[rawr]

I'm considering selling my k-7, da* 50-135mm f2.8, da 35mm macro 2.8, da 12-24mm f/4 to get a canon 5d+28mm f2.8/1.8 and maybe a 85mm 2.8

Want I want is a wide fast prime from pentax like 2.8 or above. I think we'll see these fast lenses but they will be for the EVIL camera therefore not full frame.

What's wrong with the DA 14 or 15 or 21 ltds as fast wide primes? Or some of the f1.4 and f1.8 fast wide Sigma primes?

Also the 5D is an old clunker in IQ and handling. It wouldn't be any decent step up in IQ over the K-7 or K-x, even though it is FF, except for low-light IQ.

[dopeytree]

Mm I shall probably sell the 12-24mm. It's a top lens but I find it to bulky. Maybe get a 15mm ltd or the 14mm. Really I'd love a weather sealed version.

The sigma offerings are very good just not suited to aps-c.

If we were to get this rabbit pulled out the hat then maybe I'll have to rush to get a FA 31 ltd.

With regard to the current K-7 I don't have any issues with autofocus. All I'm interested in is dynamic range/low light and weatherproofing and the video capabilities.

[Peter Zack]

I have been following this thread and find quite a bit of similarity with discussions about music formats and computers. People who consider themselves audiophiles cannot fathom why everyone does not use a lossless format. The Macintosh faithful cannot grasp why anyone would want a iPad when they could have the newest MacBook Pro. From where I sit the answer to both is that AAC (or MP3) and iPads are good enough for a sufficient number of people.

I think a similar process is happening here. A substantial majority of people in this group have been interested in photography for a long time, but we are not representative of the photographing public. A large number of people have never owned a film SLR and a dSLR seems very expensive (to them) when there are other options that are good enough. At my school's graduation back in May I would say that for over half the families there the only record of their kid's graduation will be the photos in the iPhone, in fact I saw more iPhones (and other camera phones) than cameras of any sort. For most of my students their phone will probably always be their camera also, they see no reason to spend more to carry something extra.

These are the people who all the camera makers are trying to woo, and they have decided to go with EVF cameras because these consumers, for the most part, do not want to carry around lenses and flashes and things like that. They are happy with something that takes better pictures than the phone. I know several people who never move the pictures off the camera (or phone), they just show them on the screen and then delete them, though some will upload them to Facebook.

What it comes down to, as I see it, is that the masses who spend the most money don't care if a camera looks "serious" or "professional" but rather does it take photos that look acceptable on Facebook. There are actually a lot of people who have heard of Pentax (Aren't they the ones who make the cameras in different colors?) and some of them may buy a dSLR someday but if they do they will get the kit and probably never buy anything else and never take the camera off the Green Box mode. A bigger problem for Pentax is (and the Denver area is not alone in this) there is no place where you can see one of their cameras and the average consumer does want to hold something before spending what is, to most people, a lot of money.

Marc, interesting that your post was basically steamrolled past and the discussions continued. But you are actually right on point with your comments.
The wedding I did on Saturday was a case study. At least a 20 iPhones or similar devices taking shots, another 20 or so with P&S's of various shapes and 6 Canikon DSLR's all outfitted with the same lens (18-55mm of course).

During the reception each one approached me at various times asking advice on a better lens or some technique issue they were curious about. 3 separate comments about what to get in an all-encompassing lens like an 18-250mm because "I hate changing lenses or carrying extra stuff". Image quality really wasn't a consideration. nor features etc. All 6 of those cameras had the flash up and the camera set to "portrait". They saw what I was carrying and if that were the future of DLSR's they would go buy an iPhone.

The average person buying a camera has absolutely no interest in any of the items discussed here. We're all looking at real or perceived, specific needs far beyond what the average consumer cares about.

It's a statistical fact that cell phones, PDA's and similar devices where the camera is a "secondary feature" actually take more than double the number of photos of all other cameras combined. An XTi or K-x does not fit in you pocket or purse.

In fact they see DSLR's as limiting. Not only in the large size but that the lens doesn't have the power of a typical P&S. That camera is smaller than a pack of playing cards and takes "awesome" photos.

Facebook is the worlds largest photo hosting site as well by about triple all other sites combined. They compress and downsize images, much more than any other photo host on the internet. Images are routinely stored there (not on a computer or other storage media). The site downsizes an image till it's around 50-60 Kb.

So you are correct, the masses don't care about any of this, The masses are the ones that buy the majority of the cameras. To maximize profits and sales, Pentax would be wiser to build (and market) a serious line of P&S cameras and K-x style small DSLR's. Not a FF body that I want.

[dopeytree]

Very true.

But when have you ever seen a prime lens marketed as a way to get better pictures? Once someone's tried a prime they rarely go back to a zoom lens.

Olympus is halfway there with these adverts: Olympus - PEN

I could see pentax fitting in this market very nicely with a stylish camera and maybe some smaller versions of their aps-c pancake lenses.

[Kunzite]

wait till photokina, Pentax will pull a big rabbit, believe me !!! You all would be suprised, can't tell more

A rabbit could be an accurate description; but we should remove the "big"
But... maybe you know something I do not?

[Gimbal]

wait till photokina, Pentax will pull a big rabbit, believe me !!! You all would be suprised, can't tell more

Sounds scary. I'm not so sure I want a rabbit of a camera. I don't want an EVIL and FF would probably be to expensive. So an improved K7 (which according to some people would be the end of Pentax) sounds pretty nice to me.

[Kunzite]

Better a rabbit than a dog of a camera. But, if we're talking about a weather sealed, rugged camera - would that still be a rabbit, or a hare?

Maybe a Pentax rabbit is a good answer for those Canikon wolves: Rabbit eats wolf - FunnyPictures1.com

[falconeye]

I have been following this thread and find quite a bit of similarity with discussions about music formats and computers.

So you are correct, the masses don't care about any of this

I agree with both comments but I doubt their relevance to the discussion we're having here.

To use the theme, it's like an iPad discussion when the thread is about MacBooks (MacOSX) to be 32Bit or 64Bit.


I agree and even forecast that the "masses" will drop P&S when cell phones are good enough (and e.g., an iPhone 4 may actually be). The jump from a cell phone to a dSLR will be too long. This is why the SLD segment is the only hope for mass producers like Panasonic, Samsung or Sony.

And it is why I don't really care if Pentax decides to participate on this particular battleground. Yes, the colorful K-x have been a nice success for Pentax. But it's extremely difficult to redo and dangerous to bet on it.


Some may argue (I've heard it) that photography as a hobby will die. I.e., that the enthusiast segment will die. I don't care either because then Pentax will die too.

But I don't think so. Photography is an art form and people want ways to express their creativity. Photography is one way to do so. Speaking for myself, I would de a mediocre painter and awful musician. For many, photography as a hobby is here to stay. Maybe collapsing to a core of enthusiasts and loosing a bunch of "Me Too" photographers who use big cameras because it makes them look bigger. But this would hit Canon more than Pentax.

So eventually, the decisive question will turn out to be how to keep happy the core of enthusiasts and to grow a profitable (lens) business out of it. And to have the occasional windfall profit in the lower market segments.


If Pentax does what the two above posts do (focus on the current low end mainstream) then Pentax must be killed.

To make you feel the heat ...

I firmly see $200 SLD cameras with automatic functions for panorama creation, aligning multiexposure features (HDR, emptying places from crowds, low noise, handheld soft water), portrait beautifying functions, macro focus stacking, fast contrast AF even for macro shots, supreme video features (actually merging the segment with camcorders), in camera photo and video editing, fast readout with software-stabilized video and still, and much more to list here. Like a high pixel density center region for good digital zoom with small prime lenses. The size of the development department will matter much more in the future than it does now. The digital revolution does only start now. So far, camera companies did nothing but replace the film by a sensor which they bought in.

The article I wrote was to address the question what Pentax can and must do to survive abroad the above battleground.

[Aristophanes]

Aristophanes, who would buy the 1500$ "FF"? Certainly, not those who buy Rebels... But since we have the more than 1500$ APS-C camera (and it's selling!) why would Canon launch a cheaper "FF"?

To put the screws to Nikon. At some point the only feature to compete on will be sensor size.

[Aristophanes]

I agree with both comments but I doubt their relevance to the discussion we're having here.

To use the theme, it's like an iPad discussion when the thread is about MacBooks (MacOSX) to be 32Bit or 64Bit.

I agree and even forecast that the "masses" will drop P&S when cell phones are good enough (and e.g., an iPhone 4 may actually be). The jump from a cell phone to a dSLR will be too long. This is why the SLD segment is the only hope for mass producers like Panasonic, Samsung or Sony.

And it is why I don't really care if Pentax decides to participate on this particular battleground. Yes, the colorful K-x have been a nice success for Pentax. But it's extremely difficult to redo and dangerous to bet on it.

Some may argue (I've heard it) that photography as a hobby will die. I.e., that the enthusiast segment will die. I don't care either because then Pentax will die too.

But I don't think so. Photography is an art form and people want ways to express their creativity. Photography is one way to do so. Speaking for myself, I would de a mediocre painter and awful musician. For many, photography as a hobby is here to stay. Maybe collapsing to a core of enthusiasts and loosing a bunch of "Me Too" photographers who use big cameras because it makes them look bigger. But this would hit Canon more than Pentax.

So eventually, the decisive question will turn out to be how to keep happy the core of enthusiasts and to grow a profitable (lens) business out of it. And to have the occasional windfall profit in the lower market segments.

If Pentax does what the two above posts do (focus on the current low end mainstream) then Pentax must be killed.

To make you feel the heat ...

I firmly see $200 SLD cameras with automatic functions for panorama creation, aligning multiexposure features (HDR, emptying places from crowds, low noise, handheld soft water), portrait beautifying functions, macro focus stacking, fast contrast AF even for macro shots, supreme video features (actually merging the segment with camcorders), in camera photo and video editing, fast readout with software-stabilized video and still, and much more to list here. Like a high pixel density center region for good digital zoom with small prime lenses. The size of the development department will matter much more in the future than it does now. The digital revolution does only start now. So far, camera companies did nothing but replace the film by a sensor which they bought in.

The article I wrote was to address the question what Pentax can and must do to survive abroad the above battleground.

Photography is, hands down, the second most successful vernacular art form ever developed by humanity.

#1 is music. All other forms (literature, poetry, drama, film, pottery, sculpture, painting and illustration, synchronized swimming) are very distant. You can go to most places in the world into a home and a photo is likely staring back at you. Photography is not just about creativity. It's genius in stopping time for a moment is in identity.

Photography is not going anywhere. Literature is having issues (narrative fiction in the novel format), but photography has never enjoyed such an enormous boom due to digital convenience and the sharing component of the internet.

Pentax is an optical company (as is Hoya). They make lenses. Commodity low-end cameras can be made by anyone now, as was the same with point-and-shoot 35 and 110 film cameras and disposables. For them to compete as a mass market commodity electronics maker makes no sense. Pentax, Canon, Nikon, and Olympus leverage their higher-end "real camera maker" attribute and their relatively ancient name brand in photography to sell cameras. It doesn't matter the price point, they are all associated with photography.

I am not so convinced smartphones will displace P&S cameras so out of hand. The former cannot provide as many "keeper" photos. The problem with lo-fi wedding shots is that they become a waste of effort and later observing time. Eventually, there is a cultural shift away from mass to particular, especially amongst higher spenders for whom time is money. This is what drives the prosumer markets, even to the point where people over-purchase for their general needs. They are buying possibility, willingly, eagerly, voraciously. As consumers become better educated, they often say "I want a camera that can take THAT photo", not a camera that can take many lousy photos. "Good enough" only lasts so long (Apple computers rise is a testament to that false assumption) before quality overcomes quantity, at least where the significant margins are. Pentax is well-placed to be a higher-margin company, but is poorly placed to be a commodity camera supplier.

I fully agree with the SLD proposed here by Falk, but at $200, it's going to sit beside a smartphone in the purse. Some of the features described here will still rely on superb glass.

[ManuH]

I don't think P&S will die, the low-end maybe because there will be not much difference with smart phones but higher end P&S like superzooms, waterproof and advanced will still continue to have a place due to their good compromise between IQ, compactness and conveniance. I don't even see them being crushed by the mirrorless cameras because these will be always bigger anyway and more costly to own when you start to buy lenses. I also suspect that the next fad will be 3D. 3D displays, 3D cameras. So P&S will still have a long way before dying.

Where does that leaves Pentax? The biggest Pentax problem IMHO is technological. They don't seem to have the R&D power to overcome that. So they have to be smarter and find niches. And there are many niches that are waiting to be filled IMHO. They also have to work on their brand recognition. For what particular feature Pentax will be recognized as the de facto standard? For what qualities Pentax should be recognized? This needs to be also addressed.

[Class A]

To maximize profits and sales, Pentax would be wiser to build (and market) a serious line of P&S cameras and K-x style small DSLR's. Not a FF body that I want.

But it cannot be about maximising profits only, can it? If that were the sole goal Pentax should specialise in credit default swaps or similar.

I believe there will always be a market for enthusiast and professional photographers. Prices may go up if manufacturing numbers go down but a brand like Pentax should stay true to its competences rather than following the lure of highest profit.

[Mister Guy]

Maybe some answers are not meant to be divulged, even "leaked" just quite yet?

Well, I wonder if that will make me want to "upgrade" to a "K5" which, by the way, would carry a name that doesn't quite follow with the upgrade-path-naming-convention ... K10 ...K20 ...K7 ... and why not a K8? Anyway, that is polemics only and doesn't mean a thing for the moment.
If, and only IF, this newbie comes with a better high-ISO handling sensor, and perhaps an AF which has more "locking" abilities, perhaps upgrading would be in my plans. But, it better be as good as the K7 for the rest of the features.

Now, let's go back a bit and talk FF: would one be shooting oneself in the foot by "upgrading" to a K5 while Pentax has an FF in store in their gameplan?

As far as I am concerned, and because of the type of photography I do most of the time, better AF and high-ISO handling would be two very important things to me. But again, would a future FF Pentax cause me grief and make me say: "Oh Gosh! Why didn't I wait a few more months for this fabulous FF instead of having indulged in a "K5"?
But Hey! Maybe Pentax will be offering an FF which will also be compatible with existing DA's and DA*'s!?

I suppose I will just have to wait and see what's really coming at Photokina 2010 and, should a "K5" comes out, be patient and wait for reviews first before jumping in.
As you, I am quite satisfied with the K7 for the time being but, like many here, I expect something more than "satisfactory".

Lots of speculations ... a few weeks for the revelations!

Cheers!

JP

Well, don't forget his nonleaks are leaks, too! I mean, this thread is basically, "Confirmation: K-5 is model spec'd above K-7, but not FF", only written backwards with a few more details thrown in

But as to your other comment, you almost never damage yourself by investing in a new body, if you can afford the opportunity cost. I can think of a few groups that "lost" features moving to a new body, particularly astronomers, but not many. You'll only be upset if that means not buying a new model in the near future, but with resale value being what it is on cameras, it's not such a big deal unless you break it.

What does matter is how you spend money on lenses. An announcement of FF in the near future could be damaging to the sales of any DA lens that doesn't cover the full frame circle, and the FA line would get a little boost in it's demand. That's where the real decisions should be made. Are you currently willing to invest in a lens that doesn't cover the full frame circle?

I don't personally see myself as an early adopter if a FF was released, but I still don't currently want to buy any lens that CAN'T be used if I do.

[rparmar]

Better high ISO and AF systems are not enough to build good sales. Only FF or something unique can help to survive.

To get noticed, Pentax will really need to pull a big rabbit out of the hat at Photokina.

These personal opinions do not afford with reality. Pentax has already increased sales significantly and has a lot more brand recognition now than before the K-7 and K-x. Not only sales figures but magazine covers, reviews etc. all attest to this. All they need to do is keep on doing what they are doing now to do well.

No need for some miracle. They already have something unique: maximum IQ in a small weather-sealed package. Make the cameras smaller and lighter still, but still grippable. Put in faster processor. Release more WR lenses. Incremental progress will do just fine.

A rabbit could be an accurate description; but we should remove the "big"

Ah, good, that makes sense. Pentax need to go with their obvious strengths, not venture out into any crazy new areas. Those who need a huge camera to display their prowess can go elsewhere, if they haven't already.

[rparmar]

I am not so convinced smartphones will displace P&S cameras so out of hand. The former cannot provide as many "keeper" photos.

I agree with the rest of your post (as usual) but not this part. First: phones have already displaced cameras in many places, here in Ireland for example. It's rare to see a camera day-to-day, though some few come out for a special event. I'd guess 96-99% of all images are taken with phones.

Second: it is not about keepers. This is the 21st century; no-one wants to keep anything any more. Photography is about the disposable, the instant that makes way for the next instant -- Twitter, IM, incessant social networks, flash crowds.

Here today, gone tomorrow is so passé. That rate is now two orders of magnitude too slow. If your photo is more than one minute old it is already too old.

That is not the future of photography; it is already here.

We in the DSLR world are all operating in the margins and any accounting of what is popular must take that into account.