Originally posted by ffking Fairly or not, our defensiveness and over-aggressive calling out of reviewers has become one of the things people hold against Pentax, and that's in our control.
Originally posted by Rondec I do think it is hard when reviewers go into a review assuming (1) The time of SLRs is past and (2) The particular brand you shoot is likely to meet its demise soon. Even if they grudgingly admit that the camera is nice or a lens is nice, they are bound to stick in a little bit about how much nicer the mirrorless landscape is.
Originally posted by house This preview stuff is where Pentax does well, ergonomics etc.
Originally posted by ffking I do think it's better to assume good faith and react when that trust is undeniably broken than to assume bad faith and act accordingly.
Originally posted by ThorSanchez Perhaps not, but the comments include detailed breakdowns of every perceived slight and inaccuracy and omission in a brief, high-level, 10-slide preview of the camera.
I've appreciated the many perspectives of this thread.
DPReview has a large readership and broad coverage, which is good for any new gear. I noticed that the "Most Popular Cameras" sidebar on the main page shows the K-3 Mark III reaching the top of the list at 8.7%, which is uncharacteristically high for Pentax, and notable for any brand. Certainly, the readership is intrigued by the new camera.
I found their Initial Review of the K-3 Mark III to be generally objective, and somewhat positive if not neutral. The piece presents an interesting overview of the salient elements; the comparison table seems reasonable.
Yet, there are several nuanced statements that project an undercutting viewpoint in my opinion. Is it worth mentioning?
For example: (my emphasis)
"The K-3 III iterates on the ergonomics of the exiting K-3 models, which we've frequently praised. We're pleased to be able to say that the K-3 III doesn't diverge too much from this pattern: the magnesium alloy construction maintains the impressively dense and solid feeling that its predecessors conveyed."
It's an odd choice of words. Compare their statement to one that could have easily omitted "too much," or this alternate one: We're pleased to say that the K-3 Mark III carries the hallmark Pentax ergonomics, build quality, and usability. Quite a different tone, I'd say.
"Perhaps the only question that matters for the K-3 Mark III is: does it offer enough of an improvement to prompt existing Pentax owners to upgrade?"
So, does DPReview think that the K-3 III is destined only for existing Pentax owners? Others need not bother? Or, are they implying that the majority of buyers would be existing Pentax users, which is probably a reasonable prediction? An extra sentence could have clarified their perspective, although I think it's a strange rhetorical subject to conclude a 'preview' type article.
(I hesitated to post these comments, fearing they might be seen as petty or undeserving. Well, a large public website such as DPReview should be capable of editing their work carefully, and to publish consistently objective material, unless a topic is clearly intended as an opinion piece. Then again, they want to attract readers.)
- Craig