> Why do you choose or stay in Pentax ? I got interested in photography seriously in 1980. I considered a Leica R3 but, although I could afford it, I knew I couldn't afford additional lenses. I ended up buying a Contax 139, which I used all the way through photo school (I have a BFA in photography from the Corcoran in Washington, D.C.).
I still like Contax. It's the brand that really "gets to me." And even though they do now make a "nearly perfect" camera--the Aria--they still don't, and will never, make the two lenses I most want--a 35mm f/2 and an 85mm f/2. I switched to Nikon when I joined a professional studio in 1988. All three of the other photographers shot Nikon. Between them, they had 30 lenses from 15mm to 500mm, 8 bodies, and all sorts of accessories. If I wanted to share--and, even more importantly, to let them share my stuff--I had to shoot Nikon too. I ended up getting an F4 and 3 8008s before I was done. When I quit the studio I bought a Leica M6 as a way of "reclaiming my amateur status," which I was eager to do. Then, when my son was born and I became, very suddenly, a single parent of an infant, I sold the Leica in case I needed the money. My consolation prize was an Olympus OM-4T and a bunch of lenses. I used that camera for four years. All through these years I used a lot of other cameras because of my work for photography magazines. Most of those cameras didn't stick around. I really didn't get into Pentax until just a few years ago, when I was ISO the "perfect" 50mm lens. For some reason, I found that most 35mm lenses were "good enough" for me--that is, that I liked some better than others but I really could be happy with any of them. The opposite turned out to be the case with 50mm lenses. I couldn't really find one I liked. All were "sharp," generally speaking, but many of them had different characters and varying properties. Finally, I became acquainted with John O'Connell (JCO) on the Internet, and he loaned me a Spotmatic so I could try the 50/1.4 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar. I've now tried virtually all Leica 50s, Olympuses, Konicas, Zeisses, Canons and Nikons, and all version of the Pentax 50/1.4 except the F, and I still think the 50/1.4 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar is the best 50mm I know of. My favorite, anyway. By now I've tried many different Pentax bodies and lenses, but as you can see from the above I'm not a longtime or diehard Pentaxian. I'm more like a nomad camera junkie who's turned an obsession into something moderately functional by writing articles about it. <s> All through my journey, I've taken black-and-white 35mm pictures. Whatever the camera, I've gotten good shots with everything. Although I tend to look at my photographic hobby in terms of different cameras and lenses, most of the pictures can be seen together seamlessly. *I* might see differences, but viewers seldom do. Recently, I've gotten my first digicam. Also, I recently "enabled" myself to buy an ES II. I got a chrome one in *really* nice condition. I really like it--starting with the premise that I want to shoot TX with the 50mm f/1.4 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar, the ES II seems to be about the most convenient way to do it for me. The big question for me is whether to continue my 22 year archive of 35mm B&W negs, or to make the jump across the Digital Divide. I go both ways. Right now I'm happy with the ES II, continuing to build my darkroom, and excited about the idea of staying with what I've loved for so long. Then again, I can't afford a really nice digicam right now. What will happen when I can? Remains to be seen, I guess. In the meantime, I'm a happy "screw-head." Sorry for the long self-indulgent post... --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
