[mrNewt]

No you did not. I responded to one statement/question of yours and continued voicing my opinions on which was probably a pile of other posts and posters and perhaps should have made it two posts so that you do not precieve it as a response to your stated views on that. I think we are on agreement other than I do not see a FF in my future. If I was younger or did not like using my larger film cameras my future would include FF.

In perfect agreement! Everyone is free to use what they need and what ...

[thibs]

...It probably only attests to the lack of current DA* 28-70/2.8 or 80-200/2.8...

[RANT]
Really?
I thought Sigma provided those?
You can't be objective (pun not intended) a single second can you?
[/RANT]

[Ash]

When the FF camera comes out, so to will the appropriate DFA lenses.

[monochrome]

... soooooo ... you would honestly say "Yes" to a "NO" ... as in you do not want one (even FF!?) ...

Yes I would say NO - I already have said no to an MX / LX sized digital camera.

I want a digital SLR camera in a K20 body. I don't care whether it is APSc or FF.

I would take an APSc high-end in a K-5 or slightly larger body and a grip if I thought they wouldn't obsolete the grip with the next camera body (I'll have to wait and see).

I'm not a pro so I can't expense this off or lease and sell. I have to buy and keep a $1,600 camera. A $249 Grip matters. An extra battery or two matters. They can be necessary additions to the new camera decision (they were for the K-7 / K-5). So it becomes a $1,900 or $2,000 purchase when they obsolete grips and batteries. I HATE it when they do that!!

I have to sell film cameras every now and then (like right now) because my hobby budget is tied up in them and if I want something new (Q stuff) I have to sell something else. At least film cameras don't seem to depreciate - it's already all done!!

For all these reasons MILC seems an attractive alternative to me right now, especially the K-01,

[mrNewt]

Yes I would say NO - I already have said no to an MX / LX sized digital camera.

I want a digital SLR camera in a K20 body. I don't care whether it is APSc or FF.

I would take an APSc high-end in a K-5 or slightly larger body and a grip if I thought they wouldn't obsolete the grip with the next camera body (I'll have to wait and see).

I'm not a pro so I can't expense this off or lease and sell. I have to buy and keep a $1,600 camera. A $249 Grip matters. An extra battery or two matters. They can be necessary additions to the new camera decision (they were for the K-7 / K-5). So it becomes a $1,900 or $2,000 purchase when they obsolete grips and batteries. I HATE it when they do that!!

I have to sell film cameras every now and then (like right now) because my hobby budget is tied up in them and if I want something new (Q stuff) I have to sell something else. At least film cameras don't seem to depreciate - it's already all done!!

For all these reasons MILC seems an attractive alternative to me right now, especially the K-01,

you know that the K-01 is pretty much like a K-5 though (size wise) !?

[monochrome]

you know that the K-01 is pretty much like a K-5 though (size wise) !?

A K-01 is smaller in every dimension than a K-5 - 4/10" narrower!!. But I don't hold it up to my eye to look through the viewfinder while using my thumb and forefinger to push buttons and two wheels to adjust a full suite of dSLR controls. It is more than just the size. It includes what my hands, fingers and eyes have to do within the size and form factor constraints allotted to them,

You asked who wouldn't purchase a (small) dSLR. A K-01 is not a dSLR.

I know. I'm a crank. You can keep picking at me if you want. But I'm, not going to play any more.

[mrNewt]

A K-01 is smaller in every dimension than a K-5 - 4/10" narrower!!. But I don't hold it up to my eye to look through the viewfinder while using my thumb and two finger wheels to adjust a full suite of dSLR controls. It is more than just the size. It includes what my hands, fingers and eyes have to do within the size constraints alotted to them,

You asked who wouldn't purchase a (small) dSLR. A K-01 is not a dSLR.

I know. I'm a crank. You can keep picking at me if you want. But I'm, not going to play any more.

If I was offending you in any way, I am sorry ... didn't meant anything bad. And no, I wasn't picking on you, I just thought we were having a conversation.
I promise I will stay way from you.
Again, sorry ...

[monochrome]

If I was offending you in any way, I am sorry ... didn't meant anything bad. And no, I wasn't picking on you, I just thought we were having a conversation.
I promise I will stay way from you.
Again, sorry ...

Ah hey - you didn't do anyting wrong. I think I have an uncontrollable temper flare whenever the K-01 comes up. I pre-ordered last February - it wasn't a pleasant time.

[Digitalis]

have an uncontrollable temper flare whenever the K-01 comes up. I pre-ordered last February - it wasn't a pleasant time.

I had a similar experience when my new Leica M8 arrived with a dead battery....and then there was that problem with the weak UV/IR filter...we have all been there.

[monochrome]

Hope the Leica worked out for you. Who should care what other people think if my camera does what I need it for (but I did last year)?

[Digitalis]

Hope the Leica worked out for you.

To Leica's credit they replaced the battery, they also gave me along with others who bought the M8 two free UV/IR cut filters - with a combined value over $350

It is frustrating when cameras don't work as one expects them to out of the box, regardless of what you paid for them.

Who should care what other people think if my camera does what I need it for

I have had other professionals scoff at me for still using colour transparency film in a 5X7 format camera with 8X10 lenses for certain product and architectural images. Many of them suggested a 35mm tilt/shift lens would do the job but their opinions changed when I showed them the extreme camera movements the larger image circle the 8X10 lenses allowed me to use. There are some movements that no tilt/shift lens can do - only a technical camera can accomplish them. I find it rather funny that there are still clients of mine who still demand transparencies, they enjoy the verisimilitude of a large transparency - as one of my film photography colleagues explained it to me, many still like to see a transparency because you don't need to calibrate anything when looking at it* - you have a reference point for what the image should look like. With digital there are (still)so many technical issues with colour management. Even in my private portfolio works - the use of colour is actually a rare thing for me because of colour accuracy and gamut limitations, not to mention the issues surrounding print longevity.

*though you do have to adhere to correct viewing conditions.

[GeneV]

A K-01 is smaller in every dimension than a K-5 - 4/10" narrower!!. But I don't hold it up to my eye to look through the viewfinder while using my thumb and forefinger to push buttons and two wheels to adjust a full suite of dSLR controls. It is more than just the size. It includes what my hands, fingers and eyes have to do within the size and form factor constraints allotted to them,

You asked who wouldn't purchase a (small) dSLR. A K-01 is not a dSLR.

I know. I'm a crank. You can keep picking at me if you want. But I'm, not going to play any more.

We all have our unique needs and preferences. I like how your signature includes the XA. I'm showing my age, but to me, that is the best series of compact cameras, ever. I still have 3 of them (2 XA and 1 XA2)-- and use them.

In all honesty, there is not too much that the APS-C cameras won't do for me. The biggest attraction to full frame is getting full use out of many of my lenses again. Better low light and different DOF options would be nice as well. I'd be fine with a bigger body. The more ergonomic options, the better. The smaller Pentax bodies (including the MX) have always been great for travel, but for any event where photography is the main focus (pardon the pun) a bigger body is nice.

[monochrome]

We all have our unique needs and preferences.

Yes, and mine make a very small segment - someone who still wants to photograph for fun but can't use a small VF any more. Even the big bright VF on my old bodies is getting harder. LCD's on high-quality cameras might just extend the hobby for me.

I like how your signature includes the XA

Now that's a small camera. Using the rangefinder is a chore, but when I'm in the mood it can be fun. Hopefully something with a large viewfinder will appear beside Q in the future <g>

[GeneV]

Yes, and mine make a very small segment - someone who still wants to photograph for fun but can't use a small VF any more. Even the big bright VF on my old bodies is getting harder. LCD's on high-quality cameras might just extend the hobby for me.Now that's a small camera. Using the rangefinder is a chore, but when I'm in the mood it can be fun. Hopefully something with a large viewfinder will appear beside Q in the future <g>

The best part is that most of the time with the 35mm lens, using the RF with any kind of precision wasn't even necessary. It took owning an XA2 for me to be convinced of that.

[monochrome]

The best part is that most of the time with the 35mm lens, using the RF with any kind of precision wasn't even necessary. It took owning an XA2 for me to be convinced of that.

I never actually thought of that.

It is 45' today and the snow isn't melting because it is covered with sleet - but there isn't a cloud in the sky. I don't get New Mexico skies at dusk here, but hey, fun!