i read as much as I could before getting bored.
The guy compares results from the Fuji X10 to the K-7 for Depth of Field
control, surprise surprise, the K-7 wins, then compares the X10 to the Q
for high ISO noise, and resolution in night shooting, doesn't find as
big a difference as one might think, (had to read between the lines a
bit to get that).
Now I'm starting to scratch my head and wonder where exactly he's coming
from or going to for that matter. Which is where I skipped ahead to the
conclusion.
There I discovered that it more or less contradicts the lead and
headline. It's not really the camera Pentax should have made.
Finally the comparison with the Q in the conclusion completely misses
the point of the Q. Weather you like the concept of the Q or not.
I certainly hope he doesn't get paid to write for a living.
On 12/11/2011 9:22 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote:
It appears Mr. Johnson is not the only source of Q unhappiness. This
line was the one from a recent email from Pentax Forums:
"Now, in an absence of any new camera announcements from Pentax, we've
turned to the camera that Pentax should have made: the Fuji X10."
http://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/fuji-x10-review/review.html
I haven't worked my way through the 11 page review yet, but evidently
they do compare it to the Q. Favorably or not, I am yet to discover.
--
Don't lose heart! They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a
lengthily search.
--
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.
