[mst]

This doesn't apply to the K-3iii, but I've described a configuration which would make the DSLRs every bit as accurate as a mirrorless - because the data would be read from the main sensor. Before claiming (or supporting claims) that "DSLRs are a dead end", consider such possible evolutions.

What I'm missing with this approach is: where is the advantage? Other than still having an optical viewfinder? Why put effort in a more complex (and likely more expensive) solution that catches up with mirrorless in one regard (AF precision), but still falls behind in many others (like real-time image preview)?

[Kunzite]

What choice am I not respecting? His choice to spread falsehood about SLRs? Is that something to respect?

Tip: you can go mirrorless without explaining to us how bad DSLRs are.

Judge yourself.

I already did. Again: what choice am I not respecting?
Come on, don't avoid the answer.

[mst]

I already did. Again: what choice am I not respecting?
Come on, don't avoid the answer.

His choice to explain his opinion here. Isn't that obvious?

Anyway, I'm out, I made my point.

[Kunzite]

This doesn't apply to the K-3iii, but I've described a configuration which would make the DSLRs every bit as accurate as a mirrorless - because the data would be read from the main sensor. Before claiming (or supporting claims) that "DSLRs are a dead end", consider such possible evolutions.

What I'm missing with this approach is: where is the advantage? Other than still having an optical viewfinder? Why put effort in a more complex (and likely more expensive) solution that catches up with mirrorless in one regard (AF precision), but still falls behind in many others (like real-time image preview)?

"Other than"? But that's the entire point! The optical viewfinder is very important to some - and EVFs don't quite work.
And - we're talking about a less complex DSLR configuration (because you'd no longer need dedicated AF and metering systems) while being able to match MILCs spec by spec (including AF coverage).

"Real-time image preview" is not an advantage IMHO. Seeing the actual scene is. If you disagree, that's fine, you have cameras doing it your way - but don't tell me every camera should be like that.

---

I already did. Again: what choice am I not respecting?
Come on, don't avoid the answer.

His choice to explain his opinion here. Isn't that obvious?

Anyway, I'm out, I made my point.

You mean his choice to bash Pentax and DSLRs in general, by spreading falsehoods about their capabilities. Yes, you made it thoroughly clear that you're supportive of that.

[mst]

"Other than"? But that's the entire point! The optical viewfinder is very important to some - and EVFs don't quite work.
And - we're talking about a less complex DSLR configuration (because you'd no longer need dedicated AF and metering systems) while being able to match MILCs spec by spec (including AF coverage).

You don't have to explain that to me. I made it very clear several times that I prefer optical viewfinders myself. So please stop accusing me of things I haven't said. You're mixing up many things here. I personally would prefer to stay with a DSLR. It's however simply not where the market is going. That's why I consider DSLRs a dead-end road. From a market perspective.

If you disagree, that's fine, you have cameras doing it your way - but don't tell me every camera should be like that.

I didn't.

You mean his choice to bash Pentax and DSLRs in general, by spreading falsehoods about their capabilities. Yes, you made it thoroughly clear that you're supportive of that.

Enough now! You sent a "tip", which more or less told thomass to STFU. That's not something we want to see here. If all you still see in his post is "fake news!!!1!" then come up with facts and argue or discuss properly. Period. But stop acting like a cry baby whose favorite toy was insulted. Sorry to be so harsh, but you stubbornly ignore any more subtle ways obviously. The "tip" you got in return was meant in this (and this only) way. If in exchange you start accusing me now, you didn't get the message.

[Kunzite]

"Other than"? But that's the entire point! The optical viewfinder is very important to some - and EVFs don't quite work.
And - we're talking about a less complex DSLR configuration (because you'd no longer need dedicated AF and metering systems) while being able to match MILCs spec by spec (including AF coverage).

You don't have to explain that to me. I made it very clear several times that I prefer optical viewfinders myself. So please stop accusing me of things I haven't said. You're mixing up any things here. I personally would prefer to stay with a DSLR. It's however simply not where the market is going. That's why I consider DSLRs a dead-end road. From a market perspective.

But I did have to explain that to you, since you were asking, "where is the advantage? Other than...". It's not "other than", that is THE point and it's a very important one - to some.
Where is the accusation though? Speaking of accusing people of things they haven't said...

[thomass]

Enough now! You sent a "tip", which more or less told thomass to STFU. That's not something we want to see here. If all you still see in his post is "fake news!!!1!" then come up with facts and argue or discuss properly.

@mst: Thanks, you exactly describe what I perceived from Kunzite's message: Shut up and go away!

@Kunzite: You blame me to spread falsehoods, this is both disrespectful and untrue. You say, I attempt to look "impartial" or even "favoring Pentax".

I use Pentax since 30 years and have a lot of gear, so it's a given fact that it hurts not to be able to by a new K-mount camera, which is on par with Canon R6 or Sony Alpha 7 III or Nikon Z 6II, no matter you like that or not!

One may like EVF or not, it's up to you. You may believe, that Pentax will use the 300k pixel from the exposure for whatever magic, I don't care.

But please don't call me a liar, you are crossing a red line!

[Kunzite]

@Kunzite: You blame me to spread falsehoods, this is both disrespectful and untrue.

Untrue?
Fact #1: there are many DSLRs with much better autofocus than the released Pentax ones.
Fact #2: eye detection with a DSLR, in OVF mode, is possible - and implemented on the K-3iii (AFAIK Nikon has that as well, not sure if Canon can do better than face detection).

[Klaus]

@Kunzite: You blame me to spread falsehoods, this is both disrespectful and untrue.

Untrue?
Fact #1: there are many DSLRs with much better autofocus than the released Pentax ones.
Fact #2: eye detection with a DSLR, in OVF mode, is possible - and implemented on the K-3iii (AFAIK Nikon has that as well, not sure if Canon can do better than face detection).

Fact #3: Eye detection in DSLRs doesn't make any sense - albeit it's surely possible. It does require the main sensor plus a secondary, relatively high-resolution sensor for AI analytics. So a camera design that already requires a couple of strange workarounds (mirror, prism, AF sensor, exposure meter) gets another one.

DSLRs are a thing of the past. But ... why not? Some have re-started using film SLRs (which makes a lot more sense to me than DSLRs).

[Kunzite]

Fact #3: Eye detection in DSLRs doesn't make any sense - albeit it's surely possible. It does require the main sensor plus a secondary, relatively high-resolution sensor for AI analytics. So a camera design that already requires a couple of strange workarounds (mirror, prism, AF sensor, exposure meter) gets another one.

Falsehood. Gets another one? They're using the metering sensor.