Originally posted by bladerunner0427 A previous poster suggested that creating a bridge camera may be a good move for Pentax as there is a market for superzooms, but if Pentax wants to compete in the superzoom arena, they should have have included an articulating lcd screen. What's the point of being able to record video and having live view if you don't have an articulating screen?
Never really missed it. My lil Lumix had a high-angle feature that pretty much covered my needs, without moisture-vulnerable case penetrations, extra bulk, expense that could probably have gone to something else, like a control, or hinges to break. With bridge cameras in general, you want to be using the EVF for the long lens stuff that distinguishes them to most consumers, anyway.
Just cause it may have been used to kind of string the DSLR crowd along with promises of a 'new release' doesn't mean a bridge camera basically does the same sort fof thing, does the same sort of thing, does the same sort of thing, subject to certain laws of physics.
They're all pretty impressive in those ways, but obviously this isn't a model Pentax is putting forth with big fanfare saying 'Look what we can do!'
Their first word in bridges, maybe it'll do all the stuff bridge cameras can do, nice and well, (Remember 'Doing the basics well?') Maybe it's some marketing thing to keep in the market.
It's not like discriminating photogs need to be wedded to a bridge camera as a system, should this type even be a concern.
(edit) Though, they really could have put the O-rings in. Such you put a tube over the lens, screw a filter on, baddabing: Not even a lens mount to worry about, you just gasket over the buttons and o-ring the doors and you're about there.