I hadn't, until I looked through some Google images. Not sure what your point is though. Those cameras weren't retro in styling at the time whereas arguably the K-01 is now. Commenting on that isn't reactionary (in terms of resistance to change), it's just an observation that the 'design' is not new.

I don't understand this point either.

As a camera, its design can be evaluated in terms of aesthetics and fitness for purpose, and judged more or less valid accordingly.

Ok, so the aesthetics are very subjective, but in terms of features, there are several specifics that will lead people to either like it or not like it. They've all been discussed at length - absence of VF, positioning of buttons, mediocre CDAF speed - they're all things that either will or will not be an issue for different people.

I haven't seen any evidence of people being reactionary. The photographers that post on forums tend to be the ones for whom the design is only any good if it makes the product fit for purpose.

Those that sense that it doesn't are likely to be the ones ridiculing the styling, that's all.

Because unless you know exactly how to do the metering when you use it, your exposures will be all up the swanee.

Better to default to not let the shutter fire in non-A modes IMO - then people that have a reason for using the aperture ring will go looking for it, and then discover stop-down metering.

- Turned off the beeps
- Turned off the top LCD light
- Turned down the back LCD brightness
- Switched "Use aperture ring" to "permitted" in the custom settings

Can't remember anything else

Too-whit-too-woo

The error in your ways is your concept of the unthinkable.

For instance, I spent three hours in SRS the other day with a good friend, I was trying hard to be impartial, we were deciding between the K-5 and the D7000.

The super quick focusing of the 18-135, the lovely ergonomics of the K-5, and the horrible placement of the D7000's ISO button made it look like it was going in only one direction...

... but after much deliberation, she came out with an Olympus OM-D.

Still think any kind of "oo should I keep this lens or that one" is thinking the unthinkable?

The answer to Q2 depends on two things as I see it:

- your budget
- whether the new high-end camera has a 'full frame' sensor or not.

If it's a FF camera, which seems unlikely if they're discontinuing the K-5, then unless it has an APS-C crop mode then there are a lot of variables to consider.

Discounting that, then if you can afford the new camera, and it's an APS-C, then it's not mad at all to wait for it.

You could always hire a K-5 for the holiday.

Me too. I can't see much noise, even in the shadows.

Whereas I'd agree (see earlier comments) that the Bigma is better for airshow photography, I would reiterate that the 55-300 isn't at all bad, and not having a Bigma shouldn't put anyone off.

Have you used the Shoulder Pod with the Bigma for fast jets at all? My arm was aching a lot by the end of Farnborough this year, so if the SP is any good for fast moving things, I'd definitely consider it.

Yes I agree - back when I used film I used to get 7.5 x 5 prints rather than 6 x 4.

Looked a lot better. Surprised it's not a size that's still available, given that the 1:1.5 aspect ratio is still so common.

Probably teaching gran to suck eggs here, but just in case...

...don't forget that 5x7 is not the same aspect ratio as the 2:3 sensor size.

So unless you've already cropped to fit, you'll either end up with a crop or some blank space, depending on which dimension you fit to the print size.

You might want to compare the noise levels at high ISO.

I looked at the DPReview comparisons and was really quite shocked.