By 2007, I'd been taking photos for four to five years; shot the usual stuff, for fun, on travels, and for school -- you know, record shots of students' outings, funny faces and such. (They hated most of the photos, by the way. My friends too, whenever I do portraits of them. The ingrates' rallying cry: "Too unglam!" Ok, perhaps, I really can't make it at people photography..)
Even then, I took the whole photo-taking process pretty seriously; in other words, like a nerd -- I learned to hold the camera properly, read up on rules of thirds, experimented with funky angles (and gave up that approach fast) and all the other stuff.
My first digicam was the Canon Powershot A70, which cost $699. Saved for a while to get it. My eyes watered at the price, then and now. It was a 3.2mp bridge camera, with a then-ridiculous zoom range and a swivel LCD screen. I preferred not to use the LCD though; using the electronic viewfinder seemed more stable and enabled me to focus better, and besides, I felt more 'pro' that way. And I liked the camera a lot; shots were 'free', it was small, light, produced nice colours and supremely convenient -- oh, the zoom, look at the zoom! Later, I upgraded to the Powershot A95.. even more zooooommm!
But there was one nagging issue: always, always, I hated the noise, those speckles and fuzziness, you know, how hopeless small-sensor cameras' low-light capability is (and note I'm referring to 2003-07 technology). Once it got the slightest bit dark-ish, every snap turned out kind of blurry and smeary and ugly.
So I thought about a DSLR. For just one reason: I wanted better low-light photos. I didn't care, or know about bokeh or sensor size or resolution, or lenses. (And a bonus was, I already like using a viewfinder, which is standard on DSLRs.) I did some more reading and research and price checks and specs comparisons till one fine day in Jan 2008..
.. I walked into OP and waltzed out with a K100Ds. It cost about $800+, came with a kit lens, and tagging behind was a happy novice DSLR-owner. The rest, as it's said, should be history. But then I'm no famous photographer, so here's more of the too-long-by-now story.
It was a month or so later when I got the FA50. I had read so much about its superb low-light qualities. And so it was that I fell for prime lenses, fell head over heels and straight into the abyss. (I've never managed to get to my feet since, or find my way out of the chasm, in fact.)
I went bonkers with the K100Ds, pointing it at all kinds of things, anytime, anyplace, and notched up over 20,000 shots with it using a variety of lenses. I lugged it along on trips to Penang, Vientiane, Melbourne and Tasmania, irritating my travel companions, wallabies, villagers, street vendors by shooting them and everything else incessantly.
A year and a half later, in mid-2009, I got the K-7 fresh from its launch in Singapore (and sold the well-abused K100Ds to a friend). The faithful one has since followed me everywhere for 3 years (and counting), including a year overseas. Yup, I abused it quite a bit as well; it's nearing 30,000 shots and has been in some unsavoury climatic conditions.
(This year, I held two photography exhibitions to raise funds for a special needs school; all the photos exhibited were, I'm happy to say, shot with the K-7 and a Limited trio. Thanks again to all Pentaxians who went down to support!)
Then, well, you know the not-so-hot rep the K-7 has for high-ISO performance. And I needed/wanted/demanded better low-light shots -- sounds like an echo in here -- to shoot owls or bats or something. So I got the K-01 earlier this year. It's interesting, how I have 'regressed' from being a 'pro' (at least to some friends) to a kindergarten one now, carrying a brick-like bright yellow toy camera lookalike, holding it out and shooting using the LCD screen. But I love it, been using it almost exclusively instead of the K-7. Maybe I'm getting old, but it's getting more tiring to use the viewfinder.
Today, I own the K-7 (3+ years old), the K-01 (half a year old, bought second-hand), an 'analogue' ME Super SE (decades old, bought 3 years ago), and the Ricoh GRD III (bought late last year, second-hand).
In other words: Today, I have too many cameras.
My lenses? The DA21, FA43, DA70 and K135 f2.5. Spotted a pattern? Yup, prime lenses throughout. So much for my erstwhile love of zooms. The other interesting lens trivia: I've never bought a lens new, except for the K100Ds kit.
Now, why Pentax, and why have I stuck with it all the while? It. Just. Works. For me. I love the Limiteds. I love the handling. I love the compactness of the bodies and lenses. (I'm extremely allergic to big cameras/lenses.) I love how it feels designed for photographers, by photographers. I love the quirks and willingness to be different, to go its own way (see: the K-01, the Q and all those colours).
Most of all, I love being part of a cult, oops, I mean, being in an exclusive, premium club with the swanky clubhouse, comfy lounge, secret handshake and the all-knowing special wink. In more practical terms, fellow Pentaxians have loaned me equipment (lenses, and even a flash once), signed up for voluntary assignments I organised, given me priceless lobangs (exhibitions, contacts) and more.
What else can I say? Thank you so much!
That's it.
(You're still here? Hey, thanks!)