Have a K-7, getting Nikon D40...

Started Apr 16, 2010 | Discussions thread
Gazooma Senior Member • Posts: 2,159
Re: Have a K-7, getting Nikon D40...

Roland, Are you using your vast knowledge to distort and spread misinformation again? Or just to confuse and counter the general fact that Pentax lenses are unreasonably priced?

The Pentax 100 macro may be weathered sealed but it is not the same as the Nikon 105mm macro. The Nikon one is more expensive because it has VR built into the lens. And that is provides up to 4 stops advantage compared to the 1-2 stops that Pentax SR can provide at that focal length. The Nikon also has a virtually silent drive, which is not in the Pentax, and less likely to scare your butterfly you are trying to take. There are differences in these lenses, not to mention differences in service and in support between Nikon and Pentax lenses. I do not work for Nikon and I do not have all the time you have to come up with comments that makes your own brand look better. I certainly do not have your vast knowledge but I use what little I have to tell the whole truth, and not half-truths with the intention of making Pentax look better every time.

Roland Mabo wrote:

I don't find Pentax to have unreasonable prices for their prime lenses, not when comparing apples to apples - that is, similar offerings with the others. And in some cases, Pentax is a money saver.

For example, Pentax 100 Macro weather sealed is less expensive than Nikon non-weather sealed 105 Macro. And if you want a nice wide angle prime, such as a 14 f/2.8, you can buy 2 Pentax 14 f/2.8, and still having money left to burn, for the price of one Nikon 14 f/2.8.

Pentax and Nikon's 50 f/1.4, 300 f/4, and many others, are very close in price so.

What Pentax does not offer, are cheap plastic prime lenses for photographers on a budget. All Pentax primes has very good to exclusive build quality. For example, the Pentax DA 35 f/2.8 Macro Limited is half the price of the Zeiss 35, but the excellent full metal build quality and finish is superb.

I see no reason to why Pentax primes would have Sigma lenses instead of being close to Nikon and Canon in price, especially when considering that Pentax has such a low market share so it is more expensive to make Pentax lenses than lenses for Canon and Nikon. But in the past, yes some Pentax primes has been cheaper than similar offerings from Nikon. Unfortunately, this lead to the conclusion that Pentax is "not good enough".

Pentax offers great prime lenses with exclusive build quality for advanced photographers or photo enthusiasts who demands something more than just a lens that captures an image. It is about texture, feeling, materials, design. Just look at the DA Limiteds, they are like Zeiss in fit and finish and you can't find such lenses made by Nikon and Canon.

Should Pentax lower the quality fit and finish, making lenses in simpler less expensive materials? Most consumers uses zooms. For those that wants prime lenses on a budget, then Sigma offers interesting options.

Being a small brand, Pentax can not afford making lenses that covers all the scale.

If Pentax continues their success on the market then I do believe that Pentax will offer lenses targeting a wider customerbase than what they are able to do right now.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow