[awscreo]

I don't quite understand the polarized views around DSLR versus mirrorless... They both have strengths and weaknesses, but like any tool, you just learn to embrace those and work with them. I use both, enjoy them for different reasons, and have no trouble switching back and forth. I will say, there are things I can do far more easily with an EVF, even though I may prefer the view through an optical viewfinder.

Thats exactly it! Both formats have pros/cons, but not every can afford to maintain two simultaneously so they pick one and stick with it, maybe some of the conflict comes from that - inability to have both, and aggressive marketing of MILC manufacturers, could be annoying to see ads/reviews everywhere for products you can't afford simply because you're heavily invested into a dslr system (and vice versa).

[robtcorl]

I've owned, or still own, the K1000, Super Program Plus, SF1, K10D, K-5, K-01, K-S2, and now the KP.
The KP is my dream come true, so I did not bother watching their irrelevant to me assessment.

[BigMackCam]

Thats exactly it! Both formats have pros/cons, but not every can afford to maintain two simultaneously so they pick one and stick with it, maybe some of the conflict comes from that - inability to have both, and aggressive marketing of MILC manufacturers, could be annoying to see ads/reviews everywhere for products you can't afford simply because you're heavily invested into a dslr system (and vice versa).

You could be right

I know I'm fortunate to have several cameras, though they're all older or due-to-be-replaced models, bought in heavily-discounted sales or used. But I can truthfully say, if I was randomly given any single one of my cameras - DSLR or mirrorless - and the others were taken away, I could still do most of what I do quite happily - with some adjustment and compromise, of course - and I could still appreciate the benefits others were getting from different formats without getting bent out of shape about it

I remember reading something a good few years ago where someone described the camera as nothing more than a film-or-digital back for their lenses. That changed the way I look at cameras, and I guess it's partly responsible for my relaxed attitude towards different formats and technologies, along with the features and performance they offer. The bells and whistles are exciting, for sure, and I accept they have merit - but I'm much more concerned with the glass and resulting images. If the camera can or can't do something, I'll work with it

[JPT]

What bothers me about DSLRs is that there seems to be so little progress from the three makers.

A few years ago, you could pretty clearly state that DSLRs had the advantage of AF speed, screen refresh rate, lens line-up, ergonomics for big lenses, battery life and so on. You could say the advantages of mirrorless cameras were size, choice of body design, AF accuracy (no front/back-focus), video in viewfinder and information in the viewfinder.

When I look at these lists of disadvantages now, it seems that the mirrorless makes have made tremendous strides in improving their erstwhile disadvantages, while the DSLR makers have done almost nothing to address theirs. They just add more focus points and resolution and other obvious choices.

What I would like is a camera that retained the OVF, because I much prefer it, but also addressed the issues of focus accuracy and gave better assistance to focus manually focused lenses in the viewfinder. I can imagine it, and patents imply that Ricoh and others have been working on the technology for it, but no product has emerged. Basically, most people seem to prefer an OVF, given the honest choice - even most of the staff at DPR Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder?: Digital Photography Review

I think this kind of development is what DSLRs need to stay relevant.

[mee]

What bothers me about DSLRs is that there seems to be so little progress from the three makers.

A few years ago, you could pretty clearly state that DSLRs had the advantage of AF speed, screen refresh rate, lens line-up, ergonomics for big lenses, battery life and so on. You could say the advantages of mirrorless cameras were size, choice of body design, AF accuracy (no front/back-focus), video in viewfinder and information in the viewfinder.

When I look at these lists of disadvantages now, it seems that the mirrorless makes have made tremendous strides in improving their erstwhile disadvantages, while the DSLR makers have done almost nothing to address theirs. They just add more focus points and resolution and other obvious choices.

What I would like is a camera that retained the OVF, because I much prefer it, but also addressed the issues of focus accuracy and gave better assistance to focus manually focused lenses in the viewfinder. I can imagine it, and patents imply that Ricoh and others have been working on the technology for it, but no product has emerged. Basically, most people seem to prefer an OVF, given the honest choice - even most of the staff at DPR Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder?: Digital Photography Review

I think this kind of development is what DSLRs need to stay relevant.

Maybe the issue is DSLRs are so well developed at this point that it will cost a lot of time and money to develop them further versus mirrorless which are still in early days so big gains on development are easier to come by.

The D850 which is probably the most advanced DSLR out right now only stretched the VF out a bit and adopted a ready-made AF system from the D5 and a couple other gizmos (such as focus stacking and an AFMA automatic feature). As you say.. more focus points, resolution, and other obvious choices.. it is hard to go up when you're already so far along in development.

[Fcsnt54]

If anyone looks at their product review, you can see why they placed it on the bottom of the list of their subjective review, even though there are other cameras that most likely belong on the bottom of the list. In anyway i cant really see that many differences between a milc and a dslr. They are very comparable to each other in almost every aspect, even to the point of where a milc can focus quicker and track better than a good number of dslr’s, and able to have a battery that lasts for similar number of shots in a given day. There is however two features that a milc will never be able to duplicate and/or copy leaving it inferior/not as adequate. Someone can prove me other wise, but they are focusing while the camera is off, and being able to look through the viewfinder while the camera is off to determine/setup a shot to see if it is worth even taking. Although space is cheap, i just dont care to spray and pray, and go through a million different pictures.

[mtgmansf]

This verdict is similar to how the KP was received by many, here, on Pentaxforums. Pentax delivered what the crowd wanted, and more, and the crowd was still unpleased. It is like the saying be carefull what you wish for, it might come true.

I have a K3 and my GF has a KP so i use both regularly, and i can safely say that the KP offers a unique shooting experience. It is a bit unorthodox, and if you do not take the time to just browse thru the options and see what all the knobs and buttons do, it can be a bit confusing. But once you are familiar with it, it's second to none (maybe the K1, but have not used it yet).

I hope Pentax keeps rolling out similar 2nd worst cameras because a lot of people actually enjoy them, myself included.

Or maybe they just spelled BEST wrong

I believe us the "crowds" wanted a true K3 replacement!

[Pioneer]

If anyone looks at their product review, you can see why they placed it on the bottom of the list of their subjective review...

Reasons -
1 - They were drinking gin.
2 - They were drinking too much gin.
3 - They are imbeciles.
4 - They didn't want to be bothered doing a real review.
5 - They don't know how to do a real review.
6 - All of the above.

[Fcsnt54]

Reasons -
1 - They were drinking gin.
2 - They were drinking too much gin.
3 - They are imbeciles.
4 - They didn't want to be bothered doing a real review.
5 - They don't know how to do a real review.
6 - All of the above.

I would agree that the gin didn't help with the matter. Also Alcohol should never be associated with anything professional, and really has done a disservice to their general reviews. Probably one of the worst episodes was when it was live and they were drinking during it, I really couldn't stomach that one and had to switch to something else. Anyways, as far as doing a real review, I disagree. Generally they are pretty even when it comes to their reviews especially with pentax. Look at when they did reviews, on the K-3, k-70, K-s2, 645Z, K-1. They really did hold those in high regard, Especially with shutter noise and ergonomics. Even when looking at camera imagery review, where they printed a whole bunch of OOC Jpeg and did a ranking test. That was a good video, especially when they said Pentax is all about the raw images(I know some like the SOOC Jpeg). Reviews like theseare very subjective on what they say, and no one can ever really know what happens behind the scenes. When you have so many different cameras that come out each year, Each brands new camera is going to be compared to another brand. That in return is where these reviews come in, people are curious and want to know how can they move up from phones or lower end Dslr/Milc, and what is the latest and greatest. Ricoh/Pentax has so much potential to get the word out and to show people/stores they are around and spin their products in a positive light. All you hear though is how Ricoh/pentax is a pain to deal with from the stores viewpoint and how you never hear about the brand(advertisement, etc...). Not sure what point I'm trying to make, or where I'm going with this, but anyways I agree with what you say on points 1 and 2.

[Rondec]

I will say that video is important to you (and these review sites always seem to value video over much in their reviews) then no Pentax camera is going to look great at this point. It really does feel as though Pentax includes it more to check a box than because they really think it is an important feature to have and to develop.

[Mikesul]

People here seem to be taking this TCS end of year show way too seriously. It is not a review. There seems to be an audience for people just chatting casually on camera (cp Late Night TV shows). That is what the end of year thing is. No more to be taken seriously than a party conversation. Most viewers of the segment know that these guys take photography seriously and all year long provide generally well balanced reviews of new equipment from all manufacturers. As Fcsnt54 pointed out they have done serious reviews of Pentax cameras and often like them. I only looked at the Pentax segment but I did not think it was more than mildly interesting and not at all provocative. Posters on PF are harsher and more unfair to Pentax/Ricoh every day.

[awscreo]

I will say that video is important to you (and these review sites always seem to value video over much in their reviews) then no Pentax camera is going to look great at this point. It really does feel as though Pentax includes it more to check a box than because they really think it is an important feature to have and to develop.

Their K-1, K-70 and 645z reviews cannot be more positive though. I think K-3 was very positive too. One bad review and these guys are "imbeciles", "drunks", "unprofessional", "sellouts" etc etc etc.

---------- Post added 12-28-17 at 09:34 AM ----------

People here seem to be taking this TCS end of year show way too seriously. It is not a review. There seems to be an audience for people just chatting casually on camera (cp Late Night TV shows). That is what the end of year thing is. No more to be taken seriously than a party conversation. Most viewers of the segment know that these guys take photography seriously and all year long provide generally well balanced reviews of new equipment from all manufacturers. As Fcsnt54 pointed out they have done serious reviews of Pentax cameras and often like them. I only looked at the Pentax segment but I did not think it was more than mildly interesting and not at all provocative. Posters on PF are harsher and more unfair to Pentax/Ricoh every day.

There should be no fun in photography friend, it's serious business

[Pioneer]

I was really only trying to be a bit tongue in cheek myself. I can certainly appreciate that these guys were trying to have a little fun. An attempt at a little, end of year, partying. That is great.

But that is not how they promoted it.

The Best and Worst of 2017. That is what they said it was. Or maybe that was a bit of tongue in cheek on their part.

To be entirely honest, I don't even really care how they felt about the KP. Or any of the other products they reviewed. I am not totally sure I can even rely on anything they said during this production. It would appear that nothing they actually said is even worth considering at all since everyone here is so insistent that this is not actually how they usually work. It seems I have to watch even more to get their true opinions.

They may do good work most of the time, this is the very first review video of theirs that I have seen so I'm not commenting on what else they have done. Actually, I didn't even see the complete video so maybe I should just grit my teeth and go back and watch the whole thing, I may surprise myself by changing my mind.

But I doubt it.

What I will say is this. After having partially watched this video I am completely turned off watching any further videos that they may offer. So, whether you think they were just having a bit of fun, the way they went about things hasn't helped their cause where I'm concerned.

Nuff said. Enjoy the rest of the year and I wish everyone a very happy and productive New Year. Feel free to enjoy your beverages as I most certainly will. But I won't be producing any videos.

[Kunzite]

Their K-1, K-70 and 645z reviews cannot be more positive though. I think K-3 was very positive too. One bad review and these guys are "imbeciles", "drunks", "unprofessional", "sellouts" etc etc etc.

You know, when you start your videos by insulting Pentaxians, you deserve what's coming. If they were professional, they would try to defuse, not to aggravate existing tensions.

Of course, that serves nicely for some of the other brands owners to congratulate themselves, as they're better than those nasty, angry, zealous Pentaxians
I wonder how many people are watching those TCSTV Pentax videos just for that.

[awscreo]

You know, when you start your videos by insulting Pentaxians, you deserve what's coming. If they were professional, they would try to defuse, not to aggravate existing tensions.

Of course, that serves nicely for some of the other brands owners to congratulate themselves, as they're better than those nasty, angry, zealous Pentaxians
I wonder how many people are watching those TCSTV Pentax videos just for that.

Or maybe they get much more crap from pentaxians than from other communities? Seems we are a particularly touchy bunch) anyway, just see that people have made up their minds and feel no need to argue over this video any longer.