[deadwolfbones]

I'ts still too much compared to what the 7D gives you. I am finding the 7D as low as 1339.00 new.
How low wll the K5 be in six months, a year? 999.00?

Given the depreciation of the K-7 over its first year, probably even cheaper.

[happygui]

On amazon, the preorder price is 1599 for body only. The strange thing is the 18-55 kit price is same-1599 too.

Amazon.com: Pentax K-5 16.3 MP Digital SLR with 3-Inch LCD (Black Body Only): Electronics

[macTak]

On amazon, the preorder price is 1599 for body only. The strange thing is the 18-55 kit price is same-1599 too.

photographyreview.com states:

"The Pentax K-5 DSLR will be available in October for $1,599.95 (body only) and $1,749.95 (lens kit with the 18-55mm WR)".

[TiminyCricket]

The "OMG it costs too much!!!!" group wil have to actually come up with another moaning point!!

No, they wont. The fact is that much of the anger over the price has been due to the feature/price comparison with the Nikon D7000, which itself MSRP's for $1199.95... meaning the Nikon's street price will likely be a few hundred less as well... logically meaning the Pentax will STILL be perceived as overpriced, even though the Pentax may drop in price more in the long-run.

Personally, I still think the MSRP on the Pentax is too much (regardless of what the street price ends up being (that, of course, is completely dependent on sales and demand factors). Pentax already messed with the prices of the lenses, DOUBLING them in some cases, which has already left a lot of Pentaxians (including myself) pissed-off to begin with because many of us chose to get our start in digital photography using a Pentax system because the price/performance ration was FAR better than the competition. Case-in-point, I only paid $199 for my FA50 1.4... and now I see people coughing up $350 for the same lens. The DA* prices have also gone up quite a bit, resulting in the last couple of lenses I've purchased being Sigma lenses, not Pentax.

If Pentax was a big player like Canon, or Nikon then I think people would be more accommodating to the MSRP. But, unfortunately, that is not the case and there is just no reason why a K-5 with almost identical features to a D7000 should MSRP for several hundred more. It's hard-enough to get people into Pentax as it is. I should know... I am constantly trying to talk people into choosing Pentax as their first camera, but even when the price is good they quickly dismiss it in favor of a Canikon. Pentax doesn't have the reputation. Pentax doesn't have the store presence. All Pentax had was a stellar price. And compared to the competition the prices as of late have been, in my humble opinion, not nearly as stellar (gravitating) as they have been in the past.

[Winder]

Given the depreciation of the K-7 over its first year, probably even cheaper.

If the K-5 turns out to be the camera everyone is expecting, then I doubt you will see prices falling as fast as the K-7.

[deadwolfbones]

If the K-5 turns out to be the camera everyone is expecting, then I doubt you will see prices falling as fast as the K-7.

Depends. The K-7 was quite massively hyped over here, too, when it came out.

[opiedog]

Depends. The K-7 was quite massively hyped over here, too, when it came out.

from falk lumo's initial report. NO f2.8 AF sensor, NO manual video adjustment.
so what does the K5 have over the d7000?

SR, better MagAlloy body, 1 FPS faster. the price of $1399 (vs $1599) is welcome, but to get new market share, that's just not going to cut it.

[Aristophanes]

No, they wont. The fact is that much of the anger over the price has been due to the feature/price comparison with the Nikon D7000, which itself MSRP's for $1199.95... meaning the Nikon's street price will likely be a few hundred less as well... logically meaning the Pentax will STILL be perceived as overpriced, even though the Pentax may drop in price more in the long-run.

Personally, I still think the MSRP on the Pentax is too much (regardless of what the street price ends up being (that, of course, is completely dependent on sales and demand factors). Pentax already messed with the prices of the lenses, DOUBLING them in some cases, which has already left a lot of Pentaxians (including myself) pissed-off to begin with because many of us chose to get our start in digital photography using a Pentax system because the price/performance ration was FAR better than the competition.

This has little to do with Pentax/Hoya. It's the Yen at record highs versus every major currency. Why do you think the biggest world financial story this week has been the Japanese government's politically mandated sale of reserv assets:

Yen Falls From 15-Year High Against Dollar After Japan Sells Its Currency - Bloomberg

You have too understand how difficult it is for Japanese companies these days with a high Yen. Whatever they sell overseas loses money. They have to make it all up in the home country.

The K-5 has more features than the D7000. It's a more robust camera, so a $200 price point premium at MSRP is justified (with MSRP being an anachronism in any case). I agree the D7000 has caused some pricing ruffles, but aggressive pricing is a mid-tier factor in autos, TV's, etc. Nothing new here.

As for lenses, that's almost all Yen movement. Nikon lenses have rocketed up which is why they (and Sony) have brought in budget lines. More DAL coming from Pentax in 2011 I'd say.

[deadwolfbones]

from falk lumo's initial report. NO f2.8 AF sensor, NO manual video adjustment.
so what does the K5 have over the d7000?

SR, better MagAlloy body, 1 FPS faster. the price of $1399 (vs $1599) is welcome, but to get new market share, that's just not going to cut it.

Not sure what you're replying to here, since I wasn't talking about the D7000 at all.

[hut234]

What troubles me is that first Lumo says:

"The press kit is full of errors and I'll have to verify a number of other details first. E.g., I doubt that the camera ships June 2009 Meanwhile, I verified and it ships next month already! They fixed a number of other errors too."

and the very next sentence is:

"The price hints at a US list price of $1,399.- which is only $100 more than the D7000 and means that both cameras will have an equal street price."

So IMHO it takes quite the optimist to take this price as fact and not another error, given that it's the one place in the world not quoting it at the higher price. I'm assuming it ain't until further notice.

[sjwaldron]

No, they wont. The fact is that much of the anger over the price has been due to the feature/price comparison with the Nikon D7000, which itself MSRP's for $1199.95... meaning the Nikon's street price will likely be a few hundred less as well... logically meaning the Pentax will STILL be perceived as overpriced, even though the Pentax may drop in price more in the long-run.

Pentax doesn't have the reputation. Pentax doesn't have the store presence. All Pentax had was a stellar price. And compared to the competition the prices as of late have been, in my humble opinion, not nearly as stellar (gravitating) as they have been in the past.

I agree with the point about Nikon's D7000. Overall both cameras have a few specs. that are "better" than the other. I'm not seeing any specific point where Pentax can justify a MSRP difference of $400.

That being said, I don't agree with Pentax only having price as a selling point in the past. The construction and focus on primes has been very nice. However, all we get from Pentax this week has been a plastic averagely fast prime and a slow super zoom.


If I had the reigns of Pentax I'd modify the lens range to:

High Tier (All lenses would be WR):
- Phase out the DA* lineup and drop APS-C lenses. Do not use the * (star) designator anymore.
- Take FA capable DA* lenses and call them D-FA SDM WR Limited. Make sure there is a full range of D-FA zooms available for advanced users.
- Take the FA Limiteds and DA Limiteds that are FA capable and make them WR. Call them D-FA WR Limited.

Lenses must be named with:
** D-FA SDM WR Limited **
** D-FA WR Limited **

--------------------------------------------------------

Middle Tier (these would all be WR):
- Get more D-FA WR lenses out the door. Use classic designs that were well regarded and give them the same treatment as the 100mm WR Macro basically. Try to keep them under the price range of D-FA Limiteds.
- Move FA capable DA Limited designs to the high tier as defined above. Cheapen APS-C limiteds to the level of the 100mm WR Macro, but add WR ability.
- Mid range zoom lenses like the new 18-135mm WR lens, however these should be fixed F4 lenses.

Lenses must be named with:
** D-FA WR **
** DA WR **
** DA SDM WR **

--------------------------------------------------------

Low Tier:
- Call all lenses in this range DA-L
- I think the new 35mm prime fits perfectly in this tier.
- plastic
- cheap
- somewhat decent glass
- include cheap kit zooms with plastic mounts
- APS-C only
- Phase out all lenses like the non-WR 18-55mm.
- screw drive only (unless SDM is somehow cheaper to manufacture)
- no WR

Lenses must be named with:
** DA-L **

[jpzk]

Canadian prices: (body only)

$1599.00 at Adorama Canada
$1599.00 at Henry's

I'll check at Tanguay's, they don't show it yet.

Anyone else in Canada aware of prices?

JP

[hut234]

Adorama US officially has it for the $1,600 (in US dollars) as originally expected.

Pentax K5 16.3 Megapixel DSLR Camera Body

[illdefined]

Adorama US officially has it for the $1,600 (in US dollars) as originally expected.

Pentax K5 16.3 Megapixel DSLR Camera Body

tragic. once again Nikon is dictating the industry and Pentax is struggling trying to catch-up.

[Rondec]

No, they wont. The fact is that much of the anger over the price has been due to the feature/price comparison with the Nikon D7000, which itself MSRP's for $1199.95... meaning the Nikon's street price will likely be a few hundred less as well... logically meaning the Pentax will STILL be perceived as overpriced, even though the Pentax may drop in price more in the long-run.

Personally, I still think the MSRP on the Pentax is too much (regardless of what the street price ends up being (that, of course, is completely dependent on sales and demand factors). Pentax already messed with the prices of the lenses, DOUBLING them in some cases, which has already left a lot of Pentaxians (including myself) pissed-off to begin with because many of us chose to get our start in digital photography using a Pentax system because the price/performance ration was FAR better than the competition. Case-in-point, I only paid $199 for my FA50 1.4... and now I see people coughing up $350 for the same lens. The DA* prices have also gone up quite a bit, resulting in the last couple of lenses I've purchased being Sigma lenses, not Pentax.

If Pentax was a big player like Canon, or Nikon then I think people would be more accommodating to the MSRP. But, unfortunately, that is not the case and there is just no reason why a K-5 with almost identical features to a D7000 should MSRP for several hundred more. It's hard-enough to get people into Pentax as it is. I should know... I am constantly trying to talk people into choosing Pentax as their first camera, but even when the price is good they quickly dismiss it in favor of a Canikon. Pentax doesn't have the reputation. Pentax doesn't have the store presence. All Pentax had was a stellar price. And compared to the competition the prices as of late have been, in my humble opinion, not nearly as stellar (gravitating) as they have been in the past.

Interestingly, Nikon cameras don't really drop significantly. As I recall, the D90 launched at around 1100 and currently sells for 850, whereas the K7 launched for 1300 and has dropped to 750. I guess just a difference in philosophy. Anyway, this time next year, the K5 should be selling for roughly 820 dollars, the D7000 will still be at 950. Not particularly good or bad, just true.

There are a lot of selling points for the K5 over the D7000, particularly if you are already a Pentax user. If you use Nikon, then it probably isn't enough benefit to warrant a switch. Neither camera kills the other one, either through features or price. Just saying.