--- John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 08:08:30PM -0700, Brendan > MacRae wrote: > > > > --- John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 09:18:02PM -0400, > Christian > > > wrote: > > > > Brendan MacRae wrote: > > > > > --- John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> For most people, the (significant) extra > cost > > > of the > > > > >> larger > > > > >> sensor just isn't worth it. > > > > > > > > > > For most people, yes. For most serious > > > > > photographers...that may be another story. > > > > > > > > PJs, sports guys and, yes, nature pros use > 1DmkIIs > > > with a 1.3x "crop" > > > > They seem pretty serious.... > > > > > > Not to mention all those guys out there with > Nikons > > > ... > > > > > > I guess we poor Pentax users can't be "serious" > > > photographers, either. > > > > > > And all the time I thought it was the > photographer, > > > not the gear ... > > > > > > > You know, these kinds of comments are BS. > > > > Where do you get off? Point me to where I ever > made > > this suggestion. You said most people wouldn't opt > to > > spend the significant extra dough for a FF camera. > You > > didn't specify who these "most people" are. I > assumed > > you meant photographers of one kind or another. I > only > > suggested that the more serious the photographer > the > > more likely that person would opt for better gear. > > Precisely. You just plain assume that "better" > means > "larger sensor". That's the viewpoint that's full > of BS.
First of all, from what I've seen, larger sensors produce better images. Call it BS if you want, but why on earth would a company make a camera with a larger sensor if there was no noticeable increase in image quality. Oh, and then charge three times as much for it! Must be a lot of suckers out there... > You (although not only you) seem to think that a K1D > (if one ever shows up) is somehow an inferior > product > if it doesn't have a 36x24 sensor. > Again, it's obvious you can type, but can you read? Where did I say any such thing? My original post said that I thought it was a mistake if Pentax didn't concurrently work on a larger sensor for it's DSLR's with the R&D for the 645D. My point being that there would be MUCH more interest in the former over the latter. Apparently Pentax agrees with me since at least they've killed the 645D. And although you have no evidence to support your contention that a FF DSLR isn't what "most people" want (apologies to Cotty), I want one, I feel it would be a big step up for Pentax, it could possibly even lure away Nikon and Canon shooters (something Pentax has done very rarely) and it would most likely produce better images than anything in the current lineup. Now, if the K1D had a mere 1.2 or 1.3 crop...I'd be interested. Would this be inferior to a FF camera. Depends. In Canon's example some folks like the Mark IIn more than the 5D. But your saying that I called anything other than a FF DSLR inferior is BS. I never said it. I merely said I wouldn't buy another APS-C sensor camera and would love a FF Pentax. And for the future, if you're going to comment on my posts, insert your comments into my originals. That might help you to stick to the subject at hand and stop you from pretending later that I said things I never said. Or better yet, you can just not respond at all. -Brendan __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
