Originally posted by Blue 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
)
Quote: 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.
.