Originally Posted by *isteve 
... It does not mean they will go head to head with Nikon and Canon - in fact they will leave that to Sony I suspect. There is plenty of room in the SLR market for quality, niche value-add products which is where Pentax probably need to go. That is also speculation on my part, but if you are expecting Pentax to release a $5000 FF SLR, you will probably be disappointed.
Has Pentax EVER really competed head-to-head with Nikon and Canon, for the top-end market? When I bought my Spotmatic new in 1967, it seemed to me then, that Pentax made cameras and lenses that could produce images every bit as good as C & N, but they were still not competing.
When I compared the Spotmatic to the Nikon F, I decided that the F was made for a professional photographer, probably a photojournalist, who needed a camera that could shoot 20 or 30 rolls of film every day; that could be worn around the neck with three other cameras as the photog jumped out of a Huey helicopter in Vietnam; needed removable back, viewfinders, MLU. But mostly a camera that could be literally thrown and banged around and still work.
Pentax, on the other hand, was built more for the serious amatuer, who wanted high-quality glass and a sturdy body, but didn't need quite the ruggedness or flexibility of the Nikon system (or the correspondingly higher price). The F (with the Photomic meter) sold for almost twice as much as my SP and didn't offer much more, in terms of features. You were paying for the basis of a much more extensive system (Nikon) than Pentax offered.
My opinion of Pentax has never changed. While Pentax build quality has always been excellent and some of their glass is second to none, Nikon has always beaten them hands down on professional features, most of which are way more than an amatuer will ever need.
That includes the situation today. The K10D is, in many ways, every bit as good as a D200, but the Nikon has many features that a pro really needs, but an amatuer doesn't, like faster frame rates. With Nikon, you pay for those features, and all the ones you can add on, whether you ever use them or not.
When you look at Nikon and Canon's prosumer cameras, like the D70 and so on, even back in the film days, the Pentax offerings outstrip Nikon's, yet cost less. I believe that the D70 buyer is paying a premium for the Nikon name, based on its pro-camera reputation, when that quality isn't there in the less expensive camera.
I've used my brother's D200 and it is fabulous, but I'm never going to use all the features it has. I don't need the titanium body. The K10D costs about a third as much as a D200, although that seems to be changing, now that the D300 and D3 have been announced.
Paul Noble