Originally posted by falconeye The OP touches a point but draws the wrong conclusion.
Kr vs. K5 is a nice example but not the only. Almost same sensor (15% pitch difference, both Exmor HD), same processor, almost same fps (6 vs. 7), almost same AF module.
But besides a number of other differences, the real difference is that the K-5 simply plays in another league. Just look at the camera from an analog film era point of view (all film camera shared the same sensor btw...). The K-5 is outstanding mechanically where the Kr is only good. K5 makes much more fun to shoot with. A league I always call the enthusiast class.
The problem is that this class is currently artificially made APSC (the technology would allow 35mm at this price point now). And the market starts to ask questions like the OP, "what's actually justifying the price premium?".
Therefore, the APSC enthusiast class premium has begun to erode (D7000) and I am sure the enthusiast class will soon cease to be APSC. That's why I wrote my recent blog article.
Currently, the price premium seems artificial indeed although it is due to the mechanics and possibly tighter tolerances. But that's true for the entire enthusiast APSC class.
This completely wrong on all accounts.
1) There are no reason to assume that this class of camera is overpriced. This class of camera sells about 1/10 of the entry level and is significantly more expensively built.
2). Price is the most important selling point regardless; FF will always be significantly more expensive particularly when the expenses of lenses is taken into account and hence have a lot smaller sales potential.
3) there is no consumer based demand for FF. In fact, it could be argued that APS is way above the sweetspot for image quality the general consumer and even professional demands. The trend is not towards FF in spite of a decade of saying so.
4) There's no wish from manufacturers to sell FF cheap. The idea of replacing a sucessful recipie (APS) with a camera with more expensive components at the same price is ludicrous. Manufacturers have no interest in reducing profit; particularly not by answering a virtually non-existing demand. The flop of Sony's FF camera illustrates the point. FF makes sense for the manufacturers as long as they can sell them expensively; If they can sell them at all (Sony can't).
5) There are always people asking why things are so expensive regardless of how cheap they are. It doesn't matter if it cost $1; why not 50c?
The K-5 is very competitively priced for what it does. If it is too expensive, buy something cheaper.
Last edited by Pål Jensen; 10-15-2010 at 05:50 AM.