It looks like some people are trying to give a "cold shower" to those who "dare" to say that a full frame is better than K3/K3 II, but keep in mind that:
- even if english were the first language for everybody it takes just a second to misinterpret a word or a phrase
- there must be a line between arguing on a subject and insulting people
- everybody has to treat these discussions with a constructive approach
- there are just a few months until the Pentax full frame will be released and then we can "debate" between cameras from the same class
At this moment I have the feeling that almost everyone is expecting the release of the full frame just to be comfortable with the idea that Pentax has covered this segment. But judging by the "fearless" way that some people defends K3/K3 II (with charts, scientific tests, laws of physics, etc.) when comes to compare them with full frames... then there must be no need of a full frame at all.
(just joking)
Every time someone mentions about a full frame camera from another brand the "fight" begins. But I don't see here the same pathos in a debate between Pentax K3 (K3 II) vs. Nikon D7200 vs. Canon 7D Mark II vs. Sony A77 II vs. whatever APS-C camera.
The fight must be between full frames vs. K3/K3 II.
This kind of discussions are getting weird every time this happens.
Let's hope that in a few months Pentax full frame will not start to be compared to 645Z, Phase One, etc.
Normhead is a reasonable man from my point of view. We had some differences in opinions but we solved them quickly.
Last edited by Dan Rentea; 01-05-2016 at 09:12 AM.