[johnyates]

From the TOP site, dated yesterday:

If you need anything from me that has nothing to do with the print sale, now is not a good time. In fact it's possible things might be pretty quiet around here for the next few days, as I do fun things like track and print orders, relearn (yet again) how to use a spreadsheet program, and cram every hour's worth of data entry tasks into about two and a half hours (my mind wanders. I have to go back and check. And then once more. I am just not good at this sort of thing). If so, I apologize. TOP World Headquarters is, among other deficiencies, egregiously understaffed.

So the guy's really really busy, and you're bugging him, and he banned your IP. Completely understandable.

[isaacc7]

Omitting an opinion to please a sponsor? Isn't that the definition of a hack?

More like omitting an opinion in order to not piss off a sponsor. I'm not going to judge him, it's quite clear that he is making enough to get by, but he may not have the luxury to take stands. That is, of course, assuming that there is any kind of stand to be made. It's quite possible that he doesn't think the k-01 is worth making a stand over. It is just a camera after all. Don't get angry at him just because he doesn't have as much interest in your camera as you do. His blog is about photography in general and while I too find it odd that he hasn't said anything about the k-01, it isn't as though he doesn't have anything else to write about. As has been mentioned, he has been getting his print sale together and he's bound to have other things on his plate. We don't know what he thinks about the k-01, but for whatever reason he has deemed it less important than other things. If he does indeed hate it, it will be just one more camera that he doesn't like. He doesn't spend that much time on those. Time to move on I think.

[pinholecam]

I don't see a need to go into a crusade against Mike who's only sin is to not mention the camera (entirely his prerogative).
Perhaps he's taking a "I'd rather not talk about it" stance, or simply too busy.

Why not spend the energy elsewhere like on Rice High

[mervis]

So the guy's really really busy, and you're bugging him, and he banned your IP. Completely understandable.

1. I wasn't bugging him. I sent a simple short comment, nothing rude or controversial - my second in two months. When he pointedly didn't publish it, I tried to ask again, BUT HE HAD ALREADY BANNED ME.

2. He's so busy, yet he has time to trumpet the X-pro1 AND write a long form article about a gallery show. Your logic doesn't hold. Also, the camera was announced two months ago, during which time he's published dozens of articles - many about competing cameras.

It is just a camera after all. Don't get angry at him just because he doesn't have as much interest in your camera as you do.

Are you serious? Talking about cameras is his vocation. Among photographers you don't say it's just a camera. He is stubbornly going out of his way to ignore the K-01. Otherwise he would have published my comment and not banned me instead. It's pretty self-evident. HE'S the one making a big deal of this, not me. I'm just pointing that out.

I'm not going to judge him, it's quite clear that he is making enough to get by, but he may not have the luxury to take stands.

I would guess that Pentax would rather he say something than act as if the camera doesn't exist and stonewall his readers' requests. Plus he made this decision BEFORE he had handled it or seen any results.

---

Last edited by mervis; 04-03-2012 at 11:21 PM.

[mervis]

(entirely his prerogative)

This is where I disagree. His prerogative as an ethical adult writing about cameras is to give all brands equal coverage. Doesn't like it. He should stand up and say so. Why hide?

[mervis]

I don't see a need to go into a crusade against Mike

No crusade. I'm not advocating any action. This whole time I've been speaking for myself. I've been quite clear about that. Also, go back to my very first words. I've already put this in perspective.

Anyway, you anti-K01 people are exhausting me. Your approval of Johnston's behavior is predicated entirely on your reflexive and unfounded dislike of the camera. This is my last comment on the matter.

[ibkc]

No crusade. I'm not advocating any action. This whole time I've been speaking for myself. I've been quite clear about that. Also, go back to my very first words. I've already put this in perspective.

Anyway, you anti-K01 people are exhausting me. Your approval of Johnston's behavior is predicated entirely on your reflexive and unfounded dislike of the camera. This is my last comment on the matter.

I am about as much an advocate for this camera as can be. The camera is out, and those who aren't going to give it a chance, aren't. One forum will not make a difference. mervis, your review on Amazon will mean more than this nobody's attitude. Really, people, Amazon's reviews is where people look first. Make your voice heard if you like the camera. I did.

[pinholecam]

No crusade. I'm not advocating any action. This whole time I've been speaking for myself. I've been quite clear about that. Also, go back to my very first words. I've already put this in perspective.

Anyway, you anti-K01 people are exhausting me. Your approval of Johnston's behavior is predicated entirely on your reflexive and unfounded dislike of the camera. This is my last comment on the matter.

If you read my post history, you'd be pretty aware how 'pro' k-01 I am.
(also being one those to try out the non-production model in Singapore and mention give info here )

Anyway, I don't read TOP much. Perhaps a visit every other week, sometimes once in a month.
I get kind of lost on what he talks about.
I'd rather he keeps quiet if he really dislikes it, than create a sensation going on a anti-K-01 rant. (his site is read my quite a few)

[isaacc7]

No crusade. I'm not advocating any action. This whole time I've been speaking for myself. I've been quite clear about that. Also, go back to my very first words. I've already put this in perspective.

Anyway, you anti-K01 people are exhausting me. Your approval of Johnston's behavior is predicated entirely on your reflexive and unfounded dislike of the camera. This is my last comment on the matter.

I'm a big supporter of the k-01! I I do disagree with you on what to expect from MJ's blog. It is most definitely his blog, not a camera news blog. I get more information about cameras from other places, I go to TOP to read what Mike has to say about things. Your concerns would be much more valid if places like DPR, Engadget, Mirrorless Rumors, etc. ignored the camera, but they didn't. They are camera news sites and they do indeed cover just about every camera that comes out. TOP doesn't. I think the reactions you are getting in this thread aren't because of hatred for the k-01 (certainly not from me) but because you are talking about Mike Johnson. It is one thing to critique a website, it is quite another to criticize one person, especially when you don't have any information.

[Docrwm]

I'm a big supporter of the k-01! I I do disagree with you on what to expect from MJ's blog. It is most definitely his blog, not a camera news blog. I get more information about cameras from other places, I go to TOP to read what Mike has to say about things. Your concerns would be much more valid if places like DPR, Engadget, Mirrorless Rumors, etc. ignored the camera, but they didn't. They are camera news sites and they do indeed cover just about every camera that comes out. TOP doesn't. I think the reactions you are getting in this thread aren't because of hatred for the k-01 (certainly not from me) but because you are talking about Mike Johnson. It is one thing to critique a website, it is quite another to criticize one person, especially when you don't have any information.

He does, in fact, have information - plenty. He has shared the circumstances with us and my conclusion is that the blogger has every right to not talk about things, but he also has a small obligation (because he has had his hand out asking for $'s) to be civil and at least answer polite questions and not to ban the URL for 1question from a contributor. My take away is thst the guy is a dick - MY personal conclusion given the information at hand.

[riff]

the guy is a dick - MY personal conclusion given the information at hand.

Interesting choice of words. Not to say that I disagree with your conclusion.

[Docrwm]

Interesting choice of words. Not to say that I disagree with your conclusion.

ROFLMAO - inadvertent, honest.

[Zygonyx]

I am myself also very surprised not to have seen any K-01 test in the french magazines such as "Chasseur d'Images" were it was just announced last month, "Le Monde de la Photographie", "Réponses photo" or "Déclic photo".
It all seems they passed their way to the benefit of any of other labels novelties...

[robgo2]

I don't know if this is important in the large scheme of things, but it will be of interest to the community here.

Does anyone here read The Online Photographer? It's been one of my favorite photo websites for the last 5 or 6 years - the prototype of the perfect clearinghouse for all things photographic. Shooting advice, gear news, humor, current events, book reviews, biographies. The editor, Michael Johnston, could very well be the best pure writer working on the web in the photo realm. Lately, though, the site has kind of lost its way. More and more stories about Johnston's personal life, off-topic stuff on cars, food, coffee, music. Not that I really minded. Like I said he's a great writer.

The most curious recent development, though, at least for the people here, is his absolute refusal to mention the K-01. Nothing about the announcement back in February and not a peep since. All the other major releases have been covered, some quite lavishly: the D800, the XPro1, the Nex-7, the Oly EM-5, the 5Diii, the Sigmas. A few of us have asked Johnston about the K-01 via the comment threads with no response, so it's not like he's unaware of interest in the camera.

Today he announced with fanfare the X-Pro1 is now available through B&H, so I sent a short comment wondering again why no mention of the K-01. He refused to post it. (Johnston moderates all comments before they get posted.) So I sent another (by now I was a little exasperated) and he seems to have blocked my URL. Very strange. Feels like an over-the-top reaction to defend a rather extreme editorial choice. Like they said about Watergate: It's not the crime it's the cover-up.

On his blog, Johnston solicits donations and subscriptions. One would expect an obligation from him to treat all brands equally. Also he gets a cut of gear sold through B&H. You'd think he'd want his Pentax lens-owning readers to have the chance to buy the K-01 through his site.

Anyway, not a huge deal, but puzzling.

I read TOP regularly. It is a highly personal website that is not gear oriented; nor is it comprehensive. In the past, Mike Johnston has had very favorable opinions of other Pentax cameras and Pentax lenses, so he most definitely is not biased against the brand. If the K-01 does not interest him, then he is free to ignore it. At least he is not slamming it.

As an aside, Mike has a relationship with B&H and Amazon, whereby he gets a small portion of sales that come through the portal of his website (the same as Pentax Forums does). He may, therefore, lean towards announcing cameras that he expects to sell well, so as to boost his own income. This may not seem totally ethical, but as far as I can tell, he is not a wealthy man who is making a bundle off of his delightful blog.

Rob

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

As a former journalist, I have to side with Mervis here. Johnston hasn't explained his actions, but he retaliated. It seems arbitrary and a bit too authoritarian.

I'm disappointed because the blog has been generally thoughtful, and has highlighted many of the better Pentax products.

People are certainly confused about the K-01 - even before any of the real photography review sites are done with their work. We already know it has important and unique attributes, and immense comparative shortcomings.

We pretty well know no other MiLC has better image quality, or as many directly compatible lenses to mount.
It is smaller than competing dSLRs, and likely has better video quality and sound (assuming you attach an external stereo mic) than anything in its size class or smaller, and moderate price category.

Are you going to use it to shoot professional sports? Are you going to use any MILF for professional sports shooting?

It isn't retro, it isn't even particularly modern; it's just odd looking. The combination of no articulation and no EVF is what it is (a really dumb decision). RAWs at 1fps in this day and age just cries out for a "kick me" sign on its butt.

Still, it will make great pictures from a very small unit, and very fine video if you need it. This is the ultimate ying/yang device. Inconvenience me if I can get benchmark IQ in return. Most of us already have other cameras for challenging (action) shooting.

There's a danger that Pentax and other brand managers will get the message from reviewers that, 1) It can be dangerous to think this far out of the mainstream, and 2) Image quality isn't as high a priority as aesthetic and creature comfort considerations. Of course, not so here. Adam and the others here do a fine job. That might not carry over, though.