camera --- it has the best AF system of ANY Pentax camera!) Now, where is Pentax? I feel that they have slowly but surely abandoned the market segment in which I am -- serious amateur. If we ignore the brilliant FA* 200-600/5.6, they don't have much for sports or wild-life professionals either. They seem to be concentrating in the segment of *ist and below. I have nothing against that, but I wish Pentax would come out and say if my assumption is correct, or they are simply lacking the money/people/resources to develop things faster. In the end, it is all very simple. I feel that very few serious amateurs and professionals use Pentax gear, and therefore the few serious Pentax items do not sell very well. This then leads to Pentax not investing very much in development of such items, and more serious amateurs and professionals switch to other brands. It's a vicious circle, and I am the real loser. So I switched... But like I said, I'll keep an LX, FE-1, two bright screens, a 17/4 fish, A20/2.8, A24/2.8, K30/2.8, A50/1.7, and A100/2.8 Macro. Sad as it may be, soon after my current eBay auctions are over, I will also sell the superA, MZ-5n, battery pack Fg, M24-35/3.5 and FA 24-90/3.5-4.5. Once again, thanks for all your positive remarks and nice comments to my previous mail. Cheers, Boz I have many times over the years thought about switching from Pentax for similar reasons. Your expertise and knowledge will be missed on this list. I hope you are happy with your new system. -- David S. Nature and wildlife photography http://www.sheppardphotos.com
