[Rondec]

Video costs money. Spec a still-only camera with extra still-only features at the video price point, without the video.

I guess as others have mentioned that the question is a sensor question. If you get a sensor capable of high FPS, it will be able to shoot video as well. As far as software goes, much of the programming is done already, it just requires updates to it.

[kxr4trids]

I'll add another good reason for video .. Live View magnification that actually works. I've got a K-x and don't know how the LV compares to the K-7, but even with the ishtty pentamirror and stock screen I can focus better though the finder than liveview @ 10x. If the camera was doing 1080p (or even 2K, wouldn't that be sweet) I would wager the LV would be much more useful. Higher res LCD would be nice too, but @ 10x it's the sensor not the LCD that's the problem (Yea, I know 2K video isn't coming to a $500 camera anytime soon, but still..)

[thibs]

I'll add another good reason for video .. Live View magnification that actually works. I've got a K-x and don't know how the LV compares to the K-7, but even with the ishtty pentamirror and stock screen I can focus better though the finder than liveview @ 10x. If the camera was doing 1080p (or even 2K, wouldn't that be sweet) I would wager the LV would be much more useful. Higher res LCD would be nice too, but @ 10x it's the sensor not the LCD that's the problem (Yea, I know 2K video isn't coming to a $500 camera anytime soon, but still..)

The LV of my K7 is VERY useful with lenses difficult to focus. Definitely much easier to focus with Zoomed Liveview. Screen is much better on the K7 though.

[jaitas]

I can add my thoughts of live view focusing. I'm using K-7 and it really helps, but when you compare K-7 liveview against a Canon 7D liveview... wow! Canons is so much more clearer, definetly better image versus pentax.

But i'm not complaining, you can still focus very accurately with liveview and K-7

-J

Guess I'll my 2c on a K5 or whatever it's called

K5 Pro End
-Slightly larger than K7
-21mp (seems to be rumored... 18mp OK)
-3" LCD/top LCD
-Duel SDXD slots
-1/8000
-1/250 flash sync
-Full tether to computers (wireless would be nice with those new WiFi cards)
-Great High performance at ISO 3200....I mean like ISO 500 now as K20d user
-All AF points are f/2.8 Portrait or landscape orientation
-Faster SR
-Faster AF
-Buffer for up to 25 raw at a time (unlimited JPG 4*)
-5 fps at full res 21mp
-8 fps at a lower res like 12mp
-100% VF
-Add a Split RF center Focus Screen with lit up AF points as an accessory (Why do we have to go to a 3rd party?? Why??)
-Grip with AA and or Lithium option
-1080x768 30-fps HD Video for those that may use it
-Weather Sealed

UNDER $2,300.00 new and in a year or so.... around $1,700.00

Why not... it all spec anyway
Could happen.... It could......

Are you thinking that it will be FF? All of the specs you have mentioned above are great. But, first of all, do we need all that? Especially for someone who already has K-7? I suppose Pentax can try to market it for people with K20D who passed on K-7, because that will be a big enough improvement to shell out some dough. But there I still see a problem in your theory as far as the pricing goes. If APS-C, that kind of pricing will not go so well with many of the existing Pentaxian. Why don't they wait for FF in about a year? I think that Pentax is really in a tight spot. To make the purchase enticing, with all of the specs above, the price has be closer to K-x. Certainly no more than K-7. If they were to place a camera above K-7, I don't think that more bells and whistles without FF will be enticing enough at a price higher than K-7.

Now, if it is FF you are thinking, then it is an entirely a different story here.....

[FullertonImages]

Are you thinking that it will be FF? All of the specs you have mentioned above are great. But, first of all, do we need all that? Especially for someone who already has K-7? I suppose Pentax can try to market it for people with K20D who passed on K-7, because that will be a big enough improvement to shell out some dough. But there I still see a problem in your theory as far as the pricing goes. If APS-C, that kind of pricing will not go so well with many of the existing Pentaxian. Why don't they wait for FF in about a year? I think that Pentax is really in a tight spot. To make the purchase enticing, with all of the specs above, the price has be closer to K-x. Certainly no more than K-7. If they were to place a camera above K-7, I don't think that more bells and whistles without FF will be enticing enough at a price higher than K-7.

Now, if it is FF you are thinking, then it is an entirely a different story here.....

I think a super spec'd out aps-c that was really solid improvement on K-7 at $1800 would work quite well. Or a bad ass FF at $2500+.

Whatever they release, especially if aps-c, isn't really meant to appeal to k-7 users cameras. In any brand, single generation changes are never great enough to cause upgraders from the previous model. Most people, even pros, are on a every other, or every three generation upgrade timeline. Not a lot of people went from the 40D to the 50D, but people that still had 20D's and 30D's were all about it.

[24X36NOW]

Anything above the K7 price range that isn't FF isn't going to sell. Who's going to spend FF dollars on a non-FF dSLR from a non-Nikon/Canon brand? Answer: Just about nobody. That's why Pentax needs to do a FF dSLR - it's one of the few "features" that could actually justify a higher price tag and a bigger per unit margin. That, and the fact that many are growing impatient to the point where they're starting to go to Nikon or Canon for the FF dSLR that Pentax isn't making.

Anything above the K7 price range that isn't FF isn't going to sell. Who's going to spend FF dollars on a non-FF dSLR from a non-Nikon/Canon brand? Answer: Just about nobody. That's why Pentax needs to do a FF dSLR - it's one of the few "features" that could actually justify a higher price tag and a bigger per unit margin. That, and the fact that many are growing impatient to the point where they're starting to go to Nikon or Canon for the FF dSLR that Pentax isn't making.

Not only that it has to be below K7 price, I think that it has to be significantly below it. Pentax can try to entice people, who have gotten into DSLR for the first time with Kx, to a higher model by pricing it just above it, with more features. I think we are at a point where majority of the advanced shooters would not pay a large sum of money for APS-C. K-7 is not that bad of a camera. In fact, I think that it is a fantastic camera, way ahead its of time, maybe as ahead of its time as K10D was when it was released.

I am really not sure about where this is going. If Pentax is committed to taking care of APS-C shooters instead of going ahead with FF like they have hinted in the past, then they are certainly sending mixed signals by not beefing up DA lens line-up. They cannot possibly think that the current DA line up is adequate for serious shooters.

They do have the willingness to look ahead. This is obvious. After all, they did put out 645D. Think about how they priced it in comparison to other MF on the market. Pentax would probably like to capture amateurs that are not willing to pay that high of a price of 645D. The only way they can do that, in my opinion, is to put out FF, and price it closer to the high end APS-C, not closer to 645D, because the price of 645D is certainly to come down some in the future.

In Japan they will soon have 14 mp sensor with almost 4~5 fps with ISO up to 13600 in cell phones (Fujitsu's newest model) in few days. Having a sensor with similar performance to a cell phone will not be a good selling point no matter how much bells and whistles it comes with.

I also see 135mm films coming back. FF DSLR digital cam with interchangeable back that allows you to shoot films will be a very interesting product . . . . . .

[FullertonImages]

Anything above the K7 price range that isn't FF isn't going to sell. Who's going to spend FF dollars on a non-FF dSLR from a non-Nikon/Canon brand? Answer: Just about nobody. That's why Pentax needs to do a FF dSLR - it's one of the few "features" that could actually justify a higher price tag and a bigger per unit margin. That, and the fact that many are growing impatient to the point where they're starting to go to Nikon or Canon for the FF dSLR that Pentax isn't making.

Everyone acts like above $1300 is FF territory. It was only a few years ago when FF under $3000 was insane. The 7d isn't FF and is holding it value at $1500-1600, and selling like crazy. Aps-c can easily sell at $1800 new, and settling to $1500. Canon just proved it. People will pay more than that for Aps-c if they think it's worth it. Remember that the majority of FF bodies are still over $4000, so it's not like anything over $1300 is FF territory...

[patk]

i don't know anything about full frame, but i do know leica put out a small 18 mp full-frame digital rangefinder (no video, no "kit" lens) for about $10k and no one on the leica forums even blinked. the only serious question was image quality. leica lens prices are in the stratosphere and no one blinks. but pentax is supposed to produce a ff camera with all the bells and whistles for under $1500 or else. interesting.

[thibs]

I strongly agrée to last two posts. Completely.

[ogl]

i don't know anything about full frame, but i do know leica put out a small 18 mp full-frame digital rangefinder (no video, no "kit" lens) for about $10k and no one on the leica forums even blinked. the only serious question was image quality. leica lens prices are in the stratosphere and no one blinks. but pentax is supposed to produce a ff camera with all the bells and whistles for under $1500 or else. interesting.

M9 is $6,995.00, not $10,000. Anyway...You're right.

[ghelary]

i don't know anything about full frame, but i do know leica put out a small 18 mp full-frame digital rangefinder (no video, no "kit" lens) for about $10k and no one on the leica forums even blinked. the only serious question was image quality. leica lens prices are in the stratosphere and no one blinks. but pentax is supposed to produce a ff camera with all the bells and whistles for under $1500 or else. interesting.

Leica is not anymore about photography, it's about status. Just like Ferrari is not a transportation method, it's a Ferrari.

Pentax on the other hand has a brand image of "more for less". Few people would accept a FF boby with a CCD sensor for twice the price of a D700 or a 5DmkII, whatever is the compatibility with lenses or feature list.

But I do agree that a FF with a price point of 1.5 K $/€ at launch is not realistic. At least for the moment.

So at the end the position of Hoya / Pentax of not developing a FF body + lens lineup makes perfect sense.

[patk]

i don't agree that leica is no longer about photography. it continues to attract serious hobbyists and enthusiasts, just as pentax does. perhaps pentax, the erstwhile japanese leica, should look at producing a less-expensive-than-leica ff rangefinder that will permit it to capitalize on its experience and reputation for producing high quality primes. i have no idea if that's possible, but at least it would "be interesting".

[Rondec]

Expensive may sell to other customers, but not to Pentax's customers. They complain about the prices of new cameras all the time -- even considering the fact that they know that they will drop in a few months. They whine about the prices of upper end lenses. This isn't Leica, this is Pentax and they have to somehow please the customers they have.