> On 20 December 2017 at 22:41 Godfrey DiGiorgi <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 20, 2017, at 1:28 PM, mike wilson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Not really fair, that. As a development engineer, you have a completely > > different viewpoint on products to a normal consumer. I wonder if you would > > be > > so sanguine if your Bladerunner flying car was always having near misses? > > If I was flying a Bladerunner car prior to its being a full, certified > production machine with all relevant safeties and control systems finalized, > I'd be a test pilot. I'd know *exactly* what I was getting into and what the > risks were. > > That's rather different from being given essentially an early- to > not-quite-release-ready- production camera along with a pile of marketing hype > to guide your expectations, wouldn't you agree?
I think you're making my point. The camera is on the market with, as I understand it, no qualifiers other than some slight reservations over the processing software. The user decided that the inadequacies of the software were greatly in excess of what he had been lead to expect. He provided pretty good, to my eyes, evidence for his claims. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
