On Sep 12, 2012, at 13:53 , Cory Waters wrote: > Still shooting with the K10 here. > K5 was attractive but I haven't been shooting enough to justify > ANOTHER thousand dollar camera. When I bought the used I decided it > was the last P&S camera I'd buy because my phone takes decent pictures > and the ease of sharing with the network is just a killer feature. > So now the K-5II. And the question: Is the face that it's a > specialized tool offset the fact that it doesn't connect to the > internet? > Another way: Do i ever want another camera that doesn't have network > capability? > > I don't know yet. > Is it silly that I can buy a phone for so little that DOES share > photos and a camera for so much that doesn't? Hell yes. > I mean, what are 90% of us doing with any of these photos anyway? > Could CanNikon and the rest NOT really understand this?
Because we are not dealing with the expense of film, it may seem like a good way to go. But the monthly charges entailed in having a phone embedded in the camera would be an ongoing expense of several hundred dollars a month. Plus you would have to design a DSLR that wouldn't look ridiculous holding up to your ear. PLUS to just have cell phone, you'd have to carry your PENTANICANON with you all the time. (Not a bad thing, but burdensome) Got the picture? Addendum - if the PENTAX had a built in WiFi, and your iPhone talked to it, you would only be carrying the camera when needed. Try making a short USB Pentax cable with one of those WiFi SD cards hanging out of the camera data door, talking to your iPhone, which in turn was connected to the Internet, and YouTube! There (should be) an APP for that! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
