[Rush2112]

Ouch.

What I found interesting though is that the camera is clearly intended for a beginner market and yet they state in the conclusion that advanced shooters will have an issue with the AF points.

I don't think that beginners that would out grow the camera quick would take much issue with this as they clearly would be more serious about photography and would want a complete upgrade anyways.

So what is the problem?

Sure the jpegs could be better, I presume. But to give it a barely recommended rating doesn't seem appropriate to me, or did I miss something?

Just about every DSLR that comes out of the big 5 is probably good enough to recommend, its just finding the camera that works best for you that is key. I don't understand the rating.

[Canada_Rockies]

If you check, it is a single person's rating, as are all the DPR reviews. Take it all with a grain of salt (or a 10 pound bag if you prefer.)

[Rush2112]

If you check, it is a single person's rating, as are all the DPR reviews. Take it all with a grain of salt (or a 10 pound bag if you prefer.)

Always, I just don't understand the contradiction. And this one was done by two reviewers, Richard and Lars.

C

[Canada_Rockies]

Don't forget, these are the same people that panned the k10d - in the year when it won the Advanced Camera of the Year award in Europe. Make that a 100 pound bag of salt.

[Rush2112]

Don't forget, these are the same people that panned the k10d - in the year when it won the Advanced Camera of the Year award in Europe. Make that a 100 pound bag of salt.

Thats a lot of salt! Maybe it can be used it to close the wounds they open up.

Cheers,

Carl

[ftpaddict]

The review was pretty much knee-deep in bulls**t.

[shutterpuppy]

The review was pretty much knee-deep in bulls**t.

I look at all reviews in the same way, most of us advanced shooters and a lot of beginners I know, tweak most of their pictures at least a little bit with editing software. How many "keepers" have you shot without doing something to give that picture a little bit of snap to em. I wonder if DP Review shoots and PPs their sample pics before doing a review?

Barry

[Rush2112]

I look at all reviews in the same way, most of us advanced shooters and a lot of beginners I know, tweak most of their pictures at least a little bit with editing software. How many "keepers" have you shot without doing something to give that picture a little bit of snap to em. I wonder if DP Review shoots and PPs their sample pics before doing a review?

Barry

Changes any of the settings in the camera to see how the ouput changes. Who ever said the default settings were the best settings, or that they should be judged in a review?

Just because the jpegs may not look good at 0,0,0, doesnt' mean they won't look good at -1,-2.-1 or whatever. It doesn't mean they will either, but at least you could be more objective when you base a review's outcome strictly on jpeg format . Ugh.

C

Moved to News and Rumours

[Erik]

Honestly -- I'm sure the K2000 is a great camera but what they said about the lack of focus point indication makes sense to me and would make me think twice about buying this camera. It's a total mystery why Pentax chose to remove the red AF boxes -- what could they possibly cost to implement, three bucks?

[Kunzite]

Erik, IMO it makes little sense to have focus point indicators with that AF layout. You are forced to lock&recompose, so a more advanced user would most likely use the center point anyway.
It's a cheap camera, they had to strip any unnecessary feature and I understand perfectly why many people would not like it. What you probably want is the K200D successor - but this will cost more.
Don't forget Nikon was successful with a more crippled camera - the D40 series. A camera like that is made to sell, just not to us.

[joele]

Honestly -- I'm sure the K2000 is a great camera but what they said about the lack of focus point indication makes sense to me and would make me think twice about buying this camera. It's a total mystery why Pentax chose to remove the red AF boxes -- what could they possibly cost to implement, three bucks?

It costs nothing it is the same thing other manufacturers do, cripple the lower end cameras to encourage people not to consider cameras too low on the 'tree'..

Though in Pentax's case I think the K200d is a better buy, much cheaper than the K-M, at least here.. AUD$699 vs AUD$899 (with single Pentax kit) when I looked in at my local Ted's a few weeks back.

[roentarre]

Conclusions are often too subjective as I would rate a camera fantastic if it was a k10d costing 200 US dollars.

So looking into these parameters are probably somewhat more reliable. However, these parametres do not allow quality control variable and do not translate into the particular photography styles of any particular photographer...

[Vylen]

whenever reading reviews on DPR, i just skim through them - go through the specs, read the feature list, read about the menus/controls, look at the comparison images they provide and check their conclusion.... although, i do it this way cause its just too much text and it being another persons opinion, one can only read so much without it seeming moot....

reading their reviews that way is much more better - since you're meant to form your own opinions on things, not jump onto the back of others...

(it's how i managed to buy my K20D as well - no idea what DPR said about it either )

[kristoffon]

I've lost all respect I had for DPR opinions. Well, the little left over after they based the K10D for "soft" JPGs on default settings, or whatever it was the setting they wouldn't change.