Camera Brands

Joined: 21 Jan 2007 Posts: 147 Location: Toledo, Ohio

I now have a Pentax K110(my first dSLR), previously a Pentax 1000 Asahi SLR(I think). I still the 1000 and a Practika MTL3 SLR before that. I was wondering why it seems not many people use Pentax. It seems its most use Canon and Nikon. Can someone explain this to me. Ive always felt that Pentax had great lenses, and most of them are interchangable but I feel maybe I am missing something. I havent had much experience outside of Pentax, so I guess I am limited in my experiences, which arent too bad. Can someone shed some light on this?

Premium Member Joined: 02 Apr 2005 Posts: 2020

Those two are the big names. Don't get roped into thinking they are the only ones. If you like the Pentax system, stick with it. But do yourself a favor and give the others a try. You might like one more than you think. You might find that you like the Pentax the best of all.

There very specific types of photography where one might have an edge on the other, but when you're talking about the DSLR lines, EACH of them have the potential to produce top notch photos. The important thing is to pick the camera that you feel most comfortable with. For me, it was Nikon.

Canon and Nikon do have a couple of advantages, in that there is a broader range of accessories for them and more third party vendors that make accessories for them. Not necessarily a show-stopper, but something to consider.

Joined: 13 Jan 2007 Posts: 245 Location: Maryland

Marketing.

And lots a people wanna be like everyone else. So they buy what everyone else buys.

Joined: 18 Nov 2006 Posts: 288

Jacque D wrote:

Marketing.

And lots a people wanna be like everyone else. So they buy what everyone else buys.

I've been using the Nikon system since 1968 so everyone else buys what I buy, I guress.

I think there are some other issues involved. Canon, Nikon and Pentax are optical and imaging companies. They are specialists. Everything they make - even copiers, printers and binoculars - are imaging oriented. Other companies - Sony as an example - make photographic products as a side line to their main business. This doesn't mean that they don't make good products but to me it means that imaging is not as important to them as it is to Canon, Nikon and Pentax. I think this is part of the reason that these specialist companies do what they do so well.

There aren't any incompetent digital SLR's. The marketplace would weed them out instantly if there were. All of them will get the job done. But with Canon, Nikon and Pentax you get not only competent products that will get the job done but you get a specialist company dedicated to imaging for its very existence.

If you are a pro, then Canon, Nikon and, to a lesser extent, Pentax have extreme depth and width to their systems. In other words, you can cover any possible photographic requirement within a compatible and reliable system. For amateurs this is not so important. But it can give an amateur peace of mind and confidence that this system is there and everything is designed to work together. Companies with a sideline in photography simply pick and choose the best selling elements to the system and, for the most part, do not manufacture these things themselves. In this age of Chinese oem manufacturing, this may not be a popular position but we old timers have learned to appreciate what is behind the products we buy.

The brand is important, not because of the details or features of a camera but because of the company and system behind the brand.

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:43 am

I agree with Hoosiershooter. Pentax is a great brand. I love the fact that they now have in body stabilization. Come on, how awsome is that? Every lens you own will be stabilized. I look at Pentax the same as I would Canon and Nikon. They are all the pros. I love Canon, but they have there lackings just like everyone else. Sometimes, they end up having something that the others don't. No one brand is better. Besides, it is who is behind the camera that makes a difference.

I am one of those people that feel inadequate without the right equiptment. I don't think my creative skills are that great yet. I have most of the technical apsects down. I am getting awsome with photoshop, but I lack in creative drive. I feel like I am having a photographic breakdown.

There are so many great photographers on this forum. I just I can learn enough to someday spark some creativity.

Anyway, it is the photographer, not the camera that makes a difference(most of the time).

Joined: 02 Sep 2005 Posts: 11 Location: New York city

I use Nikon all the time simply because it did good job for me. It looks like that I better try something new. Nikon is so expensive.

Joined: 03 Nov 2004 Posts: 12 Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

EOS MAN wrote:

..............
Anyway, it is the photographer, not the camera that makes a difference(most of the time).

No. In most cases, cmaera and lighting make big difference. I believe this is true for most photographers.

Joined: 15 Oct 2005 Posts: 291 Location: Texas

Digital is what happened. Canon and Nikon had the most successful and popular camera models when digital became widespread. Olympus, Pentax, Minolta (remember them?), and others were great companies with great products that got lost somewhere in the transition to digital; whether they were too slow or not enough marketing. The huge availability of Nikon and Canon just cannot be matched. Go into any general electronics or camera store and you will find Canon and Nikon along with some accesories. You will occasionally see some Olympus and Pentax stuff, but usually a SLR kit with no other accesories available.

I shot Pentax and Nikon in 35mm. When I went digital, it was Nikon only.

Joined: 18 Jun 2006 Posts: 191

i love my fuji cameras. the photos are nice once you get your settings right.

i will be getting the new S5 pro soon...thats going to be a sweet camera.

im using the 9100 now, and the only complaint I have is its not good for taking hi speed shots on zoom in the hockey stadium. other than that its very good....

Joined: 18 Nov 2006 Posts: 288

Just as a note, the S5 is built in the Nikon D200 body. You can buy the D200 for $300-500 less than the S5 and get 10mp instead of 6mp. I was a Fuji S1 user at one time until I switched to Nikon digital.

Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 3:55 pm

because the poor MZ-D was still-born and it took Pentax several years to get around to trying again.

They are back on track with the new KD series though! There isn't a camera on the market below £1000 and probably below £2000 which I would trade my K10D for, even discounting lenses.

Joined: 18 Jun 2006 Posts: 191

yeah...thats true... I like the images from my fuji products tho. plus If I dont like the S5 i can always sell the body, and get a D200...thats the good thing about them using nikon mounts.