Originally posted by mutley From looking at the updated more expanded version of the review now up there - it seems that it is not really positive at all.
Basically, she sees the only point in owning this camera is if you're someone with a "bag of old Pentax lenses."
I have do disagreement with the general observation that the review is flawed but the errors
strike me as coming from someone who had never seen a Pentax before. At least at one point there is a correction about the MP's of the K10 and a comment that it was being changed because of feedback, but then it wasn't changed in the second place in the article.
She acknowledges that she had no opportunity to take a picture with it--and thus no chance to render an opinion on whether it takes 'better pictures' than the k10.
the out of focus picture of the camera is the first clue that there may be problems here. However from a writing standpoint what she did is quite a challenge.
For those of us familar with the K10 we can be much more brief. For example, the review can start: "From the outside the K20 looks just like a K10 Except.---- ' and then list the 3 or 4 external items that are different. This would be much shorter and communicate much better for those of us who own a K10. On the other hand it would be completely unhelpful
to those who have never seen a k10.
The middle ground would have been for the writer to begin each paragraph with a "just like the k10, the side of the body has the following----- however this new feature exists-------
Item: she was baffled by the built in flash, and the process for setting the flash exposure compensation: Seriously now is anyone going to bitch about her observations here???
Will anyonce concede that the flash exposure control is a little mysterious, particularly to one who sometimes uses the built in flash and othertimes uses an external