[thibs]

Well the *ist DL lived on for several months after the *ist DL2 was released, I expect the same thing happen with K10D and K100D Super.

The DL2 and DS2 were released only in several markets. THey were NOT released in Europe for example.

[rvannatta]

I's say the opposite

Discontinue the K10 (saw its price anyway?) but keep K100D against D40/XT and put K200 against D40X/XTi.

why not reprice the k10 to the K100 price slot. 6 mps are on the way out. Who would buy
a 6 if they can get a 10 for the same money. I doubt if the cost of making the two models is much different now at least.

[thibs]

why not reprice the k10 to the K100 price slot. 6 mps are on the way out. Who would buy
a 6 if they can get a 10 for the same money. I doubt if the cost of making the two models is much different now at least.

Because the K10 has semi-pro feature set and same sensor as K200D (AFAIK) so it would kill K200D sales very quickly IMO. I think they will (K10/K100) sell while stock lasts and that's it.

[Deni]

Personally, to replace the k100d super, I'd take the body of the k10d and install the sensor of the k100d super. This way you still have a very good low light camera with the built quality and excellent controls of the k10d without jeopardizing the sales of the k10d replacement.

[thibs]

Personally, to replace the k100d super, I'd take the body of the k10d and install the sensor of the k100d super. This way you still have a very good low light camera with the built quality and excellent controls of the k10d without jeopardizing the sales of the k10d replacement.

That will not happen (unfortunately?) for a couple reasons:

• K10 body is "big" for an entry level camera
• K10 offers features of a semi-pro, not a low-end camera
• 6Mpix is not interesting on a marketing POV (unfortunately?)

That would have been cool however ...

[Deni]

K10 body is "big" for an entry level camera

I'd consider it as a positive fact.

K10 offers features of a semi-pro, not a low-end camera

The k10d is going for very cheap now, $519 after rebate click me. That's lower than the introduction price of the k100d. By using existing bodies and cheaper sensor pentax can reduce the r&d and production costs and throw a kick ass camera for less than $500 with the kit lens. Take a step further and introduce a bit longer kit lens and see the sales of the "advanced" p&s market tumble.

6Mpix is not interesting on a marketing POV (unfortunately?)

Maybe the features mentioned above and a wise marketing campaign might resolve the megapixels frenzy.

[thibs]

I'd consider it as a positive fact.

I do not think that typical P&S cutomer wantingto go for better camera will see from a good eye a "huge" and "heavy" camera as a K10D. I know my wife would reject it immediately.

By using existing bodies and cheaper sensor pentax can reduce the r&d and production costs and throw a kick ass camera for less than $500 with the kit lens. Take a step further and introduce a bit longer kit lens and see the sales of the "advanced" p&s market tumble.

Sure that's why Pentax will reuse the K100D body, easier and cheaper to manufacture than K10D body. It is obvious, good or bad is another question but for me it is pretty obvious. As for kit lenses I pretty much agree with you. The 18-250 is a step in the right direction but newer kit lenses with SDM (DA17-70 and 55-300) should help a lot.

Maybe the features mentioned above and a wise marketing campaign might resolve the megapixels frenzy.

I doubt it much but well, Canon manages to sell plastic crap (which take good picture btw even if those do not meet my standards) so why wouldn't Pentax manage to sell big cameras ??

I still think Pentax would be wise to come with a e410-style camera. I would buy one and fit a 18-250 on it.

[rvannatta]

I do not think that typical P&S cutomer wantingto go for better camera will see from a good eye a "huge" and "heavy" camera as a K10D. I know my wife would reject it immediately.



Sure that's why Pentax will reuse the K100D body, easier and cheaper to manufacture than K10D body. It is obvious, good or bad is another question but for me it is pretty obvious. As for kit lenses I pretty much agree with you. The 18-250 is a step in the right direction but newer kit lenses with SDM (DA17-70 and 55-300) should help a lot.



I doubt it much but well, Canon manages to sell plastic crap (which take good picture btw even if those do not meet my standards) so why wouldn't Pentax manage to sell big cameras ??

I still think Pentax would be wise to come with a e410-style camera. I would buy one and fit a 18-250 on it.

Well if Pentax repeats their considerable success of 30 years ago camera bodies will get
smaller.

When the K mount was introduced in 1975 it came along with the K series cameras.
I owned a K2 that I used for many years---a big heavy tank of a camera with every feature of the day. The low end model with some of the parts left out of it became the K1000 the most enduring camera in the last 30 years.

The K was followed by the M series cameras and lenses and they advertized M for was mini.

I would expect that future models may well be smaller unless there is a percieved benefit to bigger is better. As the feature set stops changing it will be possible to integrate the electronics ending with a few chips instead of a few circuit boards etc.

The extras that Pentax by design has saddled themselves with over the years that one competitor doesn't have in the race to get small is that Pentax has to have the focus motor in the camera body (taking up space), and the shake reduction in the body taking up space.

[thibs]

Yeah something like a SuperA: size of an M-serie but beefed up with features

Personnaly I could give up SR (or less efficient one) for a very small camera, smaller than DS/DL but conventional AF is mandatory to me.

[jshurak]

this comment is trivial, but I wonder about it. The naming schema for these new camera's seems to go against the grain. I would expect them to be named K5D and K50D.

[Richard Day]

.. [snip]...
Sure that's why Pentax will reuse the K100D body, easier and cheaper to manufacture than K10D body. It is obvious, good or bad is another question but for me it is pretty obvious. As for kit lenses I pretty much agree with you. The 18-250 is a step in the right direction but newer kit lenses with SDM (DA17-70 and 55-300) should help a lot.

DA 17-70 f4.0 is rumoured to be SDM, DA 55-300 f3.5-5.8 is not (...ooops, have I let something slip?)

[thibs]

DA 17-70 f4.0 is rumoured to be SDM, DA 55-300 f3.5-5.8 is not (...ooops, have I let something slip?)

LOL, I love Slipping Richard !

[JMS]

He had an NDA malfunction.

[rvannatta]

DA 17-70 f4.0 is rumoured to be SDM, DA 55-300 f3.5-5.8 is not (...ooops, have I let something slip?)

Well Pentax and Ni*on seem to mimic each other and as I understand it the Ni*on folks have limited their version of SDM to the better subset of their lens family.

I draw the line at F/5.6 as the limits of usefulness. I"ve owned a Sigma 28-300 for years and haven't used it for years because it goes down to F/6.3 on the slow end which is just too far.

We'd all like a 12- 600 f/1.4 with Pentax FA* quality in a 'pancake' size that costs $50 U.S.
but I think that is not to be. Indeed with the yankee dollar in decline, I'll even swap a bridge or 2 for such a lens as an alternative.

[RMabo]

Well if Pentax repeats their considerable success of 30 years ago camera bodies will get smaller.

No.
K D Torigoe and K Tatamiya of Pentax Imaging Business Corp said in an interview in March this year, published in D C Watch Impress Magazine, that the marketing department wanted them to make small bodies so they did that with the *ist D, DS and DL's - then they were very surprised about the bodies not selling well. Because of this, they no longer believes in what the marketing department tells and goes for bigger bodies with more features instead - which has proven to be a success. The large K100D and K10D have been much bigger successes than the small *ist's.