[VoiceOfReason]

Plus, we could always wear underwear on top of our clothes to be different as well.

I'm rockin' that style today! For some reason people are looking at me weird though...

[Den]

It's from an art school student, who cares what he says!

[deadwolfbones]

Ah, you guys are right.

It's probably a good idea to dismiss the opinions of an entire group of people out of hand because you take offense at one of their number's use of your favorite brand name in a theoretical discussion of the aesthetics of mass-produced devices.

Probably best not to address his actual argument and instead imply that all designers/design students are looney tunes retards who have nothing to do with shaping pretty much every single product you use in everyday life. Surely design as a scholarly and practical field has been rendered entirely worthless, thanks to this blog post.

[Medium FormatPro]

Pentax's in general (K-5, K-01, etc..) have some of the best frames in the industry, period.

The person writting in the original link has zero clue of what they are trying to write about

[neil]

Who gives a rats behind what some random blogger says on the interweb? (I suppose you care for whatever reason...)

It's just a camera, a tool, a device used to capture your vision...enjoy using it and don't worry about 'defending' it.

[Medium FormatPro]

It's just a camera, a tool

I agree, if someone can capture whatever image satisfies them with any camera - then please go with it. But I still cannot believe all of th ePentax bashing, by people whom have never practically used the camera name. Guess it's all opinion versus fact

[neil]

I agree, if someone can capture whatever image satisfies them with any camera - then please go with it. But I still cannot believe all of th ePentax bashing, by people whom have never practically used the camera name. Guess it's all opinion versus fact

That's the thing though. If you look hard enough, there are posts "bashing" all brands of everything... Unless you are heavily invested in Pentax financially I see little reason to care so much...

[Blue]

Do me a favor and read through the blog post and find me ANY instance where he discusses ANY of the technology inside these cameras, except in relation to the look of the camera.

I did. Why don't you do me a favor and read the title and relate it to what he talked about. My point is he evaluated the units based on a paint job and implied that had something to do with function and intention which sounds a lot like ergonomics etc. Based on the title, his evaluation was incomplete. The paint color comes down to personal preference and the comment about the 40XS really had nothing to do with it. Most pix of that edition that I have seen actually had the silver DA 40 LTD on it like the one recently discontinued by BH.

[Blue]

Ah, you guys are right.

It's probably a good idea to dismiss the opinions of an entire group of people out of hand because you take offense at one of their number's use of your favorite brand name in a theoretical discussion of the aesthetics of mass-produced devices.

Probably best not to address his actual argument and instead imply that all designers/design students are looney tunes retards who have nothing to do with shaping pretty much every single product you use in everyday life. Surely design as a scholarly and practical field has been rendered entirely worthless, thanks to this blog post.

God forbid anyone have a different opinion than you. Blogs get talked about. That is why people write them. I agree some should be completely ignored. However, that isn't up to you or me to decide.

[deadwolfbones]

My point is he evaluated the units based on a paint job and implied that had something to do with function and intention which sounds a lot like ergonomics etc. Based on the title, his evaluation was incomplete. The paint color comes down to personal preference and the comment about the 40XS really had nothing to do with it. Most pix of that edition that I have seen actually had the silver DA 40 LTD on it like the one recently discontinued by BH.

And my point is that he is not evaluating the units AT ALL, as concerns their ability to be used as cameras. He is evaluating their aesthetics ONLY.

The comment about the DA40XS was, as I understood it, saying that it was silly to take a lens designed to be paired with a very specific, design-centric camera like Newson's K-01 and pair it with a "vanilla" dSLR like the K-5. Again, all aesthetics.

I think the title of the post is a red herring.

[deadwolfbones]

God forbid anyone have a different opinion than you. Blogs get talked about. That is why people write them. I agree some should be completely ignored. However, that isn't up to you or me to decide.

People are certainly allowed to have different opinions.

Example: *I* like the retro look of the E-M5, the Fuji cameras, and the silver K-5. But I also understand the philosophical argument the blogger in question is making, even if I disagree with it. (That argument, by the way, has zero to do with the capability of the Pentax, Nikon, Panasonic, or Olympus cameras that he mentions to take quality photographs.)

I also think that going "lol he's a design student, so what he says is worthless" is a pretty worthless response.

[jsherman999]

I did. Why don't you do me a favor and read the title and relate it to what he talked about. My point is he evaluated the units based on a paint job and implied that had something to do with function and intention which sounds a lot like ergonomics etc.

Not really, though. Ben has a point, the article really is about shaping and decorating the exterior to look like an older camera, even though those decorations are not tied in any way to functionality. It's an article completely about aesthetics.. stuff like weather-sealing, plastic-vs-magnesium, etc, are beside the point of the article.

You can argue with his aesthetic conclusions, because aesthetics is personal, but his argument has little to do with the 'merits' of a camera beyond outside appearance.

(For example, he likes the V-1, but I think it's both butt-ugly and functionally headache-inducing. But the functionally headache-inducing point is also mostly beside the point of that article )

Based on the title, his evaluation was incomplete.

I think the "function" in the title referred to the lack of any functional reason for retro external decorations.


.

[Blue]

Not really, though. Ben has a point, the article really is about shaping and decorating the exterior to look like an older camera, even though those decorations are not tied in any way to functionality. It's an article completely about aesthetics.. stuff like weather-sealing, plastic-vs-magnesium, etc, are beside the point of the article.

You can argue with his aesthetic conclusions, because aesthetics is personal, but his argument has little to do with the 'merits' of a camera beyond outside appearance.

(For example, he likes the V-1, but I think it's both butt-ugly and functionally headache-inducing. But the functionally headache-inducing point is also mostly beside the point of that article )



I think the "function" in the title referred to the lack of any functional reason for retro external decorations.


.

Even if the silver makes the K-5 butt ugly, it doesn't effect its function or form any more than black does. I am not even sure if it is retro. Silver is more of a special edition thing for Pentax. I personally don't see the point of it unless it was a metal case like the old K bodies or Spotmatics and such. What if the K-5 was in read or yellow? It still has the same form and function. The color is a totally different thing than the EVF/prism argument. Plus he drug the 40 XS into the argument which could be argued to add functionality since it is a pancake regardless of looks. That is what I am getting at. I haven't discussed the other cameras in the argument because he had something there to say other than color.

[Blue]

People are certainly allowed to have different opinions.

Example: *I* like the retro look of the E-M5, the Fuji cameras, and the silver K-5. But I also understand the philosophical argument the blogger in question is making, even if I disagree with it. (That argument, by the way, has zero to do with the capability of the Pentax, Nikon, Panasonic, or Olympus cameras that he mentions to take quality photographs.)

I also think that going "lol he's a design student, so what he says is worthless" is a pretty worthless response.

I didn't make a comment like that nor did I comment on his competence as a designer.

[Jean Poitiers]

Bonjour,

Whether it's "aesthetics and/or functionality" that one is "reviewing and/or evaluating", you look like an idiot when there are enormous research mistakes ...

Anyone could have found out in about 0.001 Google milliseconds that the K-5 is not plastic ... that's what shocks and renders instantly to any knowledgeable reader that you do NOT have a clue ... thus the rest of what you write is probably "crap" as well.

An example now, let me review a car design for you ... It's the 1967 FORD Corvette convertible ... I do not like the curvy shapes of this car's STEEL fenders and rear tail fin ... and what astonishes me the most is that this car has NO HEADLIGHTS !!!

Allez & ne lisez pas les conneries comme ça ... Salut, J Frog