On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 07:50:59PM -0700, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > On Sep 10, 2013, at 7:27 PM, Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 09:21:21PM -0500, Darren Addy wrote: > >> There is a bit of a disconnect in recommending a $2200 camera to > >> someone who just sold their last camera for financial reasons (no > >> matter how hopefully very temporarily). She also said she is looking > >> in the $400-600 range for a body. > > > > At least he didn't recommend a Leica M9. > > > > :-) > > Funny.
I thought so. You don't have to worry until I *stop* teasing. That's the sign I'm mad at you. > > As I said, I didn't recommend even the E-M5 as I suspected it would be well > over the budget even used. > > The Leica M9, of course, does not have any zoom lenses so doesn't meet > another of Marnie's criteria in the first place. Never mind the price, and > the fact that it's somewhat larger/heavier than even the Olympus E-M1. Horses for courses and tools for fools. If I could justify the money, I'd have an M9, at least for a little while. For that matter, I could say the same about a Corvette. The K-5 is pretty much on the threshold of what I need in sensor performance for enough of my photography. For me, anything that doesn't perform as well is something that I would buy as a toy, or for a specific application. It looks as if the new OM-D will have crossed that threshold. The last of u4/3 is nearly there, and if I had the budget I could see owning a kit for when I need things like low light manual focus, and fast wide angle lenses. For me, the size and weight of the K-5 are not problems. I do notice the difference when I pick up my little stormtrooper (K-x), and there are times that it would be nice if it were smaller, especially with the 16-50. When I bought my K100Ds, I saw it as a temporary camera until I could afford one that met my performance needs, and the K-5 II is that camera. It is far from perfect, though most of my complaints could be solved if they let me have access to the source code and compiler. > > Let's not get into a pointless debate over image quality. I know which system > I prefer on that score, and I know which one you prefer. Let's leave it > there: either of these systems can make outstanding photographs, and each has > its strengths and weaknesses. Exactly. I am, however, eagerly awaiting whatever it is that prompted Ricoh to offer rebates on the K-5. I don't absolutely *need* better image quality, but there are certainly some features that I'd love to have. > > G > -- > 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. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://red4est.com/lrc -- 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.
