The Flagship/Pro Cameras from Pentax

What have been the cameras made by Pentax that were intended to have all the features a professional would want to have?

I think the list starts with the *ist D, K10D and ends with the K3.  But what was in between?

Film era: The 35mm LX, and to a lesser degree MX, bodies were intended for professional use, but never quite convinced the market. Both are still lovely to own and shoot with, especially the LX, which is like a Swiss watch.

PZ-1p never really got any traction at all, though it was one of the most capable cameras Pentax made, because by that time Canon had invented real autofocus.

In medium format, the various versions of Pentax 645 and 67 were in heavy use by pros, especially the 67.

OpticsEngineer wrote:

What have been the cameras made by Pentax that were intended to have all the features a professional would want to have?

I think the list starts with the *ist D, K10D and ends with the K3. But what was in between?

Taking just the K-mount digital cameras:

*istD

K10D

K20D

K-7

K-5

K-5II(s)

K-3

All the rest (I think) were lesser models that co-existed with those.

(I never had the K20D).

Your question seems to be 'what Pentax proposed as their pro/premium model' so Barry's list is good.

Arguing which of the models is 'pro' is another thing..?

'Prosumer' first made me think of a person that indiscriminately buys a lot stuff.

The cookie monster of retail.

I didn't understand the term until it was explained to me...

Tan68 wrote:

Your question seems to be 'what Pentax proposed as their pro/premium model' so Barry's list is good.

Arguing which of the models is 'pro' is another thing..?

Chuckle!

Most if not all of those flagship cameras have variously been used by professionals I've known.

And I know 2 amateur photographers who use 1DXs! (And some others who have used other models in the Canon 1D series).

I don't know what a "pro" camera is! It depends on how you earn your money. A wedding photographer typically wants to write every image to 2 cards, so for them only the K-3 qualifies.

steephill wrote:

None of the APS-C DSLRs so far deserve to be described as pro kit because of the lack of a true pro service from dealers backed by Pentax, not to mention the lack of specialist lenses e.g. TS. The pro centres marketing pitch from a few years ago fell far short of what any working pro is used to from Canon or Nikon.

A wedding photographer can't call upon a pro service provided by the camera maker in mid-wedding!

Their principles appears to be: have a spare body. Write all images to 2 cards.

Lots of professionals don't use Tilt/Shift lenses. (I'm an amateur and I use one. The Samyang. I expect it to perform well on the FF camera).

The term "pro camera" tends to be used as a near-meaningless marketing term, or when one photographer wants to sneer at another! It is much better for professionals to make lists of their personal requirements, then match those to cameras on the market.

Wow  :^)

If the definition of Prosumer is a person that indiscriminately buys a lot stuff my wife has declared me King.

steephill wrote:

Was the Pentax 67. Even the 645 was considered an enthusiastic amateur's model. The LX was the only 35mm body which was marketed as "pro" and had a full range of accessories to back that up.

I agree, the LX was the camera that brought me to Pentax.  I bailed on Canon and looked at Nikon, but the LX won me over from the other brands top models.

None of the APS-C DSLRs so far deserve to be described as pro kit because of the lack of a true pro service from dealers backed by Pentax, not to mention the lack of specialist lenses e.g. TS. The pro centres marketing pitch from a few years ago fell far short of what any working pro is used to from Canon or Nikon.

The level of support at major sporting events et al, is very important.  You can make the best camera, but you need the kind of support you mention to win over the folks who make a living with their cameras.

The 645D and Z are the best digital candidates for a pro label. Which of course brings us to the discussion about what pro means anyway. Many amateurs seem to think it means blazing fast fps and AF, neither of which is of much concern for studio or landscape work.

It could be worse though, at least Pentax doesn't call anything "prosumer" - an idiotic and meaningless description if ever there was one.

Pentax seem to brand themselves as a Field Camera in recent years.  So their FF, with suitable lenses, should appeal to the landscape and outdoor photographer, whether you make a living with your camera or not.

apathyman wrote:

Jim Beverlin wrote:

If this is limited to DSLRs only I would say the K-5 should be in this group. If you are going back to the film era the LX and probably the PZ-1P should be on the list.

And the MZ-S - probably the most professional of the 35mm film cameras but came just before digital took hold so didn't get taken up widely.

Cheers

Brian

Definitely the PZ-1P and MZ-S. The PZ's introduced hyper program, MZ-S was the first model with the green hyper-program button we know to this day, and the MZ-S printed your exposure information on the film in between the sprocket holes above every frame. That was pretty cool.

OpticsEngineer wrote:

What have been the cameras made by Pentax that were intended to have all the features a professional would want to have?

I think the list starts with the *ist D, K10D

K20D, K7, K5, K5ii, K5iis

and ends with the K3. But what was in between?

And 645D and 645Z

I think the dual SD cards is a feature that should not be absent from a pro camera.

For an impressive list of pro features, look at the Canon 1DX specs. For example the 1DX might belong to a news company that has 10 1DXes and 10 70-200/2.8 lenses. The camera can recall AF micro-adjust settings for many copies of the same lens, and all the customization settings the photographer prefers can be saved to the memory card, to be loaded on to the next body the photographer is handed.

Michael Perham wrote:

Pentax seem to brand themselves as a Field Camera in recent years. So their FF, with suitable lenses, should appeal to the landscape and outdoor photographer, whether you make a living with your camera or not.

Hm! I also have a home studio, and I've used my flagship K-mount cameras and mid-focal-length lenses for that use. And I've shot with a K-3 mounted on a boom arm over the subject, controlled via the FluCard with a laptop.

One of the uses I've envisaged for an FF camera for some time is studio work, where the weight of the camera and its lenses won't be very important. I want to see how the FF camera plus my DA* 55mm f/1.4 works. I bought that lens primarily for portraiture, but in an APS-C camera my studio is barely big enough for it. I think it will work well on an FF camera, given that it is an FF lens.

"The camera can recall AF micro-adjust settings for many copies of the same lens, and all the customization settings the photographer prefers can be saved to the memory card, to be loaded on to the next body the photographer is handed."

That is really interesting. Thanks for pointing that out.

In my job, it is amazing how hard it is to get across to the development teams the importance of the case of multiple equipment sets by the user(s), or multiple users of the same equipment. In fact... when I get back to work tomorrow, that reminds me I have to add that into a
"customer requirements document" we are working on.  Multiple equipment sets and users is something that gets so complicated people don't even want to think about it. You really have to force the issue.

Barry Pearson wrote:

Hm! I also have a home studio, and I've used my flagship K-mount cameras and mid-focal-length lenses for that use. And I've shot with a K-3 mounted on a boom arm over the subject, controlled via the FluCard with a laptop.

One of the uses I've envisaged for an FF camera for some time is studio work, where the weight of the camera and its lenses won't be very important. I want to see how the FF camera plus my DA* 55mm f/1.4 works. I bought that lens primarily for portraiture, but in an APS-C camera my studio is barely big enough for it. I think it will work well on an FF camera, given that it is an FF lens.

Barry, I'm not saying you can't use it for studio work, or any other kind of photography.  I am just suggesting that Pentax have worked at branding themselves as a field camera and one field of work is not exclusive or another.  Just that they have accentuated their weather resistance and ability to function in extreme temperatures etc., features that appeal to those working in landscape and outdoor photography more than the studio photographer.

miles green wrote:

For an impressive list of pro features, look at the Canon 1DX specs. For example the 1DX might belong to a news company that has 10 1DXes and 10 70-200/2.8 lenses. The camera can recall AF micro-adjust settings for many copies of the same lens, and all the customization settings the photographer prefers can be saved to the memory card, to be loaded on to the next body the photographer is handed.

I didn't know that. But again, shows how Canon has catered to the commercial/corporate/professional market.  However, I would think that this feature is going to be of lesser value as publishers, such as sports illustrated and many newspapers, move from staff photographers to independent contractors.