[boriscleto]

Also, all APS-C Canons have variations of the same 18MP sensor...

That's been around since 2009, at least a year longer than the 16MP Sony sensor...

[cfraz]

Then Pentax would have created the very awkward situation where each an every APS-C DSLR in their line up, from low tier to flagship, has the same sensor and thus, almost the same IQ. Then why would a photography enthusiast want to upgrade from lower tier to a higher one? Or, why would a photography enthusiast choose a higher tier body at all?

Maybe the same reason enthusiasts bought LX instead of K-1000? If I recall correctly, the sensors in those two models were identical

I know, different era. But the question becomes, if you don't use the Sony 16 Mp sensor, which one do you use? As far as I can tell, the Sony 24 Mp sensor IQ is at best, on par with the 16 Mp sensor, worse by some reports. The Toshiba 24 Mp seems to be better, but I don't know about pricing structure. Maybe Toshiba won't sell for reasonable price in orders 1/20th the size that Nikon buys them. Any other choices?

[Docrwm]

Don't forget that its not merely the sensor. The K-01 and the K-5 have the same sensor but DIFFERENT processors. The k-01 is 12-bit and the K-5 is 14-bit. Then you add the AF, the flash, LCDs, control wheels, weather sealing, etc. and you can have very different cameras built around the same sensor.

[northcoastgreg]

Could be also that K-5 II and K-5 IIs will last another year until Photokina 2014 and the announcement of "something completely different".

I'm sure Pentax will not wait that long..

I wouldn't be so sure. Hasn't Pentax stated that AF is their first priority? Producing a camera with as good AF as comparable Canon and Nikon cameras is going to take time. After all, it's not as if Pentax chose to have inferior AF on purpose. They never devoted the time and the resources to AF to make them competitive in that area. With Ricoh in charge that's going to change. But it's going to take time. I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see the "true" upgrade until late in 2014.

Good point; a 24mp K-5 III could be in the works too.

Be careful what you wish for. Last weekend I talked with an owner of the Nikon D5200. He was disappointed with his camera because he was having trouble with noise in skies even at low ISOs. He believes it has something to do with the pixel density of his camera's sensor, and I suspect he's right.

[Kunzite]

Then Pentax would have created the very awkward situation where each an every APS-C DSLR in their line up, from low tier to flagship, has the same sensor and thus, almost the same IQ. Then why would a photography enthusiast want to upgrade from lower tier to a higher one? Or, why would a photography enthusiast choose a higher tier body at all? The reason such people invest in equipment is mostly the pictures that the equipment produces, if they all produce the same quality pictures.

Why would I invest in a brands giant all terrain vehicle, or in their slick sports car, when their cheapest soccer-mom-car has the exact same engine?

That reminds me of the very awkward situation where cameras from cheap compacts to professional SLRs were using the same sensors

[deadwolfbones]

Also the very awkward situation Olympus is in with the E-PM2, E-PL5, E-P5, and E-M5 all on the same sensor.

(Actually not awkward at all.)

[Aristophanes]

That reminds me of the very awkward situation where cameras from cheap compacts to professional SLRs were using the same sensors

Like 35mm film?

[Belnan]

Then Pentax would have created the very awkward situation where each an every APS-C DSLR in their line up, from low tier to flagship, has the same sensor and thus, almost the same IQ. Then why would a photography enthusiast want to upgrade from lower tier to a higher one? Or, why would a photography enthusiast choose a higher tier body at all? The reason such people invest in equipment is mostly the pictures that the equipment produces, if they all produce the same quality pictures.

Why would I invest in a brands giant all terrain vehicle, or in their slick sports car, when their cheapest soccer-mom-car has the exact same engine?

The only thing (IMHO) that is akward is that they all feature a similar autofocus system, the K-5 II being better in low light. However the K-5 II is also slower in live view and doesn't offer focus peaking. Givin the naming convention of these upcoming cameras I don't see a 24 MP camera soon. Maybe a K-5 III befor the K-3?

[Clavius]

Maybe the same reason enthusiasts bought LX instead of K-1000? If I recall correctly, the sensors in those two models were identical

I know, different era.

Not only different era, but also a completely different situation. Or did I miss something? Do we have the ability to exchange our sensors at will? Please do tell me, because I'd love to shove in a Sigma Foveon sensor in my K5's asap. Oh, or the Fuji X-trans.

That reminds me of the very awkward situation where cameras from cheap compacts to professional SLRs were using the same sensors

Very original. Yes Kunzite, film and digital photography are exactly the same. [/sarc]

[Aristophanes]

Very original. Yes Kunzite, film and digital photography are exactly the same. [/sarc]

To the photons they are the same.

[Kunzite]

The same or not, similar methods of differentiation are still available and widely used. Like back then, it's usually not the sensor which makes the difference (unless you change the format... just like back then ).
For example, Nikon's D3200, D5200 and D7100 all have 24MP APS-C sensors; Canon is still using the 18MP sensor on how many cameras? - and the Olympus example above, and so on.

[cfraz]

Not only different era, but also a completely different situation. Or did I miss something? Do we have the ability to exchange our sensors at will? Please do tell me, because I'd love to shove in a Sigma Foveon sensor in my K5's asap. Oh, or the Fuji X-trans.

No. Your point was that no one would buy a more expensive body if it had the same sensor as a lower priced body. That is clearly not the case. All SLR manufacturers had bodies at multiple price points and people bought them based on feature set / price. Choice of sensor was identical for all.

[Kenn100D]

K500 might be Mirrorless K-Mount.

[Mistral75]

K500 might be Mirrorless K-Mount.

Is this an "educated" guess ?

[mecrox]

The same or not, similar methods of differentiation are still available and widely used. Like back then, it's usually not the sensor which makes the difference (unless you change the format... just like back then ).
For example, Nikon's D3200, D5200 and D7100 all have 24MP APS-C sensors; Canon is still using the 18MP sensor on how many cameras? - and the Olympus example above, and so on.

You're overlooking one of Pentax's historic marketing angles since they went all-digital: that for a given camera, they always included more features and a better build than the competition, thus cementing their rep for solid value for enthusiasts. They were able to keep the models apart primarily using sensor specs. If the sensor spec stuff has gone (or at least is going) and all that is left to differentiate between models is features, then Pentax's job becomes much harder. Or, to put it another way, it is harder for their to remain different from their competitors who riff their customers up and down the keyboard using the feature game. But then, we don't know what Pentax want. For all we know, they may want to become more like their competitors.

We may be looking at a bit of an end-game for APS-C, at least until there is a significant leap in sensor performance. For APS-C DSLRs, 24 mp of high-quality, noise-free pixels with an imaging pipeline which can handle the data well without buffer-busting is nearly but not quite here, imho. I imagine it will be here during 2014, though. After that, if you want still more it will be FF.