I am genuinely surprised to find out Pentax is still in business making digital cameras. I'm yet to see one tourist/photographer on the streets of NY using a Pentax. That probably explains why most forums don't even have a Pentax sub forum. Pentax might still be in this business due to some hardcore Pentax cheerleaders. They are the only ones seeing the end of the rainbow, the magic of HD coating (whatever that is) in their final pictures. I flipped a few pages on Flickr and couldn't find a reason to own such system. Canikon is equally good and they already have tons of lenses to choose from. No need to get excited if they 'reinvent' the wheel.
Jon Schick: The strategy of making a well-priced version of an existing well-regarded lens makes sense to me - and if Pentax offer this as the kit lens rather than a slower f3.5-5.6 or constant f4 offering, then I think they are reading the reasons why many people choose to move to FF quite carefully.
"Despite the fact 1300 USD is surprisingly low for a fast zoom"
Yeah, they should have priced the lens at $7500 to make you happy. $1300 low? Are you guys for real? What if the lens is a dud? What if the lens is only usable starting with f4? How can you guys say 'it's cheap' when you did not have a chance to test it. Besides, Pentax is not Canon or Nikon to ask a premium. Pentax is just.....Pentax. I'm surprised they are still in business at this point. $1300 cheap, huh?
brownie314: Wake me up when the fire sales start. Everyone who was going to buy this camera bought the last version. I don't think wifi will cause anyone to buy this one. An eye-fi card gets you most of the functionality of in-camera wi-fi.
Why so much hatred towards Ricoh. No one is forcing you to buy. Better spend your time going out and shoot.
sapporodan: So by releasing this camera are they going to update the older version? Its the same camera, and 90% of the changes are firmware.So will the people who own the original be loosing out of these updates that would have likely been destined for the first one?
Just a thought.
Oh, boy.....this problem has been beaten to death by now. Don't like it, don't buy it. Duh
belle100: Judging from the price, they must all be much higher quality. However, I don't understand why it needs to be higher quality than their still counterparts. I mean the resolution of 4K is 4096x2160, which is much lower than those of still image (typical 24MP) required.
"Anyway, getting the 8Mpix equivalent sharpness at the corners is not cheap, especially at T1.5”Whomever shoots wide open doesn't need sharp corners
Oh, my......people freak like they are paying Leica prices. Come on guys! This is a cheap camera to start with. It'll be worth $50 after a couple years of use. Who needs a serial number on a disposable product. On the other hand, people should just go out, shoot and stop worrying about labels. The only people not worried are the ones in the field using their cameras.
Wow, I went through most posts and I can't believe there are so many losers that hate rich people. She's rich because she's good at something. Most people are good at nothing, hence the 8-5pm daily schedule they have to follow until they retire.
Le Kilt: Who's Taylor Swift?
A girl that has made about $300milfrom music. A girl that buys $20mil apartments in NY. A girl that would never pass gas for many nobody's around dpreview. Seriously, a nobody
Gediminas 8: "one of the most successful commercial pop stars of all time"
This "of all time" is really tiring.
Who is " Taylor Swift " ? Did she play alongside Elvis, Pink Floyd , The Beatles, The Rolling Stones ?
Who's Rolling Stones? Or pink Floyd?
Bene Placito: "Taylor Swift" and "Music" are mutually exclusive.
That explains why she has tens of millions$$$$ from music.
Jason Sheldon? Who's this nobody?
Everythingis1: Sooooo, what exactly are the dangers again?
"Capacitor exploding in your eyes"
Good thing Canon flashes don't use capacitors, especially those made in China
d10694: I like the SJ4000 fakes (copies or clones ?) of GoPro's, which are now being faked (copied / cloned ?) themselves, so we now have fakes of fakes on GoPros, or should that be clones of GoPros being copied, or should that be faked, or cloned ?
At least the sellers are quite happy to state that it is a clone, and to sell it cheaper, and Amazon are happy to let them do so.
Yet, technically they are supposed to be pretty good.
I have one of those SJ cameras, which I purchased about a year ago for one event. At the time I had a choice, gopro for $400 or SJ for $60. Paid $60, used it for that one event, and it collects dust on a shelf. I'd rather have a $60 collect dust than a $400. The output is as good a gopro (I compared it with my friend's gopro 3)
tocar: When and if these flashes fail or explode Canon's reputation would be at stake. How come they copied everything including the name? Are they selling these flashes at the same price as Canon's?
These flashes are made by the same people, in the same factories. Why would these fail and not the original ones. Besides, I e heard the same story about third party batteries for 15 years now, and I'm yet to hear about one battery that damaged a camera. Original battery $50, third party $5. Original flash $500, fake $150
The only users here are the ones that paid $500 for the real thing, made in China, when they could have had the China made flash for $50.
jefmcc: probably made in the same factory, same assembly line, by the same workers
"This seems to be an inferior counterfeit product crafted only to enrich the criminals who are selling it."Can you tell just by looking at the pictures?
RichRMA: Nothing p------ off an Ebay seller than having to spend time answering endless inane, masturbatory questions from a "list-maker."
Good one. I hate answering a ton of questions only to be told "well, this camera is too big for my hands". Like the size of the camera has changed by the time I answered his endless list.
"When buying a camera body, look to purchase from users who clearly state the number of shutter actuations the camera has"
And if they give you the shutter actuations number, that means the camera is genuine and you can trust the seller for telling the truth. Cool logic
shademaster: small body doesn't make sense without small lenses.
You mean small like the Fuji 27? Or maybe the 18mm lens? What about the 35mm lens? Not enough, Mr Pro?
Paul Verhoeven: "It starts at $799 body-only, $899 with the XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 lens"
Good luck competing with $499 E-M10 and E-M5 14-42 kits, and $699 a6000+16-50 kit.
Meh, first of all, the M5 is a FIVE years old camera with a much smaller sensor than Fuji's. On the other hand, Olympus colors are over saturated, fake. It might work for people that like fake colors.