What's wrong with that? It's simply making a statement that there's a feature or attribute that may not be to my liking. On the flip-side, there's plenty of things to like.
Like I said, I havn't noticed so gigantic a difference in viewfinders that it would sway me one way or another in making a purchase decision. It must be acceptable for most people's use otherwise most people (or a significant portion of the customer base) wouldn't be buying them. I'm sure there's plenty of happy regular Joe's shooting with Digital Rebels. Viewfinder aside, they are a standout in astrophotography circles, with the most bang for the buck of any DSLR. I would prefer a lower native ISO particularly for moving water shots which I like to take, because as you know, it would at times preclude the use of filters other than a polarizer when needed. Tom C. >From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: OT: DPR Nikon D3, Full-Frame, previewed >Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:42:19 -0700 > >I'm pretty sure you'll voice some disappointment with almost anything >that is announced by any manufacturer. And yet you seem to feel that >a Canon DRebel viewfinder is acceptable for most people's use from >other comments. Very curious - multiple standards disorder? ]'-) > >G > >On Aug 23, 2007, at 10:16 AM, Tom C wrote: > > > Native ISO of 200 is a little disappointing. Would have preferred > > 100 or 50. > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[email protected] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
