Originally posted by mervis Is that your position? That the K-01 isn't a photographic tool? Because I can prove otherwise.
K-01 IQ is a couple of levels above the GF1. I know this from personal experience.
better IQ than the Oly, better lens choice than the NEX-7, much cheaper than the XPro1.
Whether a major photo editor personally likes something or not, he should act like an adult and say SOMETHING. I don't care if he pans it, but at least bring it into the discussion.
My reference to those cameras being photographic tools is purely a reference to their feature accessibility, not to the user behind it. Hence the subsequent reference to form over function.
I wasn't saying the GF1 takes better images than the K-01, the reference again is to a better form/usability factor (imho).
Better IQ than m4/3 is marginal at this point, lens choices for the nex no argument there, fuji is aiming at a higher end market (i.e. leica users). My point being that the cameras are
aimed at the enthusiast market - just like TOP is - while the K-01 is not.
Finally, I've never particularly perceived TOP to be a camera review site, as far as what cameras he chooses to announce it is relatively arbitrary, but again aimed at the enthusiast end of the photography spectrum, and again, a market at which the K-01 is squarely not aimed at. I'm not saying you can't be an enthusiast and also enjoy the K-01, simply saying I wouldn't expect TOP to point out a camera such as the K-01. There really is nothing particularly ground-breaking about it (the Q I get, it is unique, the K-01 is just different).