[ManuH]

Could be the best camera ever. Show me the sales stats.

Maybe it's just me but I'm kind of annoyed by the "best" of anything. Especially for complex devices like cameras, there are millions of metrics possible. But most people like to reduce all this to just one number. Like reviews.. or sales numbers. Why has everything to be seen as a competition?

[JinDesu]

Maybe it's just me but I'm kind of annoyed by the "best" of anything. Especially for complex devices like cameras, there are millions of metrics possible. But most people like to reduce all this to just one number. Like reviews.. or sales numbers. Why has everything to be seen as a competition?

My E-Peen can't handle being second best.

Honestly, an enormous factor in all camera use is ergonomics and how a person likes the camera feel and look-wise, and you can't just place a value on that. I love my k-x, and I hate using the t2i, and in no way does that make either one better or worse. I'm sure it should be the same with the k-5 compared to the d700.

[Blue]

Ever tried to load film in an M3?

I'll take the K1000 on that metric alone.

Show me the sales stats.

A Leica rep once told me that was to separate the photographers from people that eat Big Macs.

[Macario]

Maybe it's just me but I'm kind of annoyed by the "best" of anything. Especially for complex devices like cameras, there are millions of metrics possible. But most people like to reduce all this to just one number. Like reviews.. or sales numbers. Why has everything to be seen as a competition?

There is no best I believe. It is only as good as you need it to be. I do not think there is really any difference in most of the DSLR of today. Yes in lab conditions and under very weird circumstanses there will be differences visible. But otherwise they just won't be. Especially when they are just viewed on tabs tv's etc. Even printed most of the differences will go out the door due to PP.
People should just focus on what they can do with a camera, and not what they can't. As when you are just looking what your camera can't, you will get frustrated, and even a perfect picture will not be perfect anymore to you.

[johnmflores]

Not if you're a McDonald's shareholder, employee, supplier, or creditor, they are not.

The only false assumption is the insistence of YOUR perspective. Just because YOU say a relationship is mutually exclusive does not mean that this is true for ALL perspectives.

When someone disagrees with you in an argument, it's because you cannot escape from your own circular reasoning. Just because you think they are mutually exclusive, doesn't mean they are.

An economist cuts through that by looking at where people vote with their $$$. By economic stats, the Big Mac is the best hamburger ever because it probably returned more profit to more shareholders than any other burger in history. I cannot ever get consensus on whether it tastes the best, but that's a moot subjective. It sold the best. It sold the best even if all 5 million who bought it thought it tasted like crap. 1,000 year from now is someone is doing a thesis on food habits of our generation, and they want to write their piece on the best hamburger, if the #'s are still around, they'll easily be able to say which hamburger was the best over the last 20 years, and prove it using sales data, because you will not be around to argue with them.

Why do you think marketers religiously use the terms best-selling or best-in-class rather than simply the best? Because they can defend themselves against false advertising by rolling out sales data or checklists of comparative features per pricing unit. You can argue until you are blue about the term best being subjective and mutually exclusive, and the guy holding McD stock merely looks at his 20 year profit return to know better.

This is why I never dine with economists - they always want to go to McDonalds.

[Tord]

0.25% = 25000 units or 50M$ revenue. That's actually good enough for such an easy development.
The point though would be to up both 5% figures (e.g., a well-executed FF K-1 could score better than 5% among Pentaxians, I guess).

But then this thread is a zombie, why do I reply?

I am not a math's wizard, but 5% of 5% is not a 1/4%, it's 0.0025%! So not quite $50M ;-(!

[gazonk]

How come this zombie thread started moving again??

Anyway:

I am not a math's wizard, but 5% of 5% is not a 1/4%, it's 0.0025%! So not quite $50M ;-(!

You may not be a math wizard, but you should be able to spot your error here... 5% of 5% IS 0.25% (or, as decimals: 0.05*0.05=0.0025)

[pingflood]

I am not a math's wizard, but 5% of 5% is not a 1/4%, it's 0.0025%! So not quite $50M ;-(!

Actually, 5% of 5% is 0.05 * 0.05 = 0.0025 which equals 0.25%

[RickParkhurst]

No one told me there would be math?

[jsherman999]

Gah? Bah!