Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-19-2012, 09:22 PM   #1
Site Supporter
LaurenOE's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,463
Cheap shot at Pentax

I read a blog article today at

http://www.minimallyminimal.com/journal/2012/3/5/coffee-time-form-vs-functio...ntention.html/

about - journal - minimally minimal

There is a cheap shot at the K5 calling it a "Plastic Camera".

Not cool.



04-19-2012, 09:27 PM   #2
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 7,411
Who cares?

They said it's ridiculous to paint a plastic camera (the external shell of the K-5 is polycarbonate) to look metallic, and many might agree with that. Personally, I think the limited edition looks nice, but it's just an opinion.

Taken in the context of the rest of the post it's not a dig against Pentax, but rather against the practice of trying to make modern cameras look "retro" for no good reason.
04-19-2012, 09:30 PM   #3
Site Supporter
LaurenOE's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,463
Original Poster
It's still a cheap shot. Also the external shell on the K5 is NOT polycarbonate. It's textured over the magnesium. BIG difference.



It doesn't help that a Pentax user is ignorant of that fact.
04-19-2012, 09:40 PM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 7,411
Yeah, my bad. Parts of the exterior (on the rear) are poly, but the front and top are magnesium with powder coating.

Anyway, you're missing the point of the blog post in order to get worked up over a perceived slight. He's not trying to call out Pentax for making a "plastic camera," he's implying that all modern dSLRs are "plastic cameras" and that trying to dress them up like classic film SLRs is dumb. You can agree with him on that point or not, but to get upset over him namedropping the K-5 in the process is pretty much fangirl dementia.

04-19-2012, 09:44 PM   #5
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by LaurenOE Quote
I read a blog article today at

Coffee Time: Form vs Function vs Intention

about - journal - minimally minimal

There is a cheap shot at the K5 calling it a "Plastic Camera".

Not cool.

Contact him by email and tell them it is texture over magnesium and that there is more magnesium shell than the Nikon D7000.

Edit: I just did as well

minimallyminimal@me.com

Last edited by Blue; 04-20-2012 at 12:09 PM.
04-19-2012, 09:49 PM   #6
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by deadwolfbones Quote
Who cares?

They said it's ridiculous to paint a plastic camera (the external shell of the K-5 is polycarbonate) to look metallic, and many might agree with that. Personally, I think the limited edition looks nice, but it's just an opinion.

Taken in the context of the rest of the post it's not a dig against Pentax, but rather against the practice of trying to make modern cameras look "retro" for no good reason.
Still a dumb comment regarding a weather sealed camera whether it is Pentax or Nikon D7000, but not necessarily a cheap shot.

This part was kind of weird also. I would expect it to come with the LTD. But it is a k-mount. Lens and a pancake so I don't see it as insulting since I would rather have it than the DA 18-55 AL II. I don't think the guy realized the K-5 had a real viewfinder.

QuoteQuote:
It’s also particularly insulting because the limited edition package comes with a 40mm lens that was designed by Marc Newson for his K-01 (bottom).

Last edited by Blue; 04-20-2012 at 12:09 PM.
04-19-2012, 09:53 PM - 1 Like   #7
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 7,411
I give up.
04-19-2012, 10:24 PM   #8
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,367
Nothing he wrote about cameras, computers or cars was either original or interesting. Having been through university, I know that sort of bull-s**t is pushed into young minds by design lecturers. Style 'A' is the only correct way, Style 'B' is philosophically bankrupt.

One day he'll wake up and get his own opinions and not those of his professors.

04-19-2012, 10:35 PM   #9
Site Supporter
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,195
QuoteOriginally posted by deadwolfbones Quote
Who cares?
I sure don't...i have a k-5 and I love it. If he wrote that the k-5 was the ugliest, worst camera on the market, I still wouldn't care.
If he wrote an article making fun of my mom, that would make me pissed...my camera, not so much
04-19-2012, 10:41 PM - 1 Like   #10
Veteran Member
timh's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Wales
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 445
I think he's simply wrong about everything. What matters is that stuff works well and looks good. There are multiple valid ways to do that. Retro is fine.

The irony: I bet he's an instagram user. :-)
04-19-2012, 10:45 PM   #11
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,367
QuoteOriginally posted by timh Quote
the irony: I bet he's an instagram user. :-)
rofl!
04-19-2012, 10:58 PM   #12
Pentaxian
mikeSF's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Bay Area, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,523
QuoteOriginally posted by deadwolfbones Quote
... but to get upset over him namedropping the K-5 in the process is pretty much fangirl dementia.
seriously?
04-20-2012, 12:41 AM   #13
Pentaxian
aurele's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,906
this article gave me a good laugh !

He's studying design, and sill, he don't get why brand produce some retro production ? Come on ! it's all about attracting old user to new product, to surf on the good image of the rock-solid item that last for years (the complete opposite of today production, btw...), it's less about design and more about brand recognition (1st year of economy @college, btw ...).

About the design : what the fu** is wrong to re-use a design that worked perfectly for the past years ? See Leica : from film to digital, it's more or less the same design and the basic bouton are still at the same place, and that's good, because ergo is good too. Why change for something worst ?
Same for the OM-1 : the design is really good.
Idem for the K-5 : it keep going in a peculiar ergo which is reconize for year to be very good ! (on the SuperA and the MZ-5n, they ergo are not very far from the K-x nor the K-5.)

So yeah, retro can be boring, but for fu** sakes the design is good !
04-20-2012, 03:32 AM   #14
Site Supporter
Jean Poitiers's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lost in translation ...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,376
Stupid article ...

Bonjour,

Blog garbage here concernng the K-5 ... not much else to add. Doesn't even pass the "sniff" test ...

Salut, JFrog
04-20-2012, 04:44 AM   #15
Site Supporter
LaurenOE's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,463
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by deadwolfbones Quote
Yeah, my bad. Parts of the exterior (on the rear) are poly, but the front and top are magnesium with powder coating.

Anyway, you're missing the point of the blog post in order to get worked up over a perceived slight. He's not trying to call out Pentax for making a "plastic camera," he's implying that all modern dSLRs are "plastic cameras" and that trying to dress them up like classic film SLRs is dumb. You can agree with him on that point or not, but to get upset over him namedropping the K-5 in the process is pretty much fangirl dementia.
Actually, I'm not missing the point. Form over function. He implied that the K5 has no right "looking" like a metal camera if it was not metal. Just like the OM-D had no right having a Pentaprism hump since it doesn't have one.

He was talking about a "fake" design aesthetic, and while the K-01 has some retro elements, it is nothing like the homage of the OM-D, - not even close.

Overall, a cheap shot at Pentax.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, pentax k-5, shot
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Any cheap 200mm fast cheap prime suggestions? tr13 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 32 03-08-2013 02:30 AM
Pentax 35mm f2 cheap! Lemmy Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 07-20-2010 07:49 AM
For Sale - Sold: [US] 2 Cheap ME Supers, 1 Cheap ME - Pentax film bodies Just1MoreDave Sold Items 2 02-21-2010 02:11 PM
Cheap manual lens on cheap extension tube with cheap flash! Also cats. pasipasi Post Your Photos! 12 08-28-2008 04:43 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:50 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top