Quote: No offence but Nikon already has the D7000 for several years. It's not like they have to drag anything down but their own D7K since it's already a very awesome DSLR and on par with the K5 in the image quality department.
Why is it when people say something controversial they often start with "no offence".
No offense, but the D7000 is rated a couple points lower than the K-5. I would think a rival camera company would want to have something better, not something lower, so as stated in the article, Canon and Nikon have some work to do in matching Pentax's APs-c performance. Canon has some work to do matching the K-5's performance period.
Quote: "Pentax does not make lenses that perform well in test charts, but rather in capturing real-world images".
A rough paraphrase from the designer of the 77 ltd. in his notes in the patent documents for that lens, repeated by one of the Pentax reps from EXPOsure, the Henry's Camera photography show.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/107233-jun-hirakawa.html http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/thread/2612985 Quote: 8) lens aberration compensation; priority to practical photographs expression than numerical evaluation.
To expand that into more understandable English..
The lens was designed with the priority in the control of lens aberration compensation weighted towards practical photographic expression rather than the numerical evaluation of the lens. (MTF).
I'd suggest that until the optical engineers on the forum understand what he's talking about, they really don't understand the value of Pentax lenses. In the mind of Jun Hirakawa, designing for MTF and "Practical Photographic expression" are two different things.