> On 14/09/2012 6:34 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: > I doubt that a lack of a competitive 24 x 36 camera will lead to immediate > defections over the holiday buying season, although it > might cost Pentax some sales to impressionable newbies. The Nikon certainly > wouldn't interest me if it couldn't equal the low- > light performance of the K-5. If the K-5 II matches the noise performance of > the K-5 with much better autofocus, it will get some > excellent reviews, and it will sell. Their are already some preliminary > whispers of praise for the filter-free version. Pentaxians have > fixated on frame dimension because they don't have a big one. I suspect that > much of the rest of the world doesn't care.
Paul, with all due respect this is basically what you've said for the past 9 or 10 years. If Pentax doesn't have it, why would one need it? When Pentax does finally come out with it, you're among the first to jump on the bandwagon and sing its praises. I remember you asking why anyone would need more than a 6MP DSLR when I was complaining about the fact that's all Pentax was churning out. The fact that they don't have a FF DSLR yet has led to my defection, and I've been shooting for years. The D800E is expensive but doable at less than half the cost of their prior FF DSLR in the category. There's a huge selection of lenses, and I'll have double the base resolution of anything Pentax has to offer. In addition, the D800/E does appear to have excellent low-light capability (I realize you're probably referring to the D600), and it'll have the superior AF. Actually the REST of the world does care. Evidence is the fact that the two largest DSLR manufacturers have multiple FF bodies and have had for years. Tom C. -- 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.
