[ElJamoquio]

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 60D has the flip out screen, different LCD, different AF grid (half as many points), different FPS. There's easily 5x as much difference IMO between the 60D and the 7D than there is between the K-5 and the K-30.

[ElJamoquio]

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.

Similar body, similar AF results, same AF grid, slightly different processor, incredibly similar shooting speed and buffer size (6.3 FPS vs 7 FPS? That's a difference, really?), slightly different shutter speed.

That's not enough for me to consider it say 'Pentax developed a new model'. Count them however you want, I count 1 since September of 2010.

PS - I love Pentax, I'm quite satisfied except for the lack of FF. Evolutionary changes are great and they're often better than revolutionary changes. But no matter how many firmware updates you give I'm still counting it as one model, and no matter how many times you release the same sensor in a incredibly similar body with incredibly similar results, I'll still count it as one model.

[Kunzite]

Fortunately, it's not up to you to decide what counts as a different model and what doesn't. The K-30 is a different model than the K-5, and no amount of denial will change that. Deal with it.

Being similar doesn't mean identical, and what you say it's similar actually implies different hardware. But you couldn't just claim they're similar models, right? Then it would mean Pentax did something; and here, on the friendly (not to) Pentax forums, realizing their achievements is a horrifying thought.

[Rondec]

The 60D has the flip out screen, different LCD, different AF grid (half as many points), different FPS. There's easily 5x as much difference IMO between the 60D and the 7D than there is between the K-5 and the K-30.

If there really isn't a significant difference between the K5 II and K30, why would anyone buy a K5 II or IIs? The answer from those who have used both (I don't think you have) is that the K5 II is a better photography tool, worth the extra cost. But it really isn't worth the argument. I personally am glad that Pentax doesn't choose to artificially cripple their lower end cameras as much as Nikon and Canon do.

[Kobayashi.K]

Pentaxians always amaze me.
So many confident experts on the physics of graphene, photonics, sensor design - you name it
It's like I'm auditing an online course offered by Stanford or something.

It seems that your smiley is wrong it should have been 'sarcastic'.
I personally like the comments from falconeye, Aristophanes, ogl, and others very much. They have a lot of experience and I'm learning much from them.

[jcdoss]

It seems that your smiley is wrong it should have been 'sarcastic'.
I personally like the comments from falconeye, Aristophanes, ogl, and others very much. They have a lot of experience and I'm learning much from them.

I didn't get the impression he was being sarcastic... and I agree with him... and you!

[Kobayashi.K]

I didn't get the impression he was being sarcastic... and I agree with him... and you!

If that's true my apologies to rawr.

[mecrox]

If there really isn't a significant difference between the K5 II and K30, why would anyone buy a K5 II or IIs? The answer from those who have used both (I don't think you have) is that the K5 II is a better photography tool, worth the extra cost. But it really isn't worth the argument. I personally am glad that Pentax doesn't choose to artificially cripple their lower end cameras as much as Nikon and Canon do.

It's possible that won't continue. With 24 mp settling in as the standard sensor-size for APS-C DSLRs (except for Canon ones, perhaps), what else will there be to differentiate between one model and another except for features? The quality differences between sensors will likely flatten out as the 24 mp fabbing process is perfected. So what else is left? I haven't yet seen any posts which make a credible case for bumping up APS-C sensors to, say, 36 mp. We may be looking at something of an endgame here, at least for the moment.

A way round it which might be tempting to a small outfit like Pentax is to produce just one, well-specced DSLR on APS-C and move on elsewhere, to different kinds of cameras and/or sensors, for new opportunities.

[Uluru]

It's possible that won't continue. With 24 mp settling in as the standard sensor-size for APS-C DSLRs (except for Canon ones, perhaps), what else will there be to differentiate between one model and another except for features?.

I think the current situation is unclear. It can be even confusing.

In their recent CP+ interview, one of the Pentax Ricoh Imaging representatives told that the K30 was designed to be intermediate level camera. But currently, there is nothing "below" K30, not even for a year already, so how that works out?

One possible explanation is that K5 replacement/upgrade, K30 and some other entry level camera were already outlined within Hoya plans, but were not released. Maybe even the K3 (let's call it like that for a moment) was outlined, to replace the K5 in September 2012? But both were stopped by Ricoh and we were given K5-II instead, with K30 serving as both intermediate and entry level camera?

When you analyse some statements, and correlate them with reality, one can conclude there's a lot going on behind the stage. But I can bet the entry level FFs from Canon and Nikon surely have contributed to lots changes.

[Rondec]

It's possible that won't continue. With 24 mp settling in as the standard sensor-size for APS-C DSLRs (except for Canon ones, perhaps), what else will there be to differentiate between one model and another except for features? The quality differences between sensors will likely flatten out as the 24 mp fabbing process is perfected. So what else is left? I haven't yet seen any posts which make a credible case for bumping up APS-C sensors to, say, 36 mp. We may be looking at something of an endgame here, at least for the moment.

A way round it which might be tempting to a small outfit like Pentax is to produce just one, well-specced DSLR on APS-C and move on elsewhere, to different kinds of cameras and/or sensors, for new opportunities.

Clearly there are differences in cameras other than the sensors. Some shutters are capable of faster action or, are quieter. Some cameras have sealing. Some have pretty shallow buffers. These are real differentiators, as the parts are different with regard to cost and quality. What irritates me is when there really are two roughly identical cameras, where the company making the camera chooses to use software to limit the performance of the cheaper camera.

[bossa]

I think the current situation is unclear. It can be even confusing.

In their recent CP+ interview, one of the Pentax Ricoh Imaging representatives told that the K30 was designed to be intermediate level camera. But currently, there is nothing "below" K30, not even for a year already, so how that works out?

One possible explanation is that K5 replacement/upgrade, K30 and some other entry level camera were already outlined within Hoya plans, but were not released. Maybe even the K3 (let's call it like that for a moment) was outlined, to replace the K5 in September 2012? But both were stopped by Ricoh and we were given K5-II instead, with K30 serving as both intermediate and entry level camera?

When you analyse some statements, and correlate them with reality, one can conclude there's a lot going on behind the stage. But I can bet the entry level FFs from Canon and Nikon surely have contributed to lots changes.

A CR Kennedy rep' told me a few weeks ago that there will definitely be an entry level DSLR released this year but said nothing more about hi-end models.

[Aristophanes]

I think the current situation is unclear. It can be even confusing.

In their recent CP+ interview, one of the Pentax Ricoh Imaging representatives told that the K30 was designed to be intermediate level camera. But currently, there is nothing "below" K30, not even for a year already, so how that works out?

One possible explanation is that K5 replacement/upgrade, K30 and some other entry level camera were already outlined within Hoya plans, but were not released. Maybe even the K3 (let's call it like that for a moment) was outlined, to replace the K5 in September 2012? But both were stopped by Ricoh and we were given K5-II instead, with K30 serving as both intermediate and entry level camera?

When you analyse some statements, and correlate them with reality, one can conclude there's a lot going on behind the stage. But I can bet the entry level FFs from Canon and Nikon surely have contributed to lots changes.

I suspect that Pentax planned to have one out, along with the DA 50/1.8 and the DA 35/2.4, and the DA-L 18-55, 50-200, and 55-300 options. That's an entry-level kit scenario all to itself right there. No need for WR. Just the basics and a lot of auto modes.


Somehow that did not happen and we have the odd scenarios of K-30 WR's being sold with the wrong glass in packages we would not normally expect.

I believe price pressures made the swift drop in the K-30 price too much to squeeze a lower-ed body in.

[ElJamoquio]

Fortunately, it's not up to you to decide what counts as a different model and what doesn't. The K-30 is a different model than the K-5, and no amount of denial will change that. Deal with it.

Being similar doesn't mean identical, and what you say it's similar actually implies different hardware. But you couldn't just claim they're similar models, right? Then it would mean Pentax did something; and here, on the friendly (not to) Pentax forums, realizing their achievements is a horrifying thought.

I am the sole arbiter of what I think is a different model. I don't know why you've been trying to convince me otherwise, but you haven't succeeded.

I am a big fan of Pentax and hope that they become everything they want to become. They might be on track to that right now - in fact, overall, I think they are - but releasing the K-5XXI won't help them gain market share, IMO.

[Aristophanes]

but releasing the K-5XXI won't help them gain market share, IMO.

They may not want more market share. They may simply want profitability. Those can be mutually exclusive.

[ElJamoquio]

If there really isn't a significant difference between the K5 II and K30, why would anyone buy a K5 II or IIs? The answer from those who have used both (I don't think you have) is that the K5 II is a better photography tool, worth the extra cost. But it really isn't worth the argument. I personally am glad that Pentax doesn't choose to artificially cripple their lower end cameras as much as Nikon and Canon do.

I've used a K-5 and a K-30. I haven't used the K-5II. The K-5IIs makes sense for a certain group, but that doesn't make it a new model to me, either.

I agree - Pentax shouldn't artificially cripple their low end cameras, by, say, reducing their shutter speed, etc.


FYI, amazon sales rank:

42) K-30
54) K-5IIs
59) K-30
61) K-30
63) K-30
81) K-5II
84) K-x
90) K-30
91) K-5II

The K-5II (not-s) is selling but it's not close to the K-30, especially when you consider that some of the less-popular color schemes of the K-30 are likely slightly outside of the top 100. For some people it's worth the extra $200-300... but according to the sales data it's a minority of people.