[illdefined]

You do realize that water resistant is a marketing term and a relative term. It is also something that Pentax has been selling and marketing for years. Water resistance is such a vague term that almost anything could be called water resistant to some extent. Pentax has the advantage that they have actually weather sealed the camera and some of their lenses, but let's not kid ourselves. Anyone could naively go out, buy a body, and then slap a Tamron or Sigma brand lens and be surprised to find that the complete system is not going to be water resistant. No one can be that naive, and if they are, they surely aren't going to be able to blame Pentax, bring a class-action action suit, etc.... Proving that the camera is not weather resistant would be impossible, calling it false advertising would be impossible. The only real liability would occur if the cameras were advertised as weather/water proof. If you go look around Amazon, etc, you'll find that very few products are truly advertised as water proof. That's a liability most corporations don't want to tackle.

As for the continual complaints on this thread... The reality is you're preaching to the wrong choir. If you really think this is so wrong, complain to Pentax. Repeating yourself here does nothing for your point of view.

[Excuse the delay for the response, I usually post from an iPhone where I cannot post images]

Yeah, sorry, this kind of advertising is not relative. It's explicit, if not downright suggestive.

Pentax has never marketed weatherproofing to such an extent with their SLRs (you could debate they started with the K-7 but those were shipped with WR lenses) more importantly, it's never marketed WR so graphically to *this market segment*, who are decidedly unfamiliar with WR at this price point.

yes, it contains a tiny disclaimer on the bottom, but it's easily missed or misunderstood to the mid/entry-level market. The (un)lucky kid who just got the 18-55mm Kit as a graduation present, newcomer to photography, MIGHT catch it. or he may just remember his lens is 18-something something too and think he can dip it in the pool like the ad suggests.

My argument has been over-the-board reasonable, and there's already been market confusion today and yesterday to prove it. Confusing veteran PF members, not to speak of the general public.

It's funny that you call me the preacher, I'm not the one evangelizing a brand solely on blind faith. All I've done is argue with logic and evidence (backed on this thread by a former retailer no less) and it's been met with me being called an idiot, two year old illiterate, forum spammer, a CaNikon shill, a political conspirator among many, many other things.

You were right about one thing. This is definitely a choir. Not interested in facts or logic, but religion. Brand religion.

Attached Images

 

---

Last edited by illdefined; 05-22-2012 at 05:06 PM.

[illdefined]

If BH is offering the wr kitted confirmed then I imagine all the others will as well or the price will drop on Dal kits. there is a $100 difference on the lens value. Adorama for one is big enough to wnat the same (Wonder what Target has - hopefully the WR variant since that is where confusion will arise - and quite possibly where the most sales will come from - floorlining 3 colours alone would make them the biggest k-30 dealer even if only 60% of the stores get them)

disregard the above Eddie. as if it wasn't confusing enough already:

They are not WR. I just called B&H advising them of the mistake in the listing.

The only WR lens bundled with the K-30 right now (in the US) is the 18-135mm:
Pentax K30 Digital Camera with 18-135mm Lens Kit (Black) 15635

[mpmetro]

talking about kit lenses, I guess the white version wont come with a matching white 18-55 DAL anymore like it did on the K-x and K-r. All the pictures online show a black lens on the white model.

[eddie1960]

disregard the above Eddie. as if it wasn't confusing enough already:

Exactly what I expected from my post previous to that one (IE they screwed up the Ad info)

What remains to be seen is how it is done in France, since it looks like north America opted for the price point versus function option. though i'm not sure how Pentax Canada is marketing yet since they haven't announced it (Pentax US must have stolen their web team since this is the reverse of the k-01 announcement)

[illdefined]

eeeeh not that simple since i believe the kits are bundled at the factory not locally. Also there is UPP to consider.... either BH is wronmg (it's been known to happen) or the others are...or it was rushed due to the leak and not everyone got all their ducks in a row so to speak (this I can believe)
I remember seeing all black K-01 in dealer ads at the beginning for example

You were right. Looks like in all the WR launch hype B&H itself got a mixed message. now imagine the consumer.

I feel bad for everyone who's already pre-ordered the 18-55 kit from B&H or NewEgg expecting a WR camera system. Especially the newcomers who this camera targets and likely won't know any better.

Those misleading/incorrect links are still live.

[eddie1960]

You were right. Looks like in all the WR launch hype B&H itself got a mixed message. now imagine the consumer.

I feel bad for everyone who's already pre-ordered the 18-55 kit from B&H or NewEgg expecting a WR camera system. Especially the newcomers who this camera targets and likely won't know any better.

Those misleading/incorrect links are still live.

I agree a true WR kit makes more sense but i imagine this is price point driven. they could easily offer the wr as an option via instant rebate for $50 more i would think (east up sell in store or if executed properly on the web as well)
But it should have been the original kit lens. 949 just doesn't sound as good as 899 though and i'm certain that is the reasoning.

[illdefined]

I agree a true WR kit makes more sense but i imagine this is price point driven. they could easily offer the wr as an option via instant rebate for $50 more i would think (east up sell in store or if executed properly on the web as well)
But it should have been the original kit lens. 949 just doesn't sound as good as 899 though and i'm certain that is the reasoning.

No doubt. But Pentax should've taken the hit at retail or rebate to push the WR aspect of the brand and finally gain some marketshare. The K30 is so commercial, there's never been a better opportunity.

[eddie1960]

No doubt. But Pentax should've taken the hit at retail or rebate to push the WR aspect of the brand and finally gain some marketshare. The K30 is so commercial, there's never been a better opportunity.

I agree this looks like it has the potential to be the biggest selling model in years. there is so much it has over the competition, but WR is what really sets it apart for the newbie (and obviously how they have chosen to market it as well) WR is a great marketing tool easy to sell the benefit and easy for any newbie to grasp. The danger is them confusing WR with WP - which i'm sure will happen (and likely has in the past as well)

[illdefined]

The danger is them confusing WR with WP - which i'm sure will happen (and likely has in the past as well)

Yes, especially with the advertising going on. If you look at the ad I posted earlier you'll notice the camera is actually being sprayed from the SIDE. But at a glance (as most ads are seen), the way the splash is cropped looks like the camera is being SUBMERGED. Took me a couple glances myself to notice it. I certainly wouldn't try either with a non-WR lens, but the newcomer who drove past this billboard?

I don't know if that crop is intentional or not, but to me it's playing with fire. er..water.

[Marc Sabatella]

So the solution you propose is to disallow anyone from ever using the K-30 with a non-WR lens> Can you no t see how ludicrous that is? Anything short of that will leave open the possibility of confusion. Uninformed people will indeed make bad choices, and nothing you or Pentax does can change that. This is a non-issue.

[emalvick]

People need to realize almost nothing is ever marketed as water proof except perhaps diehard scuba gear and outdoors type gear. That is how it has been. We live in a fine print world, and anyone who doesn't realize what water resistant means and decides that underwater photography is perfect for a Pentax camera is going to learn the hard way. Complaining to the Pentax forums doesn't do anything because no one here works for Pentax. Court rulings show time and again that if the fine print is there, it rules. The fine print on that Pentax Ad is much more obvious than it tends to be for other general consumer products and electronics.

This repetitious posting of the same issue over and over reminds me of the woman who sued McDonalds because she got burnt by her hot coffee. The fact she won probably screams that you should go out there buy that K30 and dunk in a pool and sue Pentax when it quits working. I'm guessing that is the only way you'll really be happy.... By the way, even a WR lens doesn't make the camera water proof. Dunk a WR camera with a WR lens into a pool, and it will still likely fail. WR is not water proof.

[illdefined]

So the solution you propose is to disallow anyone from ever using the K-30 with a non-WR lens> Can you no t see how ludicrous that is? Anything short of that will leave open the possibility of confusion. Uninformed people will indeed make bad choices, and nothing you or Pentax does can change that. This is a non-issue.

No. my solution would've been to sell it with WR lenses ONLY and end this confusion once and for all. Especially considering the majority of consumers at this level/price-point don't buy other lenses, much less take their kit lens off.

That and body-only, for the experienced user, where the buyer is forced to consider what they're putting on their camera.

There's already been a WR/non-WR mix-up at B&H one of the biggest retailers, thus already proven to be an issue.

[illdefined]

People need to realize almost nothing is ever marketed as water proof except perhaps diehard scuba gear and outdoors type gear. That is how it has been. We live in a fine print world, and anyone who doesn't realize what water resistant means and decides that underwater photography is perfect for a Pentax camera is going to learn the hard way. Complaining to the Pentax forums doesn't do anything because no one here works for Pentax. Court rulings show time and again that if the fine print is there, it rules. The fine print on that Pentax Ad is much more obvious than it tends to be for other general consumer products and electronics.

This repetitious posting of the same issue over and over reminds me of the woman who sued McDonalds because she got burnt by her hot coffee. The fact she won probably screams that you should go out there buy that K30 and dunk in a pool and sue Pentax when it quits working. I'm guessing that is the only way you'll really be happy.... By the way, even a WR lens doesn't make the camera water proof. Dunk a WR camera with a WR lens into a pool, and it will still likely fail. WR is not water proof.

I'm aware. But this issue doesn't involve me, at least not directly, I'm not it's targeted consumer. I've shown you the ad, if you don't think it's potentially misleading (because YOU know better), or that Pentax holds zero responsibility in promoting that kind of message (legally or otherwise) than fine, we disagree.

[monochrome]

Just an interesting side issue - as of a few minutes ago Adam posted to the sticky K30 pre-order thread that B&H now insists all the kits will have the WR lenses; Adorama insists the kits will NOT have WR lenses.

Somebody is going to have an interesting order fulfillment resolution routine around July 10th, 2012.

[eddie1960]

Just an interesting side issue - as of a few minutes ago Adam posted to the sticky K30 pre-order thread that B&H now insists all the kits will have the WR lenses; Adorama insists the kits will NOT have WR lenses.

Somebody is going to have an interesting order fulfillment resolution routine around July 10th, 2012.

This is gtting silly

BTW Henry's has now listed it in Canada with the DAL not the WR - but then again they are the same people who put up a black K-01

I'm pretty certain it looks to be the non WR, If BH is being given the WR a the same selling then it defeats the purpose of UPP IMO