[mee]

There are other differences:

Expanded bracketing options
Mulit-AWB
Selectable AA filter simulation
Larger battery
Optional grip
etc.

Yes indeed. However, outside of the grip, I consider those minor differences.

[D1N0]

Don't forget top-lcd.

[Kayaker-J]

I accidentally read that as "new kittens." That would definitely give you a good photographic subject to test out your new camera.

Ah-ah-ah-CHOO!

---------- Post added 07-04-14 at 11:08 AM ----------

Articulated screen add to the depth of the body, and that usually makes it more difficult to use OVF. As Pentax have SR that add extra depth, it could be difficult to combine with articulated screen without making OVF worse.

Have you ever used a Sony or Nikon DSLR with tilt-able/articulated screen? On them it can be really difficult to reach the OVF with your eye.
Pentax put priority on OVF instead (100% pentaprism with higher magnification than competition)

Nice comparison. Why not just skip articulating screens (keep the excellent water resistance) and go right for the smartphone/iTouch/tablet integration? Surely a cost effective, non-electronic docking L-plate or baseplate attachment would be simple enough to design for those who'd feel they'd be more comfortable with that implementation.

[D1N0]

What about a top-oled instead of a top-lcd. It can double as VF and would be great for street work.

[Biro]

Here's what I'd like the K-60/K70 to be: A K-3 with the Sony 16mp sensor. No more, no less. But I am a realist and have no doubt the new camera will be nothing of the sort.

[snostorm]

I think I'd like to see a mid level DSLR that offers something truly different from both the competition in its class and the flagship model. This would mean thinking outside the box -- something that Pentax should be able to do. Why not use existing FF sensor technology and cut it in half (actually a little more) to give us the incredible high ISO performance of the D3/D4 Nikon FF bodies in an APSC. The benefits would be many, I would think. . .

1. More utility for existing "kit lenses". With the lower MP sensors (6-8MP) the lower res lenses would be less challenged, and their slower aperture ranges would be more than compensated for with better IQ at higher ISO -- making fully automated exposure in challenging conditions much easier to achieve with the kit class glass. I use my K-5 IIs and K-3 with a DA 18-250 in Av priority with Auto ISO set to 100-12800 as a family gathering super zoom P&S with great results for the small prints or screen viewing. With another couple of stops higher ISO to work with, this would only become easier. I find this much superior to a super zoom bridge camera that tops out at ISO 800 or 1600 for acceptable IQ.

2. Smaller files. As sensor MP increased, my computer has become increasingly less viable to handle processing, and I've finally had to pop for a new faster CPU to handle the larger files adequately. Most new entry level digital photographers would probably welcome a camera that did not require a computer upgrade in addition to the cost of the camera/lenses to pursue their hobby. There would also be gains in speed -- possibly faster FPS, longer strings using the same buffer memory, faster write times with existing hardware, etc. . .

3. This would also offer the experienced photographer an alternative body that has a truly different character. I truly love the high res and high ISO capabilities of the K-5 and K-3, but I'd also love to have even higher ISO capability, and would gladly trade some of the resolution to get it. Current entry level models offer essentially the same IQ and ISO potential in a lower spec body feature wise. I've had no desire to buy a K30 or K50 in addition to my K-5 and K-3, as they have essentially the same (or a little less) IQ potential, but with an abbreviated feature set, but I'd buy a k60 that allowed me to shoot at two or three stops faster with comparable noise levels -- really a no-brainer.

Pentax seems to be satisfied with a limited number of models, why not make them truly different from each other, with different strengths. The market for DSLRs is shrinking, why not try something new -- start a high ISO race now that the MP race seems to be slowing down. I'd love to see a 6-8 MP APS-C DSLR body that I could shoot at ISO 512000. I'd also add the ultra low Ev rated AF sensor BTW to make it a true low light specialty camera. . .

Scott

[Kayaker-J]

What about a top-oled instead of a top-lcd. It can double as VF and would be great for street work.

For a circa 28 oz. DSLR, that's a nice idea (I like the little meter needle atop my Nikkormats and F2a!)... but I think we'd need much more consistent and predictable auto-focus performance than we're getting now to take best advantage of it -- and neither of those aspects is a particular strong point of DSLRs (or AF DSLR lenses), except in the relative sense when shooting fast action sequences. As it stands, I can pretty much enjoy that advantage two different ways with my Olympus PenLite and VF-4, though not in 24mp APS-C.

For B&W, though, I think the 16mp Oly cameras produce consistently clean, snappy looking files, even straight out of the camera. Just look about online. And at higher ISO's, luminance noise is controlled even compared to APS-C... and when present in any appreciable measure, it has a tight, film-like character. Sharpness, too, holds up vs. APS-C in monochrome -- a very underrated, unappreciated performance here, I think. A swell "street" shooter.

Of course, I could only get that swivel/touch screen + EVF functionality in "small" sensor form, without spending double or more for something in APS-C lacking the same utility... and in going, going, gone 16mp form to boot. [Note to the pendantically inclined or reflexively argumentative: I am not talking about D4s or A7S type cameras, O.K.?] I'm hoping this is going to change sooner rather than later.

---

Last edited by Kayaker-J; 07-05-2014 at 03:30 AM.

[RonHendriks1966]

I think I'd like to see a mid level DSLR that offers something truly different from both the competition in its class and the flagship model. This would mean thinking outside the box -- something that Pentax should be able to do. Why not use existing FF sensor technology and cut it in half (actually a little more) to give us the incredible high ISO performance of the D3/D4 Nikon FF bodies in an APSC. The benefits would be many, I would think. . .

1. More utility for existing "kit lenses". With the lower MP sensors (6-8MP) the lower res lenses would be less challenged, and their slower aperture ranges would be more than compensated for with better IQ at higher ISO -- making fully automated exposure in challenging conditions much easier to achieve with the kit class glass. I use my K-5 IIs and K-3 with a DA 18-250 in Av priority with Auto ISO set to 100-12800 as a family gathering super zoom P&S with great results for the small prints or screen viewing. With another couple of stops higher ISO to work with, this would only become easier. I find this much superior to a super zoom bridge camera that tops out at ISO 800 or 1600 for acceptable IQ.

2. Smaller files. As sensor MP increased, my computer has become increasingly less viable to handle processing, and I've finally had to pop for a new faster CPU to handle the larger files adequately. Most new entry level digital photographers would probably welcome a camera that did not require a computer upgrade in addition to the cost of the camera/lenses to pursue their hobby. There would also be gains in speed -- possibly faster FPS, longer strings using the same buffer memory, faster write times with existing hardware, etc. . .

3. This would also offer the experienced photographer an alternative body that has a truly different character. I truly love the high res and high ISO capabilities of the K-5 and K-3, but I'd also love to have even higher ISO capability, and would gladly trade some of the resolution to get it. Current entry level models offer essentially the same IQ and ISO potential in a lower spec body feature wise. I've had no desire to buy a K30 or K50 in addition to my K-5 and K-3, as they have essentially the same (or a little less) IQ potential, but with an abbreviated feature set, but I'd buy a k60 that allowed me to shoot at two or three stops faster with comparable noise levels -- really a no-brainer.

Pentax seems to be satisfied with a limited number of models, why not make them truly different from each other, with different strengths. The market for DSLRs is shrinking, why not try something new -- start a high ISO race now that the MP race seems to be slowing down. I'd love to see a 6-8 MP APS-C DSLR body that I could shoot at ISO 512000. I'd also add the ultra low Ev rated AF sensor BTW to make it a true low light specialty camera. . .

Scott

The problem is that no one will buy this. Going back to 16 megapixel is possible. People have smartphones with more megapixels and don't know the difference.

[mee]

Don't forget top-lcd.

That was in my post.

[Clothears]

I think an articulated screen would be a great thing to add. I don't know why Pentax cameras seem to be the only ones without it. Are articulated screens problematic because of the bend in the connection? I dunno.

I don't want an articulated screen. Not sure I even want live view - the screen is typically going to be unusable in sunlight. Viewfinder with focus peaking and exposure info is almost all that's needed. Scratch the histograms too.

[aleonx3]

I don't want an articulated screen. Not sure I even want live view - the screen is typically going to be unusable in sunlight. Viewfinder with focus peaking and exposure info is almost all that's needed. Scratch the histograms too.

I like that idea....

---------- Post added 07-04-2014 at 06:40 PM ----------

.....

Pentax seems to be satisfied with a limited number of models, why not make them truly different from each other, with different strengths. The market for DSLRs is shrinking, why not try something new -- start a high ISO race now that the MP race seems to be slowing down. I'd love to see a 6-8 MP APS-C DSLR body that I could shoot at ISO 512000. I'd also add the ultra low Ev rated AF sensor BTW to make it a true low light specialty camera. . .

Scott

The market for DSLRs is shrinking (which I think is true) and Pentax should add few more DSLR models like its competition.... is it not contradicting?

[Aristophanes]

The market for DSLRs is shrinking (which I think is true) and Pentax should add few more DSLR models like its competition.... is it not contradicting?

What is missing for Pentax is a smaller DLSR, at least as small as the K-x.

Pair that with the DA Ltd lenses and you'd have a very good second body to a K-3. They might need to drop the AA batteries (groan) and lose the dual-dials from the K-50, but something with a control set more like the Ricoh GR and Tav mode using the 16MP sensor would be excellent value.

The reason why the K-x sold so well was its size and value. This is how DSLRs can compete, especially tapping an existing user base where a second or back up body is a complement.

[Uluru]

The whole Pentax DSLR approach will be revamped and industry slightly refreshed once a clearly better than Nikon Df design comes out.
A classic SLR shape that is not too clunky and illogical like the Df. And with many Pentax primes and tiny lenses it does make more sense than Nikon's own Df in their own land of lenses.
How far the miniaturisation can go? I'd say as far as Pentax MX + a few mm on the back for LCD. It is possible, and I am willing to bet that something along those lines will come out this autumn. Pentax will create a better Df, and overall smaller (in overall volume) and perhaps lighter camera than a K-x.

[mee]

I get the feeling if Adam removed the posts by each of us built around our own personal wants as suggestions for how the company should be run, we'd have a very quiet forum.

Seriously, we seem to be going around and around and around saying the same things in different threads.

[Aristophanes]

The whole Pentax DSLR approach will be revamped and industry slightly refreshed once a clearly better than Nikon Df design comes out.
A classic DSLR shape that is not too clunky and illogical like the Df. And with many Pentax primes and try lenses it does make more sense than Nikon's own Df in their own land of lenses.
How far the miniaturisation can go? I'd say as far as Pentax MX + a few mm on the back for LCD. It is possible, and I am willing to bet that something along those lines will come out this autumn. Pentax will create a better Df, and overall smaller camera than K-x.

The problems is that even multi-feature DSLRs have to come down in price...a lot. The whole retro thing with the Df is, frankly, a failure.

APS-C should be smaller. I have read the Canon SL1 sells quite well. It is the right price point and is compact. Well, Pentax has some nice compacts primes selling at decent profit to pair up with a compact DSLR. Then they have another DSLR called the K-3 for the top zooms and long glass primes. I'd dumpy the K-500 and make a mini. At some point the K-3 and K-50 will merge because the price points will be so close together.