[Tanzer]

Very interesting discussion here about technical details. However, technicalities aside, I think it is pretty obvious that K-500 is made NOT TO SELL. It should serve as a reference for comparisons, to have consumers look at it and then notice/try K-50 with just a few extra features for a few bucks more. The trick is, for an average consumer the biggest step it to decide to spend any money on a particular product. Once there, it is quite easy to decide to spend a little bit more. Happened to all of us many times, from ice cream and candies, to cars and houses ...

I very much agree that you could be very right about this. The difference in price between the K-500 and K-50 is not much, once the retailer can articulate the benefits.

So stay calm, everything is under control: Pentax is trying to become Canon!

Heh heh, wouldn't they love to get a piece of Canon! They have the marketing thing figured out so well.

[Tanzer]

I don't think that question is about beginners use it or not. ALL other entry-level cameras have this little details and K-500 doesn't. This is going to affect score for K-500 in all professional reviews and I bet 90% of consumers don't read the entire review and decide solely based on final score.

Look at first impressions everywhere on internet and you'll find them mentioning lack of visible AF point in viewfinder. Even the first look video from pentasforums mentions this. If it wasn't that important, nobody would be mentioning of it in FIRST LOOK.

Maybe. But the same reviews will also point out how the pentaprism is an entirely better experience, compared to those lousy pentamirrors.

[Aristophanes]

Illuminated focus points are an easily demonstrated feature that is beginner friendly.

Every P&S has one. My smartphone tells me where it focused.

On an 11 or 5 point AF the K-500 (and K-x) cannot tell exactly where it locked.

Some bean counter at Pentax decided users did not need that feature. Bad decision.

[ElJamoquio]

make K-500 with 1 control dial and pentamirror and you can get USD400 for body.
AF LED costs 1 USD.

But then Fair-weather photographers won't have a reason to spend the extra $100 for the K-50.

[IchabodCrane]

Thank you for reminding me (as I had forgotten in all my excitement over THREE NEW CAMERAS) that Pentax is totally clueless, does nothing right and will never survive the drubbing they are about to take in the Oh-SO-KNOWING online review community.

Such a position rises to the level of Psalmody.

So here's the false choice you just presented: Either Pentax does everything right or Pentax does nothing right (clueless). I don't subscribe to either one.

[starbase218]

So most users end up using the center point to focus... ok...
Sell an entry level DSLR with one center focus point and one AF LED indicator. What's the point of 11 point auto focus if you don't know exactly which ones are achieving focus?

Personally I'd buy a camera with one point auto focus with AF confirmation over a one hundred point system with no indicators.

If the camera had 1 AF point I would be ok with no LED indicator, at least if the focusing screen provides an indication of the AF area. Make that camera really small, like the EOS 100D, put one control wheel on it, let it do 3 or 4 fps and 1/4000 max shutter speed. Also, make it light. Pentax doesn't have a light DSLR right now. That means a pentamirror VF. Off course leave out the weather sealing. Sell it for a few hundred euros, no more. If the 16MP sensor is too expensive, put in a 12MP version. People can get the 18-55 and 50-200 and enjoy a cheap DSLR "for the masses". If they want more, they can buy DA-L primes like the 35/2.4 and still have a cheap system. Should also be a great way of bringing more people into the Pentax system.

[monochrome]

So here's the false choice you just presented: Either Pentax does everything right or Pentax does nothing right (clueless). I don't subscribe to either one.

Merely tossing pumpkins.

Likewise the only subject in this thread is comparing the (lack of) a little red light in the viewfinder, when we should be contrasting the K-500 with other offerings feature by feature.

As always happens in these threads, all we discuss is what Pentax didn't do right.

[Parallax]

I don't really get your point ogl.

I think his point is that he just doesn't like Pentax, therefore nothing they do is any good.

[ak_kiwi]

My 5 cents each way - As an entry level camera the K500 will probably be used in auto. If the camera selects auto focus points, when the dial is switched to auto, then this may lead to confusing focus errors for a beginner.
However, when i give my K5 to the kids at school to shoot with I always just put the camera on green mode with a central focus point with the led turned off.
Why turn the led off? The kids were waiting for the square to turn green

[ogl]

Very interesting discussion here about technical details. However, technicalities aside, I think it is pretty obvious that K-500 is made NOT TO SELL. It should serve as a reference for comparisons, to have consumers look at it and then notice/try K-50 with just a few extra features for a few bucks more. The trick is, for an average consumer the biggest step it to decide to spend any money on a particular product. Once there, it is quite easy to decide to spend a little bit more. Happened to all of us many times, from ice cream and candies, to cars and houses.

In other words, K-500 primarily exists to maximize K-50 sales.

It's very interesting point of view....By the way, it could be truth.
Remember - K100D and K110D without SR. K100D was one of the best-selling Pentax cameras. And this camera saved Pentax (with K10D) and bring 300% growth of sales. Outstanding result.

But....the time will answer.

[Fogel70]

My 5 cents each way - As an entry level camera the K500 will probably be used in auto. If the camera selects auto focus points, when the dial is switched to auto, then this may lead to confusing focus errors for a beginner.
However, when i give my K5 to the kids at school to shoot with I always just put the camera on green mode with a central focus point with the led turned off.
Why turn the led off? The kids were waiting for the square to turn green

I think only auto focus point is available in green mode.

[Tom S.]

The competition is very HIGH and the margin is very low in the sector till USD1000. Too various choice for customers.

I see that a lot of Pentax fans are blind. Pentax is not the player of any competition battles. Never was. It's funny to reason about Pentax and Competition. if they catch 1% from 4/3 system it will be success.

It's small company which try to survive at the market for many years and sometimes they produce very attractive products. But rather rare.
And nothing else.

Pentax is God only in the eyes of Pentaxian. But the reality is different. Pentax is dwarf.
The photoworld is MUCH wider than Pentax pot.

Given your attitude and obvious disdain for Pentax and it's fans, one has to wonder why you are here. If your sole purpose is to troll and cause discontent, you may not last here.

[Ivan Glisin]

Remember - K100D and K110D without SR. K100D was one of the best-selling Pentax cameras. And this camera saved Pentax (with K10D) and bring 300% growth of sales. Outstanding result.

Precisely! I remembered K100/110D while writing my post on K-50 and K-500, and was about to comment on one more thing, but here it is now: these two cameras should have been called K-50 and K-55, leaving K-500 for obviously different and differentiated entry level body (say, pentamirror, single control wheel, smaller), and then for the purpose of creating a "hook" for consumers, make two of them: K-500 and slightly stripped down K-550. In the end, K-55 would help sell K-50, while K-550 would help sell K-500. Success of K-55 and K-550 from the financial point would be completely irrelevant.

The only confusing thing with current naming is that "huge difference" between 50 and 500, making us believe there should be something much more or less in each, creating unrealistic expectations for us who follow Pentax lineup for years (or decades for some, including myself). Choosing K-50 and K-55 names would have been much better, and closer to K100D and K110D.

So what we are really struggling with here is how to understand how Pentax has managed "waste" K-500 slot for a camera with almost insignificant difference from the production and design perspective when compared to K-50.

[mee]

Very interesting discussion here about technical details. However, technicalities aside, I think it is pretty obvious that K-500 is made NOT TO SELL. It should serve as a reference for comparisons, to have consumers look at it and then notice/try K-50 with just a few extra features for a few bucks more. The trick is, for an average consumer the biggest step it to decide to spend any money on a particular product. Once there, it is quite easy to decide to spend a little bit more. Happened to all of us many times, from ice cream and candies, to cars and houses.

In other words, K-500 primarily exists to maximize K-50 sales. If a few K-500s sell as well, not bad. Note that K-500 is zero risk to produce: the only real manufacturing difference is painting the model number - that is the only tool on the whole assembly line that is specific to each model!!! The rest is accomplished simply by skipping some steps during the assembly process and firmware configuration.

(Which bring us to the next interesting detail: why no gazillion color combinations for K-500? Well, notice that K-500 and K-50 model names have to be printed on those colorful plastic shells. But if K-500 full rainbow palette does not sell, which is the intent as mentioned, they'll have to throw shells away! Thus, print name labels onto full palette of something that is expected to sell: K-50!)

Interesting. And I can see that.. but I wonder why they didn't remove other easily locked features such as reducing the burst framerate and the focus peaking.. make it even less enticing.. ??

It does look like they mean to sell many more K-50s but perhaps they simply think that is where the larger market is anyways so they aren't putting a lot of effort into a lower end camera when they want the market to be middle class (since I suspect middle an up will largely by more lenses and accessories vs novices who will likely use the kit lens and be happy)

[Ivan Glisin]

but I wonder why they didn't remove other easily locked features such as reducing the burst framerate and the focus peaking

Technically possible, but those would be purely software changes. Assuming hardware remains the same, sooner or later someone would come up with a bootleg firmware that can turn K-500 into a K-50. One good example is now almost exactly ten years old Canon 300D which was effectively built around prosumer Canon 10D with only minor hardware differences and some features simply disabled in firmware. An unoffical firmware was circulated turning 300D into (close to) a 10D at no cost!!! If I am not mistaken, Canon has never made the same mistake since 2003, and I'm not expecting Pentax would in 2013.