> Darren Addy wrote: > > What are bashing? You haven't touched it yet.
You. :) Certainly not the K-3. I was reacting to the word "leapfrogs" in Bill's post. > Not sure what you are referring to when you say "beat the same old > drum", and maybe you haven't been following the earlier threads on the > K-3 specs - but this camera is upgraded in waaaay more ways than just > a higher resolution sensor. To me the biggest thing that unlocks most > of its capabilities is the "PRIME III" image processor (Fujitsu > Milbeaut version 7). Others are intrigued by the innovative, > selectable AA. Others are happy that Pentax finally appears to be > catching up in the AF arena. ALL of these upgrades in one camera? When the topic has come up regarding the lack of a higher resolution sensor you tend to downplay the desirability of one when Pentax doesn't have one and make statements like 'it's not the only thing that's important', which is true. Then when I mention just the 24MP sensor, without mentioning other specifications, you infer my 'thinking has not advanced' regarding the importance of MP, as if it was retarded. That's what I mean. Yes I understood all that. I heard that AF was upgraded on the K-7, the K-5, and the K-5II as well. I'm not saying it's not on the K-3. It is on paper. We'll know when someone is able to objectively test it. > This is certainly true, but it is like judging a computer based only > on the speed of the processor and not looking at the other components > like bus speed, etc. etc. Cameras and computers are similar in that, > just because a new processor comes out (or a new sensor) there may not > be hardware and software that can take advantage of all of its > capabilities for a year or two. That is why the age of the processor > (even if it is 1-1/2 year old technology) doesn't matter. The PRIME > III can handle the data that sensor puts out. The Nikon D7100 is an > example of a camera with the same sensor, but crippled by using the > previous generation of image processor in concert with it. (Nikon - > and other manufacturers that use the Milbeaut v7 - will catch up, and > probably very soon, but there is a reason why Nikon guru Thom Hogan > was moaning about how the K-3 meets the needs of a certain demographic > of "serious photographer" that Nikon seems to be neglecting). It's your assumption that it's the only thing I judge it on. The sensor MP was the only thing I mentioned because it's an easy number to reference and defines the camera in many ways. Manufacturers and writers don't say the "The K-3 is a PRIME III camera", or "the K-3 is a Milbeaut X camera", or 'the K-3 is an 8.3 FPS camera'. They say "the K-3 is a 24MP camera" because the sensor is the preeminent component. I wasn't planning on reiterating the entire list of specifications. I read Thom Hogan also. As you say he's a Nikon afficiando. Much of what he writes though is criticisms of Nikon in the hopes that it will possibly influence their decision making. I suspect the use of image processor is largely a case of 'what' was available 'when'. > Where did you get the impression that I don't think it is "among the > most important" components? Really now Darren. :) [Rereads the message that I was replying to.] Yep. The higher resolution sensor was the ONLY thing you mentioned. Not that being presumptuous and mistaken is entirely foreign to me, however. :) See above. 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.
