driftnomore: is my k-5 better than the k-3?
Yes, it's 2 better...
paulski66: Well, on the plus side, at least we won't have to read any more posts from all the Pentax fanboys complaining "Where's the K-3 review?" every time DPReview posts a review of any other camera.
Would that I could avoid them, D1NO. Every review DPR publishes is met with the same chorus of bitching and whining from the Pentaxians, though hopefully this will give us all a temporary respite.
And btw, where the hell is the D4 review?!? The D4 was released over 2 years ago! The K-3 is less than 6 months old, and already we get a full review of it, while we patiently wait and wait for the D4 review and...nothing.
Well, on the plus side, at least we won't have to read any more posts from all the Pentax fanboys complaining "Where's the K-3 review?" every time DPReview posts a review of any other camera.
Heie2: So it's *exactly* the same, but with a couple extremely minor differences. Essentially the EXACT same.
Well so is the Pentax K-50/K-500 from the Pentax K-30 for the most part except a new body and the entry (K-500) and mid-entry/consumer (K-50) differentiation to the product line.
The point being, the review would be extremely easy and quick, just like the D610 must have been. But, there's one thing that is most curious...
D610 Annoucement: October 8th, 2013D610 Review Complete: March 12th, 2014 (124 days)
K-50/K-500 Announcement: June 12th, 2013K-50/K-500 Review Complete: 273 days and counting...
DPR: Fair and Balanced.
My dad shot a Pentax in Vietnam, and used it while I was growing up. His is the last Pentax I've seen in the wild. Not only do I not know anyone who shoots Pentax, I live withing driving distance of two great camera stores, neither of which stocks Pentax.
Pentax has a great legacy, but I would be shocked if they're still making cameras in 10 years...hell, in 5 years. Maybe fans of the brand will get lucky and Sony or someone will buy them up and release a Pentax-branded throwback camera every few years.
But complaining because DPReview reviews Nikons and Canons faster than they review the latest Pentax offering is absurd.
I've had my d600 for over a year now and cleaned the sensor exactly once. Absolutely brilliant camera; I don't regret my decision to purchase it one iota.
Yes, I understand the some people have had issues, and Nikon should have addressed these in a more forthright manner. But I also think the whole thing has been somewhat overblown, and that there are many, many more happy d600 owners than unhappy ones...though as always the unhappy owners are the most vocal.
Thank you, God!
Gary Martin: Sigma has been bringing it.
What does Sigm have to do with this Samyang lens?
I thought Nano Crystal Coating was a Nikon-specific technology. I find it impossible to believe that they sold the rights to use this to Samyang. I'm confused...
DonSantos: I think the expected price rumor was already debunked by nikonrumors themselves
Yes, but Nikon Rumors said they are now 100% certain this rumor was 100% false. That means the $3,000 price is no longer a rumor, but simply a made-up lie.
This article picks and chooses info from a number of different posts on this rumored camera. Specifically, the "$3000 to $3300 price" speculation comes from a post that the author of Nikon rumors now says was based on fraudulent information.
As posted on NR: "I am now 100% sure that the D4H specifications [where the above quoted price figures came from] I posted yesterday were 100% fake."
marike6: Has anybody found any MTF tests for the 18-140 VR online? It would be interesting to see how it compares to the slightly more expensive 18-200 VR.
It has a far better build quality with a metal mount vs the 18-55 VR and a more useful range so if it's solid optically, it could make a good travel lens and a solid alternative price-wise to the 18-200 VR.
15 times the cost? Refurbed (not new, mind you) 18-55 VRs go for $119 at Robert's in Indy. Are you suggesting the 18-140 costs $1785?
Where did you get this 15x figure? Is Fox News doing your fact checking?
JimWongyyz: This is one ugly lens. Do you guys agree ?
My first thoughts exactly...
I think I saw this on an episode of The Brady Bunch when I was a kid...
Interesting that this overpriced lens for a fringe system has gotten so many more comments than the long-awaited Canon 200-400 f/4 (and even more egregiously overpriced) announcement, even though that lens has the novelty of the built in 1.4x teleconverter.
24hrexposure: Guess I can't use my f1.4 zoom...
The LX7 is 1.4 at it's widest focal length.
Makes me almost want to buy a DX camera again...
blosshapperter: this one was first for a very long time...
I love this shot...
I suffer from occasional bouts of vertigo, and looking at this image makes me dizzy. Outstanding!