1. WR Articulated LCD
2. Precise AF
3. 4 Stop SR
4. 3 D tracking for better AFS or C accuracy
I do agree the articulating screen is a good to have for close up and very low level shots. Actually if they can make a articulating view finder, how come cannot make a plugin/snap on type of articulating screen. If you need it, just plug it in. Don't need it, keep it in your pocket. Easy.
Other than that I think Pentax is doing well in other areas. There is a limit to how much SR can do. I believe this applies to other major brands as well.
I do agree the articulating screen is a good to have for close up and very low level shots. Actually if they can make a articulating view finder, how come cannot make a plugin/snap on type of articulating screen. If you need it, just plug it in. Don't need it, keep it in your pocket. Easy.
Other than that I think Pentax is doing well in other areas. There is a limit to how much SR can do. I believe this applies to other major brands as well.
I do agree the articulating screen is a good to have for close up and very low level shots. Actually if they can make a articulating view finder, how come cannot make a plugin/snap on type of articulating screen. If you need it, just plug it in. Don't need it, keep it in your pocket. Easy.
Other than that I think Pentax is doing well in other areas. There is a limit to how much SR can do. I believe this applies to other major brands as well.
not that it cannot be done, but maybe it requires trade-offs in other areas, like weather sealing? the more removable / moving parts, the greater the challenge to WR?
Re D800, I suppose if the lenses' resolution are improved, then it may not be the case of just zooming in for the sake of zooming in. Naturally if the lenses cannot resolve to the level of detail that a 36 megapixel image can provide then it is meaningless, as you have mentioned. How much detail is too much, I really don't know. It is always good to have more detail, more of everything. That's how today's world is - to guard against everything, every possibility, we just demand more and more. The alternative is to work with what you have, but I guess you won't have any form of "progress" beyond a certain point. After all, taking it in another context, one may well say that we do not really need to get to London from Singapore in 12 hours or so with a jet plane, a matter of months via horse carriage would suffice. It's all relative.The D800 sample files on the official Nikon site has made me ponder the further usefulness of more MP.
It translates to nothing more for me other than a bigger file that I can zoom in more with 3-4 scrolls of my mouse scroll wheel instead of 2x scrolls on the 16mp file of the K5).
I just don't see what more the MP race is going to offer, unless one prints very very big (the size of A0 or larger); most likely at a commercial level.
It allows more cropping, but 36mp is a bit too much of it and something is really wrong with the photographer if he/she relies on that much cropping at a regular level.
So to me, if I am to have a wish list for the K??
1. 16-18mp (24mp MAX; grudgingly)
2. Better AF (or maybe a choice in the menu for faster AF, but more margin of error or slower but more accurate)
3. Max sync speed >1/180
4. Un-crippled K-mount
5. Better translation of the 14.3 stop DR onto direct JPG o/p (now we still need to recover in PP)
6. Tweakable in-camera HDR like a simple Photomatrix menu
7. Actual supported Tether
8. Better AF-C
9. Better PTTL and intro of new wireless flash commander system via bluetooth
10. No AA filter option? (not sure if its really that good a thing; I'm pretty sure the camera engineers are not dummies to leave it on in the 1st place)
11. NR algo as good and adjustable as Topaz Denoise
as can be seen from my list, most of them are good to haves and not must haves.
I'd be pretty happy if K5 is being sold for another 1yr at a much cheaper price, as its really a very good camera (a success and classic imo).
Re D800, I suppose if the lenses' resolution are improved, then it may not be the case of just zooming in for the sake of zooming in. Naturally if the lenses cannot resolve to the level of detail that a 36 megapixel image can provide then it is meaningless, as you have mentioned. How much detail is too much, I really don't know. It is always good to have more detail, more of everything. That's how today's world is - to guard against everything, every possibility, we just demand more and more. The alternative is to work with what you have, but I guess you won't have any form of "progress" beyond a certain point. After all, taking it in another context, one may well say that we do not really need to get to London from Singapore in 12 hours or so with a jet plane, a matter of months via horse carriage would suffice. It's all relative.
Personally, I don't think I will need 36 megapixels. I don't print large, I don't have a building to hang my photographs from. Until everyone starts getting 40" computer monitors, 12-16 megapixels will do just fine for the relatively cheap lenses I prefer to use. :bsmilie:
More DR pls, that's all I care about... And maybe bring back the K20D Fn button so that we don't have to keep pressing OK and hold it to switch...
You know, I often envy the times when things went by real mail.
MP race to me is pointless as of 2011-12.
Unless they come up with 4075x3264 (~14mp) TV screen for viewing the picts. (maybe the size of a wall)
(My 42" TV is actually my PC monitor, but its only 1280x780 (about 1mp), better ones do 1900x???? so long way to go to that day)
But its between the devil and deep blue sea for manufacturers.
No more MP gives the perception that the brand is incompetent.
More MP is actually pointless at this point of time for most users.
I guess they tried to drive the high ISO wagon instead for a short while, but are getting burned by it even sooner than the MP wagon.
I think it is as good as my Samsung Galaxy S2 IQ.