Reply interspersed:
On 10/18/2013 3:49 AM, Tom C wrote:
Zos, that statement basically casts a pale over the rest that you write.
It's also characteristic of comments often seen here and on many other
lists regardless of brand. That is the apparent lack of, or temporary
lack of intellectual honesty. The definition is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_honesty
Oh, thanks, Tom. I'm observing intellectual dishonesty all over internet
these days. I just did not know the exact term for that, and you have
helped me here. Thanks.
We all like our gear to look good. I frankly like the lines of the
A7's. To be honest I'd have preferred a NEX style without the
prism-like hump, but I wasn't the designer. Actually it shares basic
lines with every DSLR ever made.
I agree. I mean, if it had an electronic viewfinder in the left top
corner (when looking from behind) similar to Nex-6 or RF cameras, IMHO,
it would have been more in line with small size notion.
Thirdly its is a Nex which means nex-style
ergonomics and awful, unbalanced handling.
It's not a NEX, it's a Sony E-mount camera with the (a)lpha designation.
I have two NEX's. They are not unbalanced nor do they have bad
ergonomics IMO. Have you used a NEX for any period of time to back up
the statement? Even the accidental video button press is grossly
exaggerated. It's my opinion, others will disagree, that we adjust to
ergonomics over time and it's what you've come use to. I still feel
strange turning the lens in the opposite direction Pentax to
mount/dismount with Nikon. It's not the Nikon at fault, it's my mental
conditioning after using Pentax for 22 years. Eventually it'll become
second nature with Nikons.
Indeed. It took me several days to get used to the button instead of
keyhole for ignition in our rented car in Europe. It took me then few
ugly attempts to press a button that wasn't there when we got home.
In general, I think that to say that such and such camera has bad
ergonomics either should assume that it is perspective of just one
person, the one who writes, or it is intellectually dishonest.
It would be very difficult for Pentax to sell a FF camera for less
than the A, considering economies of scale. Just putting a FF sensor
in a K-3 and adding the additional cost would bring it close, not to
mention additional likely changes to shutter, stabilization, and more.
Well, I have to disagree with you here, Tom. Pentax is not forced to
make their first FF camera be the cheapest out there. Pentax has some
strong selling points such as serious weather resistance or shake
reduction (and now this variable anti aliasing technology too) that may
allow it to position themselves somewhere in the middle of the pack.
Claiming the K-3 is a better camera without evidence, and denying the
advantages of FF as if they are irrelevant simply because one does not
have them or may not be able to afford them at the moment goes to my
first point .
To make it even more general - neither camera has seen the light of day.
We had some previews from DPReview and the likes and that's it. We
honestly don't know anything about real use of these cameras, so how
could we honestly produce blanket statements such as K-3 is better than
A7 or A7 is better than K-3?
Boris
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
