Very half-hearted effort at Luminous Landscape on K7 review

Why does he even bother withsomething so below his level.

We think amonst the same lines my friend....

He is comparing EVERYOTHER camera out there with the K-7, lame.

how is being the smallest, quietist, most weather-resistant DSLR in its market segment not a Unique Selling Point?

he talks about the tiny Limiteds, and even starts the review as saying the K-7 competes with the Rebel in SIZE but is feature competitive with bigger, much more expensive and advanced cameras. amazingly, he still makes this sound like a bad thing in tone with the whole review.

he must not like small, tough cameras because the size difference amongst its peers is glaring and he chose to ignore it with his final judgement.

It does remind me a bit of the K2000 which also received some lackluster reviews.

I have shot quite a number of times with those using same or higher level cameras and I keep finding the poor ol' K2000 will AF quickly in lower light when others are struggling. I see it getting the metering and light right when others are having trouble and also see better real world DR. This is from a cheap model. I would assume the K7 is considerably better.

The AS is also an very nice value added feature that should not be underestimated.
--
Variance is Evil!

Katsura said:

Actually his opinion is worse - what he is compare, is multiple camera's strongest points against a single K-7, why don't he pack 15 cameras on his trip and use each one for it's 'advanced performace' over the K-7?

The K-7 is brilliant not because it excells at a single field and neglects others but because it's all rounder.

Click to expand...

This conclusion about the K7 by LL is somewhat humorous given what was said in LL's *ist DS review:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-jan-05.shtml

"The DS, you see, has something that a lot of other cameras don't – and it's something I personally like a lot. It's just about "perfectly sorted," to use the term Phil Askey applied to the D2h. It's plain, which is perfect. While it may not do any one thing the absolute best, it does everything well, in a simple, straightforward, ergonomically sound, and conservatively designed package."

I think that Michael's mistake is the following (and I'm a really fan of his work, and have read most if not all essays in the last 4 years): LENSES.

When he got the possibility to choose a system for review, went for what he would have chosen with Canon or Nikon: a wide angle zoom, and a fast short tele zoom. But Pentax is not any of them. And therefore, Pentax is not designed to stand out with those lenses, because the concept is different. The Pentax K7 is designed for photographers who wish to be not light, but actually unseen. That is the limited concept: small lenses, that make the photographer be ignored, compared to a Canon with a big zoom lens.

Yes, maybe the Pentax K7 doesn't stand out, as there are cameras that make everything a little better... but those cameras cannot be used like the K7 can.

Perhaps... IMHO, Michael would have been more impressed with the K7, if he could have done the photography he's not used to do with a DSLR, nor even with the panasonic GH1, as it doesn't have an OVF, or 5 fps, or weather sealing.

It would be interesting to know Michael's opinion, if he could use the K7 with a complete set of DA limiteds.
--
Alan Schamber

Progress is not possible without deviation from the norm - Frank Zappa

Well no one's disagreed with your POV so far!

Katsura said:

What an idiot. And I am entitled to my POV of his review.

Click to expand...

--
Best regards

Greg



. He who can't laugh at himself need not worry - others will do it for him

Well, what are we looking for in a semi-pro camera? For me, first of all, I want a tough, weather-proof body and a high-quality standard zoom. Let's look at the top five manufacturers and what they offer in this area:

Canon 7D + 17-55 f2.8 ............ $2760
Nikon D300s + 17-55 f2.8 ........ $3130
Olympus E3 + 12-60 f2.8-4.0 .... $2190
Pentax K7 + 16-50 f2.8 ........... $1900
Sony A700 + 16-80 f3.5-4.5 ..... $1600

So if you eliminate the Oly and the Sony as being a generation or two behind (no video) and the Sony combo lacking in build-quality, It's pretty easy to spot the Unique Selling Point of the K7.

Reichmann is a faux-contrarian (he's also rather prickly and cold if you've ever corresponded with him); The K7 is the buzz camera of the moment, so MR felt the need to go, "meh, whatever."

In the non full-frame DSLR market, he's notoriously tough on anything not named Canon or Nikon, even if he has to fudge a little to support his case.

Having said that, I like his photography and I respect anything he has to say about digital post-production.
--
Cheers from Canada
Homepage: http://www.curvesandlevels.com
Member of Lonely Planet's BlogSherpa program

but not interested in "upgrading" to the K7 or buying further Pentax lenses (I have only 4 and the 77LTD basically covers my particular interest) until Hoya has either sold or established an understandable future for Pentax, I would make this comment -

(BACKGROUND) I owned Canon for some 10 years before switching to the K10D (basically for the inbody stabilization and wonderful feature set - which improved in the K20D - and my favorite 35mm was the Olympus OM series (I had used Leica, Nikon, Hasselblad etc).

The Pentax forum has become a rather sad place lately; everybody is so defensive. ANY review (or any comment by anybody ) which does not see the Pentax line as the very best of all cameras is treated as beneath contempt.

This is a sad reaction, and the forum is of increasingly little use because of the rigid fanboy mentality.

I can predict - as anyone could - the comments on this post !

You can't learn anything much here because everything with Pentax on it is perfect. Much of what one looks for in an equipment forum is workarounds for the limitations all equipment has. But since Pentax has no limitations on this forum, being perfection incarnate, there is little to learn here.

Too bad. I think this mindset may have started to become serious with the frantic, desperate reaction to the word "just" in a Pentax dpreview review a few years ago.

Too bad.
--
Bill Wilson

Thank you, thank you, thank you. It isn't that Pentax is awful, in fact it has many excellent features. Honestly I've shot most systems out there (yes even a Hassy) and none is perfect. But this is the most defensive and insecure forum going. They don't want to be compared to other brands but they are always bringing Canon or Nikon into their discussions. What they want here is unconditional praise, and, I for one will not succumb to this herd mentality. You got a guy who is so far over the top that even if he does make sense all I think of is Eddie Haskell or that Niedermeyer ROTC guy in Animal House. He thinks those who disagree with him are jealous and envious (talk about an ego). This guy is a classic case of a personality that has identified with a product, ergo, any criticism of that product is a criticism of him. But the most appalling feature are these wannabe sycophants that likewise need his affirmation for their own sense of selfhood. You know there are some people who are doing terrific work with Pentax gear (K. McCall and Devisor come immediately to mind) but they are not posting mundane stationary seagull shots taken in broad daylight to solicit huzzahs from their acolytes (term borrowed from jthommo). Most people can do that with a P&S.

I'm sorry, tvw, you and Rennie are both wrong.

This thread was mostly about Mr. Reichmann's lack of effort and honesty. I read every comment here and nobody claimed Pentax to be the greatest camera of all (or whatever it is you're accusing them of). The posters did say the K7 has a great feature set at a very attractive price and they're puzzled that Mr. Reichmann felt the need to downplay that.

Can you defend Reichmann's article without all the negativity you've brought to this thread so far? If so, we're waiting...
--
Cheers from Canada
Homepage: http://www.curvesandlevels.com
Member of Lonely Planet's BlogSherpa program

Everything in quotes is Reichman

"Pentax cameras have long been criticized for not have as responsive an AF system as some of their competitors. Reportedly the K7 is improved, and I certainly wouldn't call it poor when it comes to autofocus, but it doesn't quite seem in the same league as it's prime competitors." DPR wrote:
AF speed not quite up with the fastest in class

"Because of schedule constraints during the time that I've had to work with the K7 I'm going to refer you elsewhere on this one. Imaging Resource has done a very nice job of comparing the K7 to other cameras in its category, and since I always find IR's work to be fair and well executed I'm going to simply recommend that you look there to satisfy your image quality comparison hunger." There were many here who posted links to the IR review ad gushed over its findings. Reichman is being extremely honest and even asking that you look at a more thorough review

" It's a competent camera and does a lot of things well and not too many poorly. Image quality is fine, but not exceptional, and maybe a bit noisier than some." DPR wrote:

Less dynamic range than direct competitors and Measurably and visibly more noise than competition at high ISOs (JPEG)

"In the end, the Pentax is a fine camera and anyone who finds it of interest will likely not be disappointed with its purchase. Don't regard this as damning with faint praise. It's a camera that will likely to be found equal to the needs of most photographers looking in this price and performance category. It just failed to light my fire. "

In short, he didn't say anything bad about this camera and his reservations were echoed by DPR. So, you tell me, where's the beef? There isn't any unless you are looking for unconditional praise. I stand by my post that you respionded to.This forum is extremely insecure about anything that doesn't see Pentax as the sine qua non. They can't even accept the fact that Reichman called it a fine camera, what they want is for him to callit the finest camera.

tvw said:

Thank you, thank you, thank you. It isn't that Pentax is awful, in fact it has many excellent features. Honestly I've shot most systems out there (yes even a Hassy) and none is perfect. But this is the most defensive and insecure forum going. They don't want to be compared to other brands but they are always bringing Canon or Nikon into their discussions. What they want here is unconditional praise, and, I for one will not succumb to this herd mentality. You got a guy who is so far over the top that even if he does make sense all I think of is Eddie Haskell or that Niedermeyer ROTC guy in Animal House. He thinks those who disagree with him are jealous and envious (talk about an ego). This guy is a classic case of a personality that has identified with a product, ergo, any criticism of that product is a criticism of him. But the most appalling feature are these wannabe sycophants that likewise need his affirmation for their own sense of selfhood. You know there are some people who are doing terrific work with Pentax gear (K. McCall and Devisor come immediately to mind) but they are not posting mundane stationary seagull shots taken in broad daylight to solicit huzzahs from their acolytes (term borrowed from jthommo). Most people can do that with a P&S.

Click to expand...

LOL. This is one of the funniest posts I have read in a while.

I think you should take your schoolboy attempt psychology and apply it to yourself just to see what a sad, envious, jealous case you actually are. Have a good look in the mirror, oh sad and lonely one. You are not upset at me, but upset at yourself because you are not looked upon with the same respect that I have garnered here and that's what really upsets you. So, in order to gain respect and to set the "herd mentality" straight you resort to knock down the tall poppy in a forlorn attempt to make yourself look better and if that doesn't work, then it must be the "herd mentality" as God forbid that you could be deemed wrong. Not only that you have the audacity to label and attack those that dare agree with me by calling them sycophants. Talk about belief in your own self importance!! Hahahaha! You're a joke.

--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b

Lance, did you read what you wrote? You actually made my case, unwittingly, of course, you referred to yourself as "the tall poppy". That is exactly my point and the point of others, who challenge you. You deem yourself superior.

tvw said:

Lance, did you read what you wrote? You actually made my case, unwittingly, of course, you referred to yourself as "the tall poppy". That is exactly my point and the point of others, who challenge you. You deem yourself superior.

Click to expand...

Hahaha. This just gets funnier. Again, trying to denegrate in order to make yourself look better which has the opposite effect. Give up sonny, you're out of your league. Why don;t you go back to the Canon forum and reverse your negative attitude and you will see that you might just get some respect after all. LOL.

--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b

As I did a while ago...
--
Alan Schamber

Progress is not possible without deviation from the norm - Frank Zappa

Hi Alan,

I think you've really hit on something there. I also really enjoy reading Michael's stuff, and have learned much from his work, but I think he completely misses the beauty of the K-7. Personally, I just don't think he spent enough time with it, but everyone has different needs and tastes. I see he's updated his "what's new" to state how people are backing him up etc... but he just reiterates missing the point (which in all fairness may be something completely irrelevant to his type of shooting, but I have a difficult time imagining that).

snip "...it doesn't have any one aspect of its design or performance that makes it stand out"

What makes it stand out is exactly what all of its enthusiastic users like, and why I'm chomping at the bit to get one. Among other things, it's the perfect compact landscape camera, particularly with the great Pentax prime lenses! Come on... compact, with weatherproofing, in camera stabilization, quiet shutter, zillions of unique adjustable parameters for whatever type of shooting you like, and at a price point well below the features offered... it's the ONLY camera out there that offers all of that.
Can't please everybody.

Best regards,
Mark

--

A Schamber said:

As I did a while ago...

Click to expand...

I try to, but then some of his assertions are so funny I just feel the need to comment. I love the comments he made by him "I for one will not succumb to this herd mentality" and then the comment "But the most appalling feature are these wannabe sycophants that likewise need his affirmation for their own sense of selfhood" and then has the temerity to accuse me of thinking I am superior!! Hahahaha. His hyporcacy is so breathtaking it's almost too funny to contemplate.

Anyway, Alan, I thank you for your concerns and support and I will do my best to try to avoid the hypocrite in future.

A Schamber said:

--
Alan Schamber

Progress is not possible without deviation from the norm - Frank Zappa

Click to expand...

--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b

joseluismx said:

joseluismx said:

After a full day of initial familiarization I rarely found myself reaching for the K7 by choice. Not because of any particular failing, but simply because there were features or capabilities of other cameras available that simply were more compelling and which I felt would help me take better images more effectively.

Click to expand...

He doesn't say which cameras he had available, nor which features were more compelling that would permit better images, i wonder why...

Click to expand...

Perhaps, the focus of the article was the K7, not a comparison of various dSLR cameras.

--
rc

--
rc