[lammie200]

Looks like the screen is recessed on the K5II as well which would be nice - I cant seem to get a screen protector to stay on my K5 as the edges are somewhat exposed and when in my bag it must rub the protector slightly and off they come.

If this is in fact a new body to be soon released, then it appears as though it probably addresses the QC issues that surfaced with the original K-5. Some people had problems with dust under the rear lcd screen. Perhaps recessing it has solved that problem. Improvements like AF performance also appear to be addressed. Semantics between "improvements" and redesign to address QC issues is irrelevant as far as I am concerned.

It does seem as though that the people that are expecting FF are way off in terms of expectations for lowly Pentax. This is another modest step forward, as was the blueprints for the K-01 and K-30 which share most of the original K-5 internals. It seems pretty obvious to me that they want to sell more APS-c's before they take on the risk of designing and manufacturing a FF.

Also, there was the expectation that since the K-30 was much further advanced than the K-r, the K-5 successor would exhibit a similar advancement from the K-5. That doesn't seem to be the case. Another indication that PRICL is not willing to stretch its R & D very far - at least not at this time. Maybe things will change?

[Docrwm]

Only thing I missed going from my Olympus c5060 to a DSLR was the EXCELLENT swivel screen, which actually offered better protection of the lcd when the screen was reversed for storage.

To each their own, sorry you miss that feature. I had a bad experience on a rather expensive camera, which is why I no longer buy any Sony cameras.

[Rupert]

If you already have a K5, chances are you are already so well pleased that none of this matters much to you....it sure doesn't to me!

Regards!

I stand by my post....and while you guys are "discussing" what is real and what is not....I am going to take my Very Real and excellent K5 out and do some Real shooting! That's what happens in the real world!

Regards!

[northcoastgreg]

Though I still don't really see how there would be room between the K-30 (practically a K-5 itself) and a new Pentax APS-C flagship. I mean what features would there be to add to a K-3, really?

The K-3 will have a 24 MP sensor. Now there appears to be a division in the desires of DSLRs consumers. Some buy into the megapixel madness and want cameras with more MPs. Others are either satisfied with 12-18 MP or only desire qualitative (i.e., better high ISO performance, more DR), rather than quantitative improvements. Nikon and Canon, with their larger lineups, can satisfy both consumer bases. Now Pentax has sold a number of high quality APS-C lenses; many of the owners of those lenses will want to use them on top-of-the-line camera. Assuming the K-5 II (or equivalent) rumors are true, those of us who want a camera better than the K-30 won't be forced to upgrade to a camera with an MP size we don't want or need. Having more choices is good. It means more people can have the kind of camera that fits their needs/wants.

[Mace]

As a long term K-7 owner, an upgrade to an improved K-5 is exactly what I'm looking for (my wife won't even notice the difference - "What new camera?"). I've small-ish hands and the body felt just right compared the 50D or D90 that I was considering at the time.

I can second point one (K-7 upgrade), point two ("WHAT ANOTHER NEW LENS/CAMERA?!?!!!")

And I disagree on point three ( I do not have small hands and would love to see a slightly bigger body, e.g. a Fullframe body!)

[LamyTax]

The K-3 will have a 24 MP sensor. Now there appears to be a division in the desires of DSLRs consumers. Some buy into the megapixel madness and want cameras with more MPs. Others are either satisfied with 12-18 MP or only desire qualitative (i.e., better high ISO performance, more DR), rather than quantitative improvements. Nikon and Canon, with their larger lineups, can satisfy both consumer bases. Now Pentax has sold a number of high quality APS-C lenses; many of the owners of those lenses will want to use them on top-of-the-line camera. Assuming the K-5 II (or equivalent) rumors are true, those of us who want a camera better than the K-30 won't be forced to upgrade to a camera with an MP size we don't want or need. Having more choices is good. It means more people can have the kind of camera that fits their needs/wants.

It's not megapixel madness with DSLRs. Look at the D800 and you know why.

[northcoastgreg]

Also, there was the expectation that since the K-30 was much further advanced than the K-r, the K-5 successor would exhibit a similar advancement from the K-5. That doesn't seem to be the case.

There are two problems here. In the first place, I don't think the K-30 is meant to be a successor to the K-r; rather, it's a belated successor to the K200D. And secondly, the K-5 is already so good that it would have been unrealistic to expect significant improvement in its successor. Indeed, we've reached the point where significant improvements are going to be harder and harder come by. DSLRs cameras are better than nearly all photographers; so additional improvements, at least in terms of potential image quality, are irrelevent; or if they have any relevancy, are only important at very large print sizes or for photographers who can't get it right in the camera and require generous cropping. This notion that each new generation of cameras needs to be significantly better than the previous generation is therefore no longer feasible.

[ogl]

And secondly, the K-5 is already so good that it would have been unrealistic to expect significant improvement in its successor.

Are you sure? K-5's AF is far from so good....


P.S. WHERE IS THE DIGITAL CAMERA with
Exposure Range (EV) like LX -6.5 - 20?

Let be realists - even -3 will be really cool

[mecrox]

There are two problems here. In the first place, I don't think the K-30 is meant to be a successor to the K-r; rather, it's a belated successor to the K200D. And secondly, the K-5 is already so good that it would have been unrealistic to expect significant improvement in its successor. Indeed, we've reached the point where significant improvements are going to be harder and harder come by. DSLRs cameras are better than nearly all photographers; so additional improvements, at least in terms of potential image quality, are irrelevent; or if they have any relevancy, are only important at very large print sizes or for photographers who can't get it right in the camera and require generous cropping. This notion that each new generation of cameras needs to be significantly better than the previous generation is therefore no longer feasible.

"Better" is rather a loaded term, but when you consider that there are millions of folks out there in the world's newer markets - China and SE Asia, India, Brazil, etc - who want and can now afford a taste of the action, there are likely plenty of things camera manufacturers can do. However, they won't necessarily be things we particularly rate here in ye olde Weste. Samsung's new Android P&S with full mobile connectivity is an example. Not better but certainly different. As for the K5, I'd guess that any product these days only gets a year or two at the top of the tree before the world moves restlessly on. The K5 is an all-time great but it has had its day. Personally I would see a K5 Mark II more as a sign of desperation - there's an insuffcient R&D pipeline for Pentax to draw on - than as a canny move. I have a K5 and there are things on it that can certainly be improved, in fact which need to be, but if spending hundreds of bucks I'd not be looking for a retread no matter how attractively presented. Over the next few weeks, all eyes are likely to be on things like the Nikon D600 (if it materializes or if a Canon equivalent does instead). It will be called new, better, groundbreaking, revolutionary and all the rest. Maybe yes, maybe no. But that's the game and if as a brand you don't play it with a steady stream of new products chances are you'll soon be off the pitch.

[lammie200]

There are two problems here. In the first place, I don't think the K-30 is meant to be a successor to the K-r; rather, it's a belated successor to the K200D. And secondly, the K-5 is already so good that it would have been unrealistic to expect significant improvement in its successor. Indeed, we've reached the point where significant improvements are going to be harder and harder come by. DSLRs cameras are better than nearly all photographers; so additional improvements, at least in terms of potential image quality, are irrelevent; or if they have any relevancy, are only important at very large print sizes or for photographers who can't get it right in the camera and require generous cropping. This notion that each new generation of cameras needs to be significantly better than the previous generation is therefore no longer feasible.

For the most part I can agree with what you wrote. However, regardless of the feature set of the K-30 versus the K200D, the fact that the K-r was discontinued (the K200D long since discontinued) and the K-30 was introduced at nearly the same time (and have/had nearly the same introductory pricing) leads me to compare those two models for their relevance in the Pentax dSLR line up.

Also, while I agree that some aspects of APS-c dSLR's have plateaued in terms of features and performance there are still plenty of additional features that could have been incorporated into the K-5 successor to differentiate it from the original K-5. However, I don't want to jump too far ahead. I want to see what the actual camera has. That is not meant to sound pessimistic. I can see why PRICL would expolit the K-5 platform for quite a while longer. I even wrote before that I thought the K-5 would continue until the end of the year. Now I can see that although the original K-5 will cease production soon (if it hasn't already) the K-5 platform will continue to live on. Viva la K-5 platform!

[northcoastgreg]

Are you sure? K-5's AF is far from so good

I was writing only about potential image quality, irrespective of AF or other handling issues. There are of course improvements that can be made to the K-5 that have nothing to do with the sensor which can make it easier to attain the camera's full IQ potential. AF is chief among these.

It's not megapixel madness with DSLRs. Look at the D800 and you know why.

I know all about the D800 (and the more impressive D800E). For people who make a lot of large images (mostly professionals), the D800E makes sense. For those who are merely hobbyists, matters stand differently. While Nikon large MP cameras might make hobbyists feel better about their photography, it's not likely to make them better photographers. It will likely, however, be a drag on their PP workflows (assuming they even have one).

[ElJamoquio]

"Better" is rather a loaded term, but when you consider that there are millions of folks out there in the world's newer markets - China and SE Asia, India, Brazil, etc - who want and can now afford a taste of the action, there are likely plenty of things camera manufacturers can do. However, they won't necessarily be things we particularly rate here in ye olde Weste. Samsung's new Android P&S with full mobile connectivity is an example. Not better but certainly different. As for the K5, I'd guess that any product these days only gets a year or two at the top of the tree before the world moves restlessly on. The K5 is an all-time great but it has had its day. Personally I would see a K5 Mark II more as a sign of desperation - there's an insuffcient R&D pipeline for Pentax to draw on - than as a canny move. I have a K5 and there are things on it that can certainly be improved, in fact which need to be, but if spending hundreds of bucks I'd not be looking for a retread no matter how attractively presented. Over the next few weeks, all eyes are likely to be on things like the Nikon D600 (if it materializes or if a Canon equivalent does instead). It will be called new, better, groundbreaking, revolutionary and all the rest. Maybe yes, maybe no. But that's the game and if as a brand you don't play it with a steady stream of new products chances are you'll soon be off the pitch.

'retread'.

We haven't even seen pictures of it. The 5D Mark II and 5D Mark III definitely have their advocates.

Those are completely different cameras, of course, but we don't know how much of a 'retread' this 'retread' is.

[Pentikonian]

<snip>
I know all about the D800 (and the more impressive D800E). For people who make a lot of large images (mostly professionals), the D800E makes sense. For those who are merely hobbyists, matters stand differently. While Nikon large MP cameras might make hobbyists feel better about their photography, it's not likely to make them better photographers. It will likely, however, be a drag on their PP workflows (assuming they even have one).

So true. I'm a hobbyist. New camera may improve the technical aspects of a photo (better DR, etc...), but will not improve my photography skills.

I have a D700. No plans on upgrading to a D800/ D800E, as there is no need and the files sizes are large. 12mp FF is fine for anything I'll be doing doing photographically for the foreseeable future. (May pick up a second D700 or a D3/ D3S. Maybe.) If my needs change, I'll re-evaluate.

As for APS-C, 16mp is fine for me. I want to get another K-5 (or K-5 replacement), but am waiting for Pentax to sort out what they are doing with regards to lens pricing. Really interested in seeing the new viewfinders and whether or not there is a body with a weaker/ no AA filter.

[Docrwm]

So true. I'm a hobbyist. New camera may improve the technical aspects of a photo (better DR, etc...), but will not improve my photography skills......

Under most circumstances I would tend to agree with that statement, oft repeated hereabouts, but the introduction of the focus peaking is a game changer IMHO. I've used it on the K-30 and that was the single biggest aspect of the K-30 that tempted me. For those of us with failing eyesight it makes taking photographs that are in focus far easier and therefore is actually does bring my photography skills (or at least one aspect of them) that are failing back to the level they were when I was into photography back in the 70s-80s and had younger eyes.

[Pentikonian]

Under most circumstances I would tend to agree with that statement, oft repeated hereabouts, but the introduction of the focus peaking is a game changer IMHO. I've used it on the K-30 and that was the single biggest aspect of the K-30 that tempted me. For those of us with failing eyesight it makes taking photographs that are in focus far easier and therefore is actually does bring my photography skills (or at least one aspect of them) that are failing back to the level they were when I was into photography back in the 70s-80s and had younger eyes.

Good point. This is something I need to read up on as I'm getting older and manual focus is more difficult these days. (One reason for the D700 - bigger brighter viewfinder with a larger view window.)