Originally posted by Kunzite What I'm saying is, stop being such a masochist and buy a camera you would like
I have several from all kinds of brands. And I love them all. Different tools for different jobs.
Now I'd like to buy a Pentax FF MILC, with an EVF, WR and SR please.
Originally posted by Kunzite And how are the oldest cameras from your list relevant, except as a history lesson?
To show there's enough FF DSLRs around, that they have been around for a while, and that there's probably still lots to come from those brands.
Originally posted by Kunzite You forced the presence of every DSLR you could remember, just to artificially get a higher number.
How is that even possible when I indicated the exact number of currently available model myself already? (6)
Originally posted by Kunzite I never called them "mirrorless"; but they are not SLRs either.
SLT's have a mirror, this discussion is about mirrorless. Done.
Originally posted by Kunzite That's a made-up illustration, and not a real measurement.
[Cynical]
Kunzite, you are a much higher authority on this subject then Photozone. So If you say that Photozone is making up stuff, then we will believe you without asking you for any further proof or arguments. BTW, should we call the newspaper and out PZ's fraude?
[/cynical]
Originally posted by Kunzite 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.
Shutter slap is the latter two red humps in the PZ's drawing. How could you have missed that?!? That same way you missed the real life impact of mirrorslap?
You can test it yourself easily. Go shoot in low light. Take a K5 and a NEX5n. Use them with exactly the same lens. You'll be able to use much lower shutterspeeds on the NEX then the K5 due to the absense of mirror slap. Imagine what a camera like the NEX5n would be like with a FF sensor and SR.
Mirror slap is also very evident when doing ultra-macro. Or Ultra-tele. Movements get so much enlarged in those shooting styles.
Originally posted by Kunzite I wouldn't call it "the major advantage of mirrorless cameras", though; many MILCs have inferior sensors,
Ah, you agree that it's time for a MILC with a superior sensor then?
Originally posted by Kunzite Said the man who's trying to convince DSLRs users and the company known for inventing the Japanese SLR that MILCs are better.
Asahi Pentax did not invent the SLR. The SLR is not a Japanese invention. All they did, is take the idea, and make it approachable for the common man.
Something they could repeat... Making FF more approachable for the common man by surpassing the expensive mirror, mirror mechanism, prism, viewfinder optics and all the manual labour that goes into calibrating each and every camera that gets produced.
Originally posted by Kunzite 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.
It's normal for new technologies to be outsold by the techs they're replacing. Film cameras outsold Digital cameras at the beginning too. No reason to but the brakes on progress.