On Feb 2, 2012, at 11:38 AM, Cotty wrote: > On 2/2/12, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: > >> I just watched a small portion of an interview of the designer of the >> K-01. He mentioned very early on that he had never designed a camera >> before. At that point, I decided that my initial suspicions had been >> confirmed and watched no further. >> If the K-01 was a wristwatch, it would be worn like a dog collar and >> wouldn't tell time. >> Anyone who thinks the Q is useless, well, at least it's small, and might >> find a niche because of that. The K-01 is not only fugly, without a >> viewfinder it is next to useless as a camera. >> Pentax may have shot themselves in the foot with the Q, but with the >> K-01 they sawed their leg off above the knee. > > I have to say that I agree. > > I just don't see the point of the K-01. I mean, how the hell are you > supposed to use it with anything longer than (say) 150mm lenses? With a > DSLR you brace the camera against your hand/head with the other had > holding the lens and elbow braced against the body. How are you meant to > hold all this away from your face while trying to compose??
This is my biggest concern with the LCD screen. That and since I hit 50 it's very easy for things like LCD screens to fall in that magic range that are too far for me to focus on without my glasses, and too near for me to focus on with my glasses. This is a camera designed for people who are used to taking photos with cell phones. With the DA40, it should be fine. Anything much longer than that, you'll need to use a monopod or a tripod. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
