[deejjjaaaa]

Hmmm..accordong to Amazon.com and Photoprice.ca the K200D is priced better than the Canon and Nikon models in the same range. It's at the same price as the D60 and cheaper than the XSi (by $200).

And the Pentax has weather sealing.

This must be a European issue.

reputable sellers (B&H) sell D60kit for ~$600 and K200Dkit for ~$600... now... what was the price 2-3-6 month ago ?

[ewalk]

reputable sellers (B&H) sell D60kit for ~$600 and K200Dkit for ~$600... now... what was the price 2-3-6 month ago ?

About the same - I would know since I cross-shopped the Nikon D60 with the K200D back in Jan-March. Give or take about $50 - the two cameras were very close in price.

[montecarlo]

Hmmm..accordong to Amazon.com and Photoprice.ca the K200D is priced better than the Canon and Nikon models in the same range. It's at the same price as the D60 and cheaper than the XSi (by $200).

And the Pentax has weather sealing.

This must be a European issue.

In Romania Pentax K200D has the same price as the old 400D and it's cheaper than the D60, 450D, A350, E520

[Asahiflex]

Nearly 0 I guess, unless they release some FF lens to go with it.

Don't forget that MANY of us have lenses intended for 35mm film. The only crop lenses I have are the Sigma 10-20 and the Pentax 16-45, but all other lenses from 24 to 500mm are for FilmFrame

I can easily imagine that Pentax will launch a FF camera with a non-crippled mount to satisfy the old lens lovers. What Pentax loses by offering this feature they will gain again by body sales. But if this will happen is anyone's guess.

[Lord Awesome]

The lenses I use most frequently are my old primes. Actually, I use my Super Takumars the most, so concievbly I could move to any manufacturer's full frame body and still get use out of them via adater. I try not to be biased, or let myself be effected by brand loyalties, but I do have a measly budget. Pentax has spoken to this issue from what I have seen. They whisper sweet nothings in my ear that I can actually afford.

[Serpiente]

Pentax should focus on a pro cam that just works perfect with the SDM lenses to make it optimal. No half work and look back in the past. They should boost the AF with it. Let the non-pro cams work with the old lenses for the people who need them. They should make a big step with this.

[montecarlo]

Pentax should focus on a pro cam that just works perfect with the SDM lenses to make it optimal. No half work and look back in the past. They should boost the AF with it. Let the non-pro cams work with the old lenses for the people who need them. They should make a big step with this.

Well, I would't like to see this approach from Pentax. One important reason I choosed Pentax is exactly that it is the most compatible system (old lenese on new bodies and viceversa). I use many MF lenses because they are cheap and very good and because Pentax has good viewfinders for manual focusing (and working lightmeter and focus confirmation).
Nikon's pro and semi-pro line works with the older lenses and entry-level ones don't (light-meter) - hmmm I wonder why ? . Even on Canon lenses can be mounted (using an adapter), having K Pentax, Oly OM, F Nikon, Contax/Yashica, Leica R, Rolley, M42, etc. mounts (M and Av mode).

[montecarlo]

Don't forget that MANY of us have lenses intended for 35mm film. The only crop lenses I have are the Sigma 10-20 and the Pentax 16-45, but all other lenses from 24 to 500mm are for FilmFrame

I can easily imagine that Pentax will launch a FF camera with a non-crippled mount to satisfy the old lens lovers. What Pentax loses by offering this feature they will gain again by body sales. But if this will happen is anyone's guess.

I hope so, as mentioned before.

[Serpiente]

Well, I would't like to see this approach from Pentax. One important reason I choosed Pentax is exactly that it is the most compatible system (old lenese on new bodies and viceversa). I use many MF lenses because they are cheap and very good and because Pentax has good viewfinders for manual focusing (and working lightmeter and focus confirmation).
Nikon's pro and semi-pro line works with the older lenses and entry-level ones don't (light-meter) - hmmm I wonder why ? . Even on Canon lenses can be mounted (using an adapter), having K Pentax, Oly OM, F Nikon, Contax/Yashica, Leica R, Rolley, M42, etc. mounts (M and Av mode).

Using M lenses shouldn't be a problem.. But I mean the in-body motor. The M-lens compatibility is great. But I think they have to choose.. I think they should fully focus on the new lenses with the new bodies. Manual focus is always possible if its still a K-mouth.

[vinzer]

Pentax should focus on a pro cam that just works perfect with the SDM lenses to make it optimal. No half work and look back in the past. They should boost the AF with it. Let the non-pro cams work with the old lenses for the people who need them. They should make a big step with this.

Actually, the more pro-level a cam is, the bigger the need to make it backwards-compatible with old lenses, since it's more likely that the already established pros and fervent hobbyists have a collection of old lenses they would use with a new body.

It doesn't take too much to implement both SDM and screw-driven AF. Nikon does it with their higher-numbered Dxx models and up the pro line. Those still have the screw, and people are, for the most part, happy with the speed of their AF-S lenses still, even with the screw-drive in there.

Besides, it's good PR at only a fraction of the cost.

[24X36NOW]

Actually, the more pro-level a cam is, the bigger the need to make it backwards-compatible with old lenses, since it's more likely that the already established pros and fervent hobbyists have a collection of old lenses they would use with a new body.

It doesn't take too much to implement both SDM and screw-driven AF. Nikon does it with their higher-numbered Dxx models and up the pro line. Those still have the screw, and people are, for the most part, happy with the speed of their AF-S lenses still, even with the screw-drive in there.

Besides, it's good PR at only a fraction of the cost.

Couldn't have said it better myself. One of the biggest reasons Pentax has any market share left to speak of is its backwards compatibility. Absent that, why buy Pentax? Lens availability is what SLR cameras are all about, and the best current lenses are often either not made in, or are made but forever "out of stock" in, PK mount. If I didn't have a collection of existing PK lenses, I would definitely buy a Nikon or (shudder) Canon product, because then I would be able to get the full array of lenses I wanted. That's also why Pentax needs to get their full frame cameras out - the faithful are growing impatient!

[wiyum]

Couldn't have said it better myself. One of the biggest reasons Pentax has any market share left to speak of is its backwards compatibility. Absent that, why buy Pentax? Lens availability is what SLR cameras are all about, and the best current lenses are often either not made in, or are made but forever "out of stock" in, PK mount. If I didn't have a collection of existing PK lenses, I would definitely buy a Nikon or (shudder) Canon product, because then I would be able to get the full array of lenses I wanted. That's also why Pentax needs to get their full frame cameras out - the faithful are growing impatient!

I find it interesting that you and I agree on a number of fundamental points and reach entirely disparate conclusions from them. Lens availability *is* what SLR cameras are about. You seem to think that, absent a backlog of incredible glass (a point I'd not likely challenge; the old glass is terrific), Pentax has no lens options worth choosing the system for and thus the old glass is the only reason to own a Pentax camera. I, on the other hand, think that they have far and away the best selection of lenses available for a cropped-format camera. We can go back and forth about the disadvantages of the cropped format, and given your username I'll take the liberty of predicting your feelings on the matter. I'll add that I agree with many of the points made in favor of a 36x24 sensor, not the least of which being that I "know" those focal lengths intrinsically. But the fact of the matter is that almost every DSLR sold in the world has a smaller-than-36x24 sensor, and no one is going to buck that trend in the next three to five years, minimum.

Granting that, Pentax currently offers the most complete lens lineup available for such a sensor. Certainly they're lacking the longer lenses of the Canon and Nikon lineups, topping out at 300 currently. But with primes at 14, 21, and soon 15, they offer more in the way of wide angle primes. They have not one, but two zooms available that go as wide as 16mm. They have a popular lineup of small primes unlike anything available from any other manufacturer. They'll soon have fast (and large) normal and portrait lenses roughly equivalent to a 50 and 85 in the 30 and 55mm DA* primes. Whatever you want, Pentax seems to have it, as long a you're fine with a maximum focal length equivalent to a 450mm lens and a minimum of 21mm on a "Full Frame" camera (excluding fisheyes). Soon zooms will bring this range to 16-450mm.

What Pentax doesn't currently offer is a comprehensive selection of glass that covers the image circle of a 36x24mm sensor. In fact, all but (by my count) 6 such lenses have been discontinued. Pentax certainly has a backlog of old glass that could be brought back into production, but there's a justifiable question of how quickly this could happen. Added to that, there's a question of how excited new consumers would be about decade-old lens designs.

It's all about gaining marketshare, to be sure. Currently, Pentax offers the most comprehensive selection of glass for smaller sensor cameras, which are the cameras most people will be buying for the next half-decade. These are all new designs, and many are head-and-shoulders above the aging glass offered by Canon, Nikon, and the rest. It seems to me that the way to gain marketshare is to make this lineup even better and promote it to no end, along with even better bodies with smaller sensors. A Full-frame camera should certainly be forthcoming, but introducing it, in my opinion, should wait until Pentax actually has glass to sell with it and the market is ready for larger sensors to be more mainstream. After all, you can't improve marketshare if "wealthy-ish owners of several old Pentax lenses" is your target market.

Just my take on it.

Will

[ftpaddict]

there's a question of how excited new consumers would be about decade-old lens designs

Canon and Sony DSLR users don't seem to mind that some of the lenses they buy were conceived more than a decade ago. If performance and image quality is good, why not go ahead and re-introduce old designs?

The problem with Pentax is that they currently don't have the production capacity to manufacture more than a certain number or type of lenses /bodies.

They need to ramp up production first, and drop the price of the K200D to about $500-550.

[ghelary]

Certainly they're lacking the longer lenses of the Canon and Nikon lineups, topping out at 300 currently.

Not true, see yourself the 600 is still labelled as in production on demand.

However, to me extreme tele are for very specific use like wildlife shooting and paparazzi. Is there any other use ?

I'm currently satisfied with Pentax lens lineup, just missing some fast telezoom for nautical photo, but the 60-250 shall fill the gap.

Regards,
Guillaume

[vinzer]

24X36NOW and wiyum, what I find interesting is that you have come to different conclusions, yet both conclusions are not mutually exclusive to one another, which is one of the things I like about Pentax.

You have the superb old lenses. A cursory look at the [insert lens lineage here] club threads in the SLR Lens Talk, and one can be sold on that, knowing full well how little one would have to pay to get those studs. An excellent case for the enthusiast who doesn't have much to spend.

On the other hand, Pentax also has a good lineup of currently in-production lenses. The FA Limiteds are very highly regarded, evoking comparisons to Zeiss primes, and dubbed by some grizzled photography veterans as some of the best AF lens ever. Even the lower-end zooms are optically excellent. And really, the pancake lenses are unparalleled in their combination of form factor and optical qualities. Oly's 25mm is a good, but unsuccessful attempt at a pancake lens (I'm not that okay with it's performance vis-a-vis the 40mm 2.8).

Basically, whichever side you are, be it the scrounger for lenses cheaper than $100 - that would be me, or the moneyed serious enthusiast/pro (those who can afford FA*s at this point in time), there's a case for you to at least take a look at Pentax. And that's what's interesting about Pentax.

Perhaps one could also make a case for Nikon with regards to their lenses, but not all Nikon bodies can meter for the older lenses. Pentax makes it a point to be able to use old lenses on all bodies, be it entry-level or semi-pro.