New K100D Super

What nonsense. You went totally over the top because Pentax had the temerity to release an upgrade to an existing model.

Should they not have done so? Should they have just left the existing model to become increasingly uncompetitive? Should they spend millions developing brand new cameras every year, instead of wringing as much value as they can out of existing designs?

You said: "it's the same camera body, several years on" but actually, it's one year on. (Sorry for bringing facts into the argument.)

Your original post, and your numerous follow-ups, failed to provide any concrete suggestions as to what Pentax might have done differently. You just whinged on.

In fact, I wonder if you are not Viewfinder, come back to haunt us.

You also completely missed the point about DPReview. It is populated by hand-wringing, pixel-peeping, whining, fault-finding, nit-picking, suburban neurotics with nothing better to do than moan.

Lighten up and brighten up. The rain is getting to you.

G

what is many times?
We have the D100 and the D100super so that is one refresh
We had the DS and the DS2 that is one refresh as well.

So there is no such thing as a camera being refreshed many times.

Clearly not, but I don't think anyone's suggesting they should.

However, it is by no means clear to me that SDM support and DR are going to make them more competitive. DR perhaps.

Upgrading the SR to K10 level, replacing the pentamirror with a pentaprism, introducing ISO 100 at the bottom end of the range would all seem more immediately useful to entry-level photographers than supporting lenses that they probably aren't budgeting for (I'm assuming SDM lenses are going to be in the 16-45's price league or more, not the 18-55's).

But maybe those changes would be too major and consequently expensive. I don't know.

No. I made criticisms because Pentax made only a very minor upgrade to an existing model. I went over the top because of nonsense I read about what a wonderful and fantastic thing this was.

Should they not have done so? That's debatable. Or is it? I thought this was a discussion forum, implying that people could have different opinions.
Who said anything about spending millions developing brand new cameras every year? It's not like they only went one year without doing so - the K10D is IMO the only truly brand new camera since the *Ist DS which has been effectively 'upgraded' ever since. Also you can get more value out of an existing camera by adding more than just SDM support and DR.

OK... the K100D was slightly different from the *Ist DL2, slightly different from the *Ist DL, slightly different from the *Ist DS. (Sorry for not agreeing to call a very slight redesign a new product).

Whose posts have you been reading? I made several suggestions, including more megapixels (not because they're better but because they sell), a larger buffer, more differentiation in body design... oh and some comments about that very minor factor, lenses. I'm sorry if I didn't provide a "concrete" plan for Pentax to follow.

Brilliant and totally unexpected. I was expecting you to say that I was probably RiceHigh using another name, but no, you surprised me...
... why not go one further and suggest that I'm a fully paid Canon mole? Because obviously no loyal Pentax user could possibly ever find a single fault with the system...

No, I didn't miss the point at all. I just turned it around to include the other people who populate DPreview, the fanatical brand loyalists. I'm not peeping at pixels. I'm looking for certain things from the system and not finding them, and I am concerned about whether Pentax is going to provide them... so yes, I moan. I thought negative comments were allowed as well as positive ones but again that doesn't seem to be the case.

I did. I even apologised, but you couldn't resist bashing me with the DPreview comment, and here we are again.

Jeffrey Archer, whose strict regard for the truth is legendary, was described by his fragrant other half as having a "gift for inaccurate precis". I can see you must be a fan. Nobody said anything remotely approaching "what a wonderful and fantastic thing this was".

Actually I have long suspected that Viewfinder WAS Ricehigh, and you are just another and more terrible manifestation.

Don't be hypocritical. It takes two to argue, and two to maintain an argument. Now help yourself to a large Scotch, then go to bed and wake up in a more cheerful frame of mind.

Over and out.

G

No surprises here then!

So not only am I compared to DPreview posters but now to Jeffrey Archer. Gee, isn't it exciting making personal insults on the Internet?

I already acknowledged that those excessively positive comments were read on another forum and I was mistaken in responding to them here. You do remember that, right? Of course not, you somehow skipped over all the suggestions I made in order to claim that I made no suggestions, and here again you seem to apply the same selective reading.

Yeah it takes two to argue. One of those two apologised in order to end the argument, the other one apparently decided that wasn't enough and had a go. If you expected me to not respond to that then what you actually mean here is simply "George likes to have the last word". Maybe if you had a drink or two yourself and cheered up you might be able to accept that my comments are not going to hurt you or the company, and allow people to disagree with you.

I think you need to change your brand of whisky.

G