munro harrap: You all seem to be debating an image merely because it is here on show again.It is here on show again, is a clue. You all take pictures this good all the time, but they are not published on covers etc because you do not work in the industry.
The girl's history and the circumstances cannot be gauged from the shot- it's just a snap, and because she has big eyes it is attractive- like TV presenters with big eyes- think The Gadget Show....
So the media are manipulating you as usual, which is why I quit 40 years ago. The choice of this image is fiscal- they chose the pic they knew would sell the magazine- like a page 3 girl in the Sun. It has nothing to do with photography at all, but money- its the money shot.
Let me disagree, it's not just a snapshot. It's a masterpiece. As in many McCurry works you can see all the dignity of the person in this picture, all her desperation, everything.It's not the big, beautiful green eyes, it's something more. something that I can find in every McCurry book I've read.bye
Brian Thomas: Thanks, Richard for answering my question about the shutter sound. Interestingly, in your video presentation, your subjective statement that the shutter sound "is about average" is the most valuable piece of information for me.
I don't think WP will hurt anyone, K200D was mid range WP and doesn't hurt anybody.. except maybe Pentax itself.
Sorry to be hursh but I don't like this review at all, the conclusion on the quality page is: "Overall the R3000 is more than capable of producing excellent prints, and with some fine tuning by the end user perfect color prints should be easily obtained. "
but wait, SHOULD?? It's not a review of a 50$, the review MUST give complete and precise information, is a 1000$ printer! We can't buy it on a SHOULD comment!
I'm think that this review is quite a big step back from Oliver's excellent reviews on photo-i.co, this is my biggest element of regret.anyway is the first review here on dpr and I hope that next issues will be much better.