In case he deletes my comment, this is what I had to say about the review: Good review for the most part, and as you guessed it, Pentaxians are criticizing you for your AF section. I appreciate the attention to the ergonomics, which I insist are one of Pentax's strongsuit, and in my experience, by far.
Regarding the AF, I can't help but feel there has to be an issue some where. I have read numerous accounts of new owners heralding the AF performance of the K-30, to including watching one guy have it track flying magpies (crow-like birds out West). Without trying to come off as insulting, perhaps it is be user error. Even with just my K-5, I have absolutely no problem getting focus on an eye when doing a static portrait shoot. In fact, I'm shocked you had trouble with a single point of a completely mobile subject - something my Pentax K-7 can still do without issue. Like I said, this is the only negative review I have found regarding the K-30's AF, and something is not congruent, and without being biased towards any sources, I am purely using sample size (and my own experiences with inferior AF systems that are years old) to see there isn't a correlation with your review and the general consensus (thus far).
One issue I also have is your lack of ANY mentioning of focus peaking. In fact, I find this completely derelict of your duty as a reviewer and thus negligent. FP is an extremely useful tool, especially with the thousands of otherwise obsolete manual lenses available to the Pentax system by virtue of the system's legacy compatibility. No other camera of this class offers it (either the FP or the compatibility of all those lenses), and for you to completely neglect even mentioning such a thing (like a resurrected 50mm f/1.7 manual lens that is stabilized and has an accurate "auto focus" for under $50) demonstrates the lack of comprehensiveness of your efforts. And then to claim that because it isn't something you use thus doesn't deserve to be added to your review further chips away at your credibility and the ultimate usefulness of this "review."
Another issue I have is the lack of mentioning of the in-camera HDR processing. While a gimmick to some, it's especially useful for those of us who use HDR blending because of the expanded dynamic range it provides you. No other camera at this price point offers this (Nikon entry level cameras don't even offer *bracketing*), and for the traveler on the go and/or the RAW-averse, this is an extremely useful and unique capability that only Pentax offers. Even the most casual mentioning of this option (which many don't even know exist, especially new and uneducated consumers looking for their first camera - something you influence directly) would have sufficed.
Additionally, I have to admit that the photos included are extremely subpar, and in my opinion do nothing to demonstrate the purported capabilities of the K-30's image quality, which, since it uses the same exact senor and PRIME M as the K-01, should be nothing short of *outstanding*. In my personal opinion, they look very altered, and not in a "here's-a-4-stop-underexposed-RAW-image-to-see-what-could-be-recovered-through-its-dynamic-range" kind of way, but rather an either high contrast or flat look that is very unappealing. I personally would be embarrassed to exhibit these photos, even on Facebook, much less on a professional camera review.
Also, where are the incremental ISO shots of the same scene that demonstrate the noise control in JPG versus RAW from the ISO floor to ceiling, and the comparison of those shots from competitors' images?
Lastly, it unfortunately seems the reviewer is not the proper person to conduct a review of an entry-mid level camera because of his continued false correlations and comparisons that lead to underwhelming expectations when viewed in regard to cameras that are not only out of the league of the K-30, but entirely different formats. Mentioning it would be nice to incorporate a feature unique to $40,000+ Medium Format Hasselblads and AF systems of Full Frame cameras--yes outdated, but Full Frame nonetheless--is nothing short of immature and just plain wrong.
I have much respect for the Phoblographer, and like I said above, I think some great things were said, especially with attention to the ergonomics and the second control wheel that are hard to objectively qualify and quantify. However, I am very disappointed by the lack of comprehensiveness and quality control of this review when you consider the complete personal and purposeful neglect of some serious innovations for this price. For having the camera for an entire month as you claim, this comes off as very lazily completed. Furthermore, the complete defensiveness of the reviewer when professionally and legitimately criticized in the comments section demonstrates a lack of professionalism unbecoming of such a revered organization.
Very Respectfully,
Heie
-Heie
|