Originally posted by dcreed I've never been all that impressed with cameras that take 5 frames per second because, well, I'd rather than 1 good shot every minute rather than just banging away and hoping there's a good shot in there. Studio strobes don't cycle that fast anyway.
I shoot pictures, not video. No desire to shoot video. (Anyone done the math of how much HD video will fit on a 8GB card?) My wife has a damn good video camera, and I'll leave that to her.
That's what's getting the headlines in the gadget blogs. But just think of what fuss there'd be if the burst rate were under 5. We'd be hearing nothing but complaining. So consider that feature not for its usefulness to you but by the amount it cuts down on whining.
Then consider the other things: 100% viewfinder, reduced size and weight (or, if you like bigger — more controls on a grip which allows AA batteries), actually useful LCD size and resolution, better metering (77 segments), faster AF (including a new sensor which adjusts focus for tungsten light), less noise, etc., etc., etc.
This is a camera designed for still photography, with a lot of great new features aimed squarely at that use.
Originally posted by dcreed I was really hoping that Pentax would announce a camera with a full-frame sensor and lenses to match. If Pentax is gonna stick with this APS-C sensor and consumer market, maybe I'd better just sell my 20 years' worth of Pentax products and switch to another brand. Or just go back to using my 645 medium-format film camera.
Ahhh, here we go. You were being unreasonable in your expectations, and now you're disappointed that they weren't met. I know that sounds a bit harsh, but Pentax reps have been repeating for the last several years that they are totally committed to APS-C. The lens lineup proves it. If you want bigger, there
will be the 645D — at least if it sells well enough in Japan, and as RH insinuates, as long as the K-7 sells well enough in the rest of the world.