I think that Pentax should make new small body for K2000D

alohadave · 05-07-2008, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by séamuis

nope I certainly wont buy a camera without an optical viewfinder. didn't we already have a thread just like this about bringing back the K1000 as a digital? if I remember correctly we came to (mostly) a decision that such a camera wouldn't sell well and it would only be a small niche market. and for the record I wont buy a camera digital or otherwise that doesn't have a 1:reflexmirror 2

entaprism/mirror 3

ptical viewfinder 4:interchangeable lenses (the shutter is a toss up if pentax can manufacture a sensor that can do the shutters job just as efficiently and reliably)I dont want a P&S and I don't want a rangefinder. I want to use an SLR, simple as that. thats why I still mostly use film (MX, superA) and I will continue to use only true SLR's from pentax even if they start making cameras that don't qualify as such.

In my opinion, something like this would only work if Pentax was trying to cultivate internal upgrades with existing customers by making this a bridge style camera with a fixed lens. Give it some manual controls and a clearly defined upgrade path so that people who like Pentax P&S can stay within the brand.

This how I moved up within Fuji, from a 2MP P&S, to a 4MP bridge, and finally to a 5.1MP bridge. If Fuji had an entry level dSLR, or even any dSLRs besides the pro model, I'd be shooting them right now.

Unfortunately, I don't see this happening as the bridge level is too close in price to an entry level dSLR for Pentax to bother with now. Maybe next year with Hoya adding resources.

**GaryM** · 05-07-2008, 10:57 AM

Originally posted by Matjazz

K100D looks the same size as the DS and when measured it is about 4mm (1/5") wider and 4mm thicker (from lcd to lens mount). Height is the same.
K200D has only thicker/better grip compared to K100D. All measures mentioned above are identical to K100D.

I have a K200 and a DS in my bag, and the DS feels noticeably smaller and lighter.

alohadave · 05-07-2008, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by creampuff

Isn't the K200D or the K100D Super small enough? Pentax's direction should be towards making a BIGGER camera.

Compared to a bridge camera like a Fuji S5200, the K100D Super is huge, in size and weight.

user440 · 05-07-2008, 11:16 AM

Eh, size and weight are way down on the important list for me. Give me performance / quality first. If I want small, I'll take the P&S.

Pentaxke · 05-07-2008, 01:11 PM

What I would like is an ist D series II. Just update speed for me and add SDM and SR for marketing reasons, and you're off...

**GaryM** · 05-07-2008, 01:48 PM

Originally posted by user440

Eh, size and weight are way down on the important list for me. Give me performance / quality first. If I want small, I'll take the P&S.

So, how do you like your 8x10 view camera?

offertonhatter · 05-07-2008, 02:33 PM

although I have both the DS and K10D something about the size of the MZ series would be nice as the K2000D. I would suppose it would end up like the E-400/410/420 Olympus, but for me that would be no bad thing, as it would be smaller than my Fuji S6500fd (which incidently is the same dimensions, body wise, as my DS) I like the hold of the E-4xx camera, even though it does not have the grip. Remember, before the advent of DSLR's, SLR cameras for the consumer did not have a grip of any kind, but due to the power requirements of digital, the manufacturers created grips on DSLR's to fit the batteries in. Its only Olympus with a small powerful battery, have they created a DSLR without a gip of some note. I dont have the Olympus but as a walk around camera, I can see the benefits of the small size. It is like my MZ-5n, MZ-50 and even my Praktica MTL 5B.
Of course some people won't like a lack of grip, as that is what they are used to, but to a great number, bought up on film SLR's will appreciate a small discrete SLR to carry around a lot, which gives them the feel of an old SLR that they have had in the past.

Finally, If Pentax do create the K2000D at a respectable price, but like a MZ(ZX) with 10mp, I would be certainly be interested, and would confine my compact Bridge camera to the cupboard or E-bay, as the IQ will be FAR superior.

NickC · 05-07-2008, 02:33 PM

Originally posted by Matjazz

K100D looks the same size as the DS and when measured it is about 4mm (1/5") wider and 4mm thicker (from lcd to lens mount). Height is the same.
K200D has only thicker/better grip compared to K100D. All measures mentioned above are identical to K100D.

All I know is that side by side my wife's K100D feels large compared to my old *istD. The latter fits much better with the limited lenses, and certainly better than my K10D.

Nick

NickC · 05-07-2008, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxke

What I would like is an ist D series II. Just update speed for me and add SDM and SR for marketing reasons, and you're off...

I agree, if you add in the 14Mp sensor. And keep the TTL flash metering for my AF140C ringflash.

Nick

Geekybiker · 05-07-2008, 03:56 PM

I wouldn't mind something along the lines of a sigma dp1, but with a 28mm pancake as the standard lens included and a plain old k mount on it. Electronic shutter to keep down the bulk maybe?

creampuff · 05-07-2008, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by mattdm

"Should?" Why? Because you want one, or because you think it'd be a good move overall? If the latter, why?

So simple. Professional grade camera =Bigger
Pentax is well covered in the small camera segment. To me the K100D series is sufficiently small. It can't be the size of the MX because it has to have far more electronics, motors and batteries built in. Those that look to a smaller form factor like the Oly 400 series don't realise that sales of the model hasn't been a commercial bestseller. If I wanted a smaller camera I'd but a compact or a prosumer.

mattdm · 05-07-2008, 07:21 PM

Originally posted by creampuff

So simple. Professional grade camera =Bigger

Right, that's nice and all, but...

Quote:

Pentax is well covered in the small camera segment. To me the K100D series is sufficiently small. It can't be the size of the MX because it has to have far more electronics, motors and batteries built in. Those that look to a smaller form factor like the Oly 400 series don't realise that sales of the model hasn't been a commercial bestseller. If I wanted a smaller camera I'd but a compact or a prosumer.

What has been a commercial bestseller is the Nikon D40, the smallest camera from the top two brands. I bet dollars to donuts the E400/E500 series outsells the E3.

creampuff · 05-07-2008, 08:13 PM

Originally posted by mattdm

Right, that's nice and all, but...

What has been a commercial bestseller is the Nikon D40, the smallest camera from the top two brands. I bet dollars to donuts the E400/E500 series outsells the E3.

That's because the average consumer is price sensitive and cannot see the need for a camera targeted at the semi-professional level. Most people who do decide on a consumer grade DSLR want a step up in quality or find the limitations of a P&S or prosumer bridge camera but don't want to spend too much. So it is natural the entry level DSLRs are volume sellers.

BTW there are some who bought the D40 but felt shortchanged when Nikon very shortly after rolled out the D40X and just recently the D60. Product model life for a DSLR is now getting shorter. In Pentax's case, introducing a small camera that has features not to dissimilar to the current models is silly. It will mean a diversion of production capacity, distribution and service issues and worse, might cannibalize sales of existing models.

Just look at Sony right now. So many models rolled out but which should one buy? There's not a clear distinction between the models. I'd rather Pentax keep it simple with 3 product segments: consumer, enthusiast/semi-pro and professional. A flagship pro-grade camera is the missing link right now.

247nino · 05-08-2008, 01:41 AM

i think pentax will introduce a small dslr sometime... pentax eventually has the smallest body size =)

ogl · 05-08-2008, 06:15 AM

I think that DL's size would be enough. No need to make E-420 from Pentax.

05-07-2008, 10:56 AM	#16
alohadave Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Quincy, MA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,024	Originally posted by séamuis nope I certainly wont buy a camera without an optical viewfinder. didn't we already have a thread just like this about bringing back the K1000 as a digital? if I remember correctly we came to (mostly) a decision that such a camera wouldn't sell well and it would only be a small niche market. and for the record I wont buy a camera digital or otherwise that doesn't have a 1:reflexmirror 2entaprism/mirror 3ptical viewfinder 4:interchangeable lenses (the shutter is a toss up if pentax can manufacture a sensor that can do the shutters job just as efficiently and reliably)I dont want a P&S and I don't want a rangefinder. I want to use an SLR, simple as that. thats why I still mostly use film (MX, superA) and I will continue to use only true SLR's from pentax even if they start making cameras that don't qualify as such. In my opinion, something like this would only work if Pentax was trying to cultivate internal upgrades with existing customers by making this a bridge style camera with a fixed lens. Give it some manual controls and a clearly defined upgrade path so that people who like Pentax P&S can stay within the brand. This how I moved up within Fuji, from a 2MP P&S, to a 4MP bridge, and finally to a 5.1MP bridge. If Fuji had an entry level dSLR, or even any dSLRs besides the pro model, I'd be shooting them right now. Unfortunately, I don't see this happening as the bridge level is too close in price to an entry level dSLR for Pentax to bother with now. Maybe next year with Hoya adding resources.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
HOYA: 1 easy step to succe$$ - Make an iPad-friendly body	Unsinkable II	Pentax News and Rumors	110	09-18-2010 05:38 AM
Thrown in a river with my Pentax K2000D	gladyscrum	Pentax DSLR Discussion	29	09-02-2010 10:20 AM
Small, Full Frame Pentax body spotted!	jsherman999	Pentax News and Rumors	16	04-10-2010 09:41 AM
Pentax K2000D at Fry's	madbrain	Pentax DSLR Discussion	5	09-13-2009 09:22 PM
New low-end model Pentax K2000D will be close to Photokina	ogl	Pentax News and Rumors	236	09-15-2008 10:22 AM

05-07-2008, 10:57 AM	#17
GaryM Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Montclair, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 426	Originally posted by Matjazz K100D looks the same size as the DS and when measured it is about 4mm (1/5") wider and 4mm thicker (from lcd to lens mount). Height is the same. K200D has only thicker/better grip compared to K100D. All measures mentioned above are identical to K100D. I have a K200 and a DS in my bag, and the DS feels noticeably smaller and lighter.

05-07-2008, 11:00 AM	#18
alohadave Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Quincy, MA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,024	Originally posted by creampuff Isn't the K200D or the K100D Super small enough? Pentax's direction should be towards making a BIGGER camera. Compared to a bridge camera like a Fuji S5200, the K100D Super is huge, in size and weight.

05-07-2008, 11:16 AM	#19
user440 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: St. Louis, MO Photos: Gallery Posts: 349	Eh, size and weight are way down on the important list for me. Give me performance / quality first. If I want small, I'll take the P&S.

05-07-2008, 01:11 PM	#20
Pentaxke Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Belgium Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 476	What I would like is an ist D series II. Just update speed for me and add SDM and SR for marketing reasons, and you're off...

05-07-2008, 01:48 PM	#21
GaryM Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Montclair, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 426	Originally posted by user440 Eh, size and weight are way down on the important list for me. Give me performance / quality first. If I want small, I'll take the P&S. So, how do you like your 8x10 view camera?

05-07-2008, 02:33 PM	#22
offertonhatter Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: North West UK Posts: 390	although I have both the DS and K10D something about the size of the MZ series would be nice as the K2000D. I would suppose it would end up like the E-400/410/420 Olympus, but for me that would be no bad thing, as it would be smaller than my Fuji S6500fd (which incidently is the same dimensions, body wise, as my DS) I like the hold of the E-4xx camera, even though it does not have the grip. Remember, before the advent of DSLR's, SLR cameras for the consumer did not have a grip of any kind, but due to the power requirements of digital, the manufacturers created grips on DSLR's to fit the batteries in. Its only Olympus with a small powerful battery, have they created a DSLR without a gip of some note. I dont have the Olympus but as a walk around camera, I can see the benefits of the small size. It is like my MZ-5n, MZ-50 and even my Praktica MTL 5B. Of course some people won't like a lack of grip, as that is what they are used to, but to a great number, bought up on film SLR's will appreciate a small discrete SLR to carry around a lot, which gives them the feel of an old SLR that they have had in the past. Finally, If Pentax do create the K2000D at a respectable price, but like a MZ(ZX) with 10mp, I would be certainly be interested, and would confine my compact Bridge camera to the cupboard or E-bay, as the IQ will be FAR superior.

05-07-2008, 02:33 PM	#23
NickC Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 53	Originally posted by Matjazz K100D looks the same size as the DS and when measured it is about 4mm (1/5") wider and 4mm thicker (from lcd to lens mount). Height is the same. K200D has only thicker/better grip compared to K100D. All measures mentioned above are identical to K100D. All I know is that side by side my wife's K100D feels large compared to my old *istD. The latter fits much better with the limited lenses, and certainly better than my K10D. Nick

05-07-2008, 02:41 PM	#24
NickC Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 53	Originally posted by Pentaxke What I would like is an ist D series II. Just update speed for me and add SDM and SR for marketing reasons, and you're off... I agree, if you add in the 14Mp sensor. And keep the TTL flash metering for my AF140C ringflash. Nick

05-07-2008, 03:56 PM	#25
Geekybiker Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Chicagoland Posts: 337	I wouldn't mind something along the lines of a sigma dp1, but with a 28mm pancake as the standard lens included and a plain old k mount on it. Electronic shutter to keep down the bulk maybe?

05-07-2008, 04:23 PM	#26
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	Originally posted by mattdm "Should?" Why? Because you want one, or because you think it'd be a good move overall? If the latter, why? So simple. Professional grade camera =Bigger Pentax is well covered in the small camera segment. To me the K100D series is sufficiently small. It can't be the size of the MX because it has to have far more electronics, motors and batteries built in. Those that look to a smaller form factor like the Oly 400 series don't realise that sales of the model hasn't been a commercial bestseller. If I wanted a smaller camera I'd but a compact or a prosumer.

05-07-2008, 07:21 PM	#27
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Originally posted by creampuff So simple. Professional grade camera =Bigger Right, that's nice and all, but... Quote: Pentax is well covered in the small camera segment. To me the K100D series is sufficiently small. It can't be the size of the MX because it has to have far more electronics, motors and batteries built in. Those that look to a smaller form factor like the Oly 400 series don't realise that sales of the model hasn't been a commercial bestseller. If I wanted a smaller camera I'd but a compact or a prosumer. What has been a commercial bestseller is the Nikon D40, the smallest camera from the top two brands. I bet dollars to donuts the E400/E500 series outsells the E3.

05-07-2008, 08:13 PM	#28
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	Originally posted by mattdm Right, that's nice and all, but... What has been a commercial bestseller is the Nikon D40, the smallest camera from the top two brands. I bet dollars to donuts the E400/E500 series outsells the E3. That's because the average consumer is price sensitive and cannot see the need for a camera targeted at the semi-professional level. Most people who do decide on a consumer grade DSLR want a step up in quality or find the limitations of a P&S or prosumer bridge camera but don't want to spend too much. So it is natural the entry level DSLRs are volume sellers. BTW there are some who bought the D40 but felt shortchanged when Nikon very shortly after rolled out the D40X and just recently the D60. Product model life for a DSLR is now getting shorter. In Pentax's case, introducing a small camera that has features not to dissimilar to the current models is silly. It will mean a diversion of production capacity, distribution and service issues and worse, might cannibalize sales of existing models. Just look at Sony right now. So many models rolled out but which should one buy? There's not a clear distinction between the models. I'd rather Pentax keep it simple with 3 product segments: consumer, enthusiast/semi-pro and professional. A flagship pro-grade camera is the missing link right now.

05-08-2008, 01:41 AM	#29
247nino Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sunnyvale, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 302	i think pentax will introduce a small dslr sometime... pentax eventually has the smallest body size =)

05-08-2008, 06:15 AM	#30
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	I think that DL's size would be enough. No need to make E-420 from Pentax.