K-3 speculation

ElJamoquio · 05-30-2013, 04:44 PM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Nonsense. The K-30 and the K-5II are two separate models, clearly differentiated by features, components and price targets.

What features do you find clearly different between the K-30 and K-5II?

For what it's worth, I would argue that the myriad of people coming in and asking 'K-30 or K-5/K-5II?' would indicate it's not completely nonsensical to consider those models as partially (or largely) overlapping.

You agree with Pentax, which is fine and I won't try to convince you otherwise. In my opinion, there hasn't been a model worthy of 'new' since the K-5. They're long overdue for a model with clearly differentiated features, and I agree with you that a new model will likely be announced this year.

Quicksand · 05-30-2013, 04:50 PM

Originally posted by bossa

I know that sounds odd but imagine a 300mm where the entire lens barrel counts as the camera.

Hooo boy. My tilted horizons are bad enough already!

**Rondec** · 05-30-2013, 04:58 PM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

There's a styling difference. One uses 12-bit processing, the other uses 14-bit.

They both have two dials, use the same sensor, appears to be the same size AF sensor if not exactly the same AF sensor, buttons in roughly the same spots, same physical size of camera, same weight, both WR...

What are the big differences between any of the K-5, K-30, and K-5II? A low-light AF improvement? Focus peaking?

To me those are firmware-update levels of improvement, not a 'new' camera.

Do you think then that all of Canon's cameras that feature their 18 megapixel APS-C sensor (and it's a lot) are basically the same camera? Are the Canon 60D and 7D the same camera?

The K30 has different fps, shutter, body style, availability of grip, buffer size, video capabilities, and cost. The K30 required individual design, for all the fact that it did reuse some components from previous cameras and it differs significantly from the K5 so that it cannot by any stretch be considered the same camera. What you are really saying is that all of these cameras equally do not appeal to you and that is fine, but to say that they are the same pure silliness.

**RobA_Oz** · 05-30-2013, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

What features do you find clearly different between the K-30 and K-5II?

For what it's worth, I would argue that the myriad of people coming in and asking 'K-30 or K-5/K-5II?' would indicate it's not completely nonsensical to consider those models as partially (or largely) overlapping.

You agree with Pentax, which is fine and I won't try to convince you otherwise. In my opinion, there hasn't been a model worthy of 'new' since the K-5. They're long overdue for a model with clearly differentiated features, and I agree with you that a new model will likely be announced this year.

Feature set is one aspect of differentiation, but the chassis and body are different, even if the sensor, stabilisation system and some of the electronics are the same, there is no top LCD on the K30 and the rear LCD is different (though I concede that it's probably the same as the previous K-5's). They probably share a lot of the WR seals and gaskets, too. The same could be said of previous models, though.

Although analogies are fraught, it's a bit like saying that, because the engine and transmission and some of the instrumentation and door furniture come from the same parts bins, that different models of motorcar are the same. I agree, though, that drawing a wholly distinct line between products that share components is getting more difficult, as manufacturers try to reduce costs in that way. I don't think that the K30 and the K-5II/s are aimed at the same market segment, even if people here might hesitate to choose between them, and that in itself defines a difference.

twr · 05-30-2013, 07:24 PM

"I believe that within 10 years you'll be buying, not just lenses, but lenses with the camera built into them. I know that sounds odd but imagine a 300mm where the entire lens barrel counts as the camera. It would be possible for a live-view LCD or EVF on the end or a headset for display. Think of a monocular and you'll get my meaning. I'm sure the tech' would get cheap enough for a scenario like this to work quite well."

I agree. Sony tried something along these lines with the Dev-3 and Dev-5. I think as the technology improves we will see some true innovative camera designs.

**Aristophanes** · 05-30-2013, 07:31 PM

Originally posted by bossa

I believe that within 10 years ...

I believe sooner than that we'll see an app that exactly, with indistinguishable, pixel-level, and untraceable accuracy, mimics the most expensive Leica glass for falloff, bokeh, and resolution. It will isolate your subject with unerring levels of detail and sharpness. No one will be able to tell even on a 1 metre print.

It will be built right into the software of your camera. $3,000 worth of equivalence will disappear. Photoshop will tremble even more.

**Aristophanes** · 05-30-2013, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by bossa:

I believe that within 10 years you'll be buying, not just lenses, but lenses with the camera built into them. I know that sounds odd but imagine a 300mm where the entire lens barrel counts as the camera.

Are we not starting to see binoculars and monoculars like that?

**Digitalis** · 05-30-2013, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by Aristophanes

Are we not starting to see binoculars and monoculars like that?

One of my colleagues has a Leica spotting scope with a built in camera. Though the images don't look that great when printed above 8X12, as the sensor isn't anything to write home about.

bossa · 05-30-2013, 08:40 PM

Look at Nex cameras with their 'coke can' style lenses attached and imagine the camera component as not just some rectangular add-on but a more 'organic' part of the actual lens... once that plate on the end of the lens becomes more integrated I feel those cameras will be more like what they 'should' be. [And open up a new range of possibilities for ergonomics]

A camera with a lens becomes a lens-camera..

ogl · 05-30-2013, 10:02 PM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

Personally I don't count the K-5, K-30, K-5II as three DSLR's.

Agreed. But K-30 has new body.

Anyway, K-30 and K-5 (II/IIs) are the one variation on the same subject.
Cut here, add there.

Kunzite · 05-31-2013, 12:58 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

What features do you find clearly different between the K-30 and K-5II?

For what it's worth, I would argue that the myriad of people coming in and asking 'K-30 or K-5/K-5II?' would indicate it's not completely nonsensical to consider those models as partially (or largely) overlapping.

You agree with Pentax, which is fine and I won't try to convince you otherwise. In my opinion, there hasn't been a model worthy of 'new' since the K-5. They're long overdue for a model with clearly differentiated features, and I agree with you that a new model will likely be announced this year.

Different body, sensor, AF system, processor, battery, shooting speed, buffer size, max shutter speed, video mode - to name the most obvious. If that's not enough to consider it a different model, nothing is.

People are choosing between different models all the time, FYI; not only with Pentax, not only cameras.

It's not like I "agree with Pentax" (whatever that means), it's just how things are. New models are new without being completely different from all the past ones; and oh boy, if you hope otherwise you're in for a serious disappointment. I'd even suggest you to jump ship, except I can't think of a camera maker suited to your taste.

Clavius · 05-31-2013, 02:47 AM

Lets put it differently: The only reason to upgrade (and the only possibility to upgrade) since the K5, from 2010 is the K5IIs. All other "new" cameras were essentially stripped versions of the K5.

ogl · 05-31-2013, 03:24 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Different body, sensor, AF system, processor, battery, shooting speed, buffer size, max shutter speed, video mode - to name the most obvious. If that's not enough to consider it a different model, nothing is.

It's cosmetics, make-up...It's not the attributes of landmark camera.

If you stare at what you listed above, you could understand that difference is not serious. It's design set.
It's deliberate adding and cutting.

ogl · 05-31-2013, 03:25 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

Lets put it differently: The only reason to upgrade (and the only possibility to upgrade) since the K5, from 2010 is the K5IIs. All other "new" cameras were essentially stripped versions of the K5.

If your K-5 AF is OK and you are not pixel-peeper (I mean K-5IIs), no any sense to upgrade at all.

I've started to investigate my old photos from K-5 and I would say that K-5IIs is sharper, of course, but K-5 is not bad at all.
Especially with lenses which were good in terms of AF.

Kunzite · 05-31-2013, 04:01 AM

Yeah, right. Pentax (and only Pentax) should only make "landmark" cameras, completely reinventing the wheel each time and scraping every good idea they had because it's no longer "new".

I have doubts any amount of staring would mess my brain to the point I'll start thinking like you. Not that I'd wish to try...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Speculation: What if Pentax did not go FF but rather a 1.3x?	brecklundin	Pentax DSLR Discussion	36	08-13-2013 10:36 PM
Any speculation on how long...	Tom S.	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	10	12-16-2010 09:19 PM
K-x price speculation	SylBer	Pentax DSLR Discussion	18	10-13-2010 12:29 PM
Small rant + speculation	ilya80	Pentax News and Rumors	35	04-20-2010 11:42 PM
speculation about FA lenses on FF DSLR	lpfonseca	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	11-05-2009 10:34 AM

05-30-2013, 04:44 PM	#1831
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by Kunzite Nonsense. The K-30 and the K-5II are two separate models, clearly differentiated by features, components and price targets. What features do you find clearly different between the K-30 and K-5II? For what it's worth, I would argue that the myriad of people coming in and asking 'K-30 or K-5/K-5II?' would indicate it's not completely nonsensical to consider those models as partially (or largely) overlapping. You agree with Pentax, which is fine and I won't try to convince you otherwise. In my opinion, there hasn't been a model worthy of 'new' since the K-5. They're long overdue for a model with clearly differentiated features, and I agree with you that a new model will likely be announced this year.

05-30-2013, 04:50 PM	#1832
Quicksand Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Central Ohio (formerly SF Bay Area) Posts: 1,519	Originally posted by bossa I know that sounds odd but imagine a 300mm where the entire lens barrel counts as the camera. Hooo boy. My tilted horizons are bad enough already!

05-30-2013, 04:58 PM	#1833
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by ElJamoquio There's a styling difference. One uses 12-bit processing, the other uses 14-bit. They both have two dials, use the same sensor, appears to be the same size AF sensor if not exactly the same AF sensor, buttons in roughly the same spots, same physical size of camera, same weight, both WR... What are the big differences between any of the K-5, K-30, and K-5II? A low-light AF improvement? Focus peaking? To me those are firmware-update levels of improvement, not a 'new' camera. Do you think then that all of Canon's cameras that feature their 18 megapixel APS-C sensor (and it's a lot) are basically the same camera? Are the Canon 60D and 7D the same camera? The K30 has different fps, shutter, body style, availability of grip, buffer size, video capabilities, and cost. The K30 required individual design, for all the fact that it did reuse some components from previous cameras and it differs significantly from the K5 so that it cannot by any stretch be considered the same camera. What you are really saying is that all of these cameras equally do not appeal to you and that is fine, but to say that they are the same pure silliness.

05-30-2013, 05:19 PM	#1834
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,197	Originally posted by ElJamoquio What features do you find clearly different between the K-30 and K-5II? For what it's worth, I would argue that the myriad of people coming in and asking 'K-30 or K-5/K-5II?' would indicate it's not completely nonsensical to consider those models as partially (or largely) overlapping. You agree with Pentax, which is fine and I won't try to convince you otherwise. In my opinion, there hasn't been a model worthy of 'new' since the K-5. They're long overdue for a model with clearly differentiated features, and I agree with you that a new model will likely be announced this year. Feature set is one aspect of differentiation, but the chassis and body are different, even if the sensor, stabilisation system and some of the electronics are the same, there is no top LCD on the K30 and the rear LCD is different (though I concede that it's probably the same as the previous K-5's). They probably share a lot of the WR seals and gaskets, too. The same could be said of previous models, though. Although analogies are fraught, it's a bit like saying that, because the engine and transmission and some of the instrumentation and door furniture come from the same parts bins, that different models of motorcar are the same. I agree, though, that drawing a wholly distinct line between products that share components is getting more difficult, as manufacturers try to reduce costs in that way. I don't think that the K30 and the K-5II/s are aimed at the same market segment, even if people here might hesitate to choose between them, and that in itself defines a difference.

05-30-2013, 07:24 PM	#1835
twr New Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 14	"I believe that within 10 years you'll be buying, not just lenses, but lenses with the camera built into them. I know that sounds odd but imagine a 300mm where the entire lens barrel counts as the camera. It would be possible for a live-view LCD or EVF on the end or a headset for display. Think of a monocular and you'll get my meaning. I'm sure the tech' would get cheap enough for a scenario like this to work quite well." I agree. Sony tried something along these lines with the Dev-3 and Dev-5. I think as the technology improves we will see some true innovative camera designs.

05-30-2013, 07:31 PM	#1836
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by bossa I believe that within 10 years ... I believe sooner than that we'll see an app that exactly, with indistinguishable, pixel-level, and untraceable accuracy, mimics the most expensive Leica glass for falloff, bokeh, and resolution. It will isolate your subject with unerring levels of detail and sharpness. No one will be able to tell even on a 1 metre print. It will be built right into the software of your camera. $3,000 worth of equivalence will disappear. Photoshop will tremble even more.

05-30-2013, 07:32 PM	#1837
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by bossa: I believe that within 10 years you'll be buying, not just lenses, but lenses with the camera built into them. I know that sounds odd but imagine a 300mm where the entire lens barrel counts as the camera. Are we not starting to see binoculars and monoculars like that?

05-30-2013, 07:51 PM	#1838
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by Aristophanes Are we not starting to see binoculars and monoculars like that? One of my colleagues has a Leica spotting scope with a built in camera. Though the images don't look that great when printed above 8X12, as the sensor isn't anything to write home about.

05-30-2013, 08:40 PM	#1839
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	Look at Nex cameras with their 'coke can' style lenses attached and imagine the camera component as not just some rectangular add-on but a more 'organic' part of the actual lens... once that plate on the end of the lens becomes more integrated I feel those cameras will be more like what they 'should' be. [And open up a new range of possibilities for ergonomics] A camera with a lens becomes a lens-camera..

05-30-2013, 10:02 PM	#1840
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by ElJamoquio Personally I don't count the K-5, K-30, K-5II as three DSLR's. Agreed. But K-30 has new body. Anyway, K-30 and K-5 (II/IIs) are the one variation on the same subject. Cut here, add there.

05-31-2013, 12:58 AM	#1841
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by ElJamoquio What features do you find clearly different between the K-30 and K-5II? For what it's worth, I would argue that the myriad of people coming in and asking 'K-30 or K-5/K-5II?' would indicate it's not completely nonsensical to consider those models as partially (or largely) overlapping. You agree with Pentax, which is fine and I won't try to convince you otherwise. In my opinion, there hasn't been a model worthy of 'new' since the K-5. They're long overdue for a model with clearly differentiated features, and I agree with you that a new model will likely be announced this year. Different body, sensor, AF system, processor, battery, shooting speed, buffer size, max shutter speed, video mode - to name the most obvious. If that's not enough to consider it a different model, nothing is. People are choosing between different models all the time, FYI; not only with Pentax, not only cameras. It's not like I "agree with Pentax" (whatever that means), it's just how things are. New models are new without being completely different from all the past ones; and oh boy, if you hope otherwise you're in for a serious disappointment. I'd even suggest you to jump ship, except I can't think of a camera maker suited to your taste.

05-31-2013, 02:47 AM	#1842
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Lets put it differently: The only reason to upgrade (and the only possibility to upgrade) since the K5, from 2010 is the K5IIs. All other "new" cameras were essentially stripped versions of the K5.

05-31-2013, 03:24 AM	#1843
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Kunzite Different body, sensor, AF system, processor, battery, shooting speed, buffer size, max shutter speed, video mode - to name the most obvious. If that's not enough to consider it a different model, nothing is. It's cosmetics, make-up...It's not the attributes of landmark camera. If you stare at what you listed above, you could understand that difference is not serious. It's design set. It's deliberate adding and cutting.

05-31-2013, 03:25 AM	#1844
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Clavius Lets put it differently: The only reason to upgrade (and the only possibility to upgrade) since the K5, from 2010 is the K5IIs. All other "new" cameras were essentially stripped versions of the K5. If your K-5 AF is OK and you are not pixel-peeper (I mean K-5IIs), no any sense to upgrade at all. I've started to investigate my old photos from K-5 and I would say that K-5IIs is sharper, of course, but K-5 is not bad at all. Especially with lenses which were good in terms of AF.

05-31-2013, 04:01 AM	#1845
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Yeah, right. Pentax (and only Pentax) should only make "landmark" cameras, completely reinventing the wheel each time and scraping every good idea they had because it's no longer "new". I have doubts any amount of staring would mess my brain to the point I'll start thinking like you. Not that I'd wish to try...