Originally posted by Clavius No, I'm the fool that's buying almost any new Pentax camera that hits the market, remember?
What I'm saying is, stop being such a masochist and buy a camera you would like
Originally posted by Clavius Didn't I indicate myself that I pasted a list of all FF DSLRs, including the obsolete ones? And didn't I already state myself that 6 of those are currently available new? Did you forget to read that? Or read it an bitch about it anyways?
And how are the oldest cameras from your list relevant, except as a history lesson? You forced the presence of every DSLR you could remember, just to artificially get a higher number.
Originally posted by Clavius Classic Rangefinders are not mirrorless, in fact, they use multiple mirrors.
I had a phone with integrated cameras, and it had a small mirror for taking self-pictures. And even the gloss surface of most LCDs can serve as a mirror...
Originally posted by Clavius They are not mirrorless cameras, Kunzite. The image in the viewfinder is reflected from the mirror in front of the sensor. It just doesn't bounce and cause blurring, so they are on the right path.
I never called them "mirrorless"; but they are not SLRs either.
Originally posted by Clavius The major advantage of mirrorless cameras:
That's a made-up illustration, and not a real measurement. While mirror and shutter slap (the later completely ignored by Photozone's drawing) can potentially (and many times practically) degrade image quality, what's important is the real life impact.
I wouldn't call it "the major advantage of mirrorless cameras", though; many MILCs have inferior sensors, and are used in such unstable positions (viewing through LCDs) that mirror slap is actually preferable.
Originally posted by Clavius Yes? If you cut up all reality is there then suddenly an affordable FF MILC on the market? Where can I buy one? There still is 0 of those on the market.
Said the man who's trying to convince DSLRs users and the company known for inventing the Japanese SLR that MILCs are better.
You can buy the Sony NEX video camera; but it's a little bit more expensive than a D800; but that's not my point. You are ignoring everything but the idea that no FF MILC exists. Current vs. old technologies, market segmentation, relative market sizes are all parts of the reality you are ignoring.
Originally posted by Clavius Who says I'm not? Oh, you mean it's either way? Are you making this some kind of war, like I'm either one of the Indians or Cowboys?!? LOL!
Are you?
Originally posted by Clavius Didn't you say the mirrorless segement isn't doing all that well? And now you say it's well-estabished?!?
I made neither of these statements, not like you're trying to "explain" them. What I said is that (regardless of how the MILC market is doing) Sony NEX is well established on this market (together with m4/3).
Originally posted by Clavius Yes, competing with only one big competitor (Sony) in a new and open market is more difficult then competing with two even bigger competitors (Canon and Nikon) that they dominate and satisfy completely. Dream on, Kunzite...
Again you're ignoring anything but your extremely narrowed perspective. What if it's impossible unless they make an entire line, from APS-C to FF, in order to gain some economy of scale? They would compete with all the MILC makers, then; and you're ignoring this possibility. You're ignoring the relative sizes of the DSLR and MILC markets, calling the latter "new and open" - so it would appear more easy to compete in. You are the dreamer here.
Originally posted by Bestzoom Maybe a Pentax FF mirror less can change things around.
So, if they don't succeed, they should try again with a more expensive product?