On Sun, Apr 14, 2013, Brian Walters wrote: > Quoting Aahz Maruch <[email protected]>: >>On Sun, Apr 14, 2013, Mark C wrote: >>> >>>I am hoping that we see something out of Pentax - Ricoh that tells >>>us that they are serious about the K-AF mount and it's corresponding >>>glass. I really don't care if they lag the market regarding FF dslr, >>>but let's face it - the day is not far off when FF will be the >>>consumer standard for DSLR. >> >>Maybe. Assuming I buy an SLR, I'm basically wavering between the K-5 and >>the OM-D, I certainly don't want anything bulkier/heavier (especially for >>telephoto work). I picked Pentax for my upcoming cruise because I wanted >>weather sealing and m4/3 is really lacking there. I suspect it's not >>just cost that keeps people from full-frame even now, given the overall >>success of m4/3. > > If I wanted to be picky, I would point out that the OM-D isn't an > SLR but I'm not going to be picky....
That is indeed precisely my point: for anyone who never used a film SLR or mirror-based DSLR (and even for many who have), mirrorless ILCs are functionally "SLRs" using the duck test (this talks about programming, but should be clear enough, particularly if you just read the intro and history): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_typing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_typing#History The OM-D looks like an SLR, acts like an SLR, and has zero functional difference from an SLR aside from the EVF. The K-01 looks and acts less like an SLR, yet is strongly connected to an SLR lens family. I basically use "DSLR" to refer to ILCs in general, I see plenty of other people doing the same, I think it's a lost cause. ;-) -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- 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.
