[*isteve]

Apart from the obvious sponsored pros, most pros I know will use multiple cameras (from different makes) for different jobs, including LF and MF if required. It would not be considered unusual for someone who uses or rents a D3X for their day job to buy something more hiker friendly for the weekend and they would not hesitate to buy Pentax if it offered a no-compromise product.

I think Pentax have a great idea going - dont compete with the "pro" cameras, make cameras the pros will use on holiday. Genius.

Every company has to work within its means. Pentax is much smaller than the 2 camera giants, and as such has to pick its battles. Making a pro-spec APS-C camera in a small form-factor would fully emphasize and capitalize on Pentax's unique qualities, instead of spending a bigger outlay just to become an also-ran in areas where the camera superpowers reign supreme. Yet again pending real specs, it could be exactly the camera Pentax needs to consolidate its niche and gain some new users at the same time. Nobody else is even close to putting out a small pro-spec camera. This could be something really special if executed properly.

[robgo2]

Amazing specs or not, it does not change the fact that thus far what we know shows Pentax heading in a very new and hopefully rewarding direction. My commentary was merely to point out that it does seem they had to almost choose a metaphorical path and either path had to leave some users a bit discouraged.

I think that your observations are generally valid. But the fact remains that Pentax is not in a position to try to be all things to all people. Given their limitations, carving out a market niche seems wise. It is still an open question as to whether they can find the right niche and then make a success of it. If they can, then there will be a possibility of them expanding beyond that niche in the future.

Rob

[joerg]

I think it is an extremely good point that Pentax cannot be all things to all people, and chasing Canon, Nikon, and Sony into that inferno is more than likely not the way to go. If a company like Sony cannot support a FF camera then Pentax does not have a chance, at it. At the same time though the 3000 dollar bodies and pricey lenses contain many times the margin of their budget counterparts.

It is good that from the looks of it most Pentax users are excited about the direction of the K-7, I am interested to see how the camera positions itself in the market. I think the thing I dread most at this point is the fact that my mind will keep telling me this camera will feel horrendous in my hands like every olympus I have ever used has, and yet I will not be able to prove that fact wrong because there is not a store within 200 miles of me that even carries new Pentax bodies.

[mattdm]

This car company makes a really great family car. It would be perfect for my needs. Too bad the company doesn't also make construction trucks. That would make me a lot more likely to buy one of their cars. 'm never going to buy a construction truck, but it makes me feel good to buy from a company that really knows about hauling gravel around. Because that's where all of the prestige is.

[KungPOW]

This complain realy make no sense.

When did Pentax ever said they didn't want to have FF? They have no FF sensor. How do you know Sony is willing to sell the FF sensor to Pentax for cheap?

They already said a supported FF lenses system need to prepare for the FF body. That sounds like they are working on it.

The design of the K-7 is alot closer to a FF pro body than the K20D, K10D, that's for sure.

So please, justify your argument in logical sentenses.

ummm...

The OP is not complaining. He opened a discusion that at the center asks the question: "If Pentax becomes a high end niche camera maker (leica), will that exclude some Pentax users that are looking for typical "pro features" found with other camera brands."

And I think he asks a good question.

I think the overall question is less about FF and more about the "feel" of the new camera. "pro" vs. "enthusiast". A top spec'd "ethusiast" camera does not mean it is an underspec'd pro camera.

In 1980, the LX and the Canon A1 were "pro" cameras.

By 1994 the LX became an "enthsiast" camera, and the EOS-1n was the "pro" camera.

[joerg]

Mattdm, comparing car companies to camera companies is hardly a fair comparison. My point is only that a system as a whole is very costly. I have a little over 8 grand wrapped up in Canon gear and I am only half way to breaking even on that system, not to mention my backup body is an old 10D. So lets assume a wedding pro has possibly a 40d and either a 5D or a 1D, all three very common cameras, now lets assume 4 pieces of L glass, some light equipment and a few other odds and ends, you are close to 10,000 dollars in equipment there. It is hard for a lot of photographers to justify buying an entire second kit. This is why your comparison is not fair, with a car you usually just by the car, with a camera you might expect to buy 3-10 times its value in lenses and accessories.

If I decide to return to Pentax I either A.) come up with enough to purchase this camera and at least 3 good lenses or B.) sell my Canon gear and go all in with Pentax.

This is not a complaint about Pentax, it really is just a discussion about where this leaves Pentax in this market. I know many of us myself included will probably never turn a living with our cameras, but I do have the dream to possibly go pro if the opportunity presents itself. So the question at hand is do you think another APS-C camera smaller than the K20 can help you get there. Obviously the camera has very little to do with whether you are pro or not, but at the same time if you have ever worked with a D3 or a 1D you know what a pro level sports or wedding system feels like. It is a totally different experience, everything from the sound of the shutter, to the faith that you have in the system, it all screams professional grade. Pentax's consumer grade cameras, are still in my opinion the highest quality in their class and at launch are more than competitive, but can the K-7 inspire the same faith that other pro cameras do? Lets not argue about whether it was meant to compete with these cameras or not, because whether it was designed that way or not, its name suggests that it will stand at Pentax's leading edge (atleast in the Kmount).

The sooner Pentax lures in more photographers willing to use the camera to make a living, the sooner we will see the return of some of the classic Pentax lenses, I would love to see Pentax produce another 600mm lens, or a new 200 macro, or a new tilt shift design, or an 85 1.4, or a new 135 2. Pentax is an incredible manufacturer capable of great things, but the fact of the matter is that a mid range body lacks the justification for a full system. My point here all along is that this camera is not completing Pentax's lineup, it is almost redefining it midway through. Where do they go from here?

You get inspired by an equipment?

[eccentricphotography]

I too am waiting for this release with hopeful expectations. I love the lenses, but I am demanding and need it to be close enough to justify not going back to Canon. If it is actually an upgrade in high iso performance, frames per sec, and dynamic range as well as low light focus, I'm in. I don't have to be full frame. I have LF and medium format for that.

[mickey]

The power of rumours is a beautiful thing.
Here we are all debating over a product that hasn't had its specs released officially.
3 and a half weeks isn't long to wait...

Let's just see what happens before we make judgements on Pentax's approach and the actual camera in question.

[Wheatfield]

Mattdm, comparing car companies to camera companies is hardly a fair comparison. My point is only that a system as a whole is very costly. I have a little over 8 grand wrapped up in Canon gear and I am only half way to breaking even on that system, not to mention my backup body is an old 10D. So lets assume a wedding pro has possibly a 40d and either a 5D or a 1D, all three very common cameras, now lets assume 4 pieces of L glass, some light equipment and a few other odds and ends, you are close to 10,000 dollars in equipment there. It is hard for a lot of photographers to justify buying an entire second kit. This is why your comparison is not fair, with a car you usually just by the car, with a camera you might expect to buy 3-10 times its value in lenses and accessories.

If I decide to return to Pentax I either A.) come up with enough to purchase this camera and at least 3 good lenses or B.) sell my Canon gear and go all in with Pentax.

This is not a complaint about Pentax, it really is just a discussion about where this leaves Pentax in this market. I know many of us myself included will probably never turn a living with our cameras, but I do have the dream to possibly go pro if the opportunity presents itself. So the question at hand is do you think another APS-C camera smaller than the K20 can help you get there. Obviously the camera has very little to do with whether you are pro or not, but at the same time if you have ever worked with a D3 or a 1D you know what a pro level sports or wedding system feels like. It is a totally different experience, everything from the sound of the shutter, to the faith that you have in the system, it all screams professional grade. Pentax's consumer grade cameras, are still in my opinion the highest quality in their class and at launch are more than competitive, but can the K-7 inspire the same faith that other pro cameras do? Lets not argue about whether it was meant to compete with these cameras or not, because whether it was designed that way or not, its name suggests that it will stand at Pentax's leading edge (atleast in the Kmount).

The sooner Pentax lures in more photographers willing to use the camera to make a living, the sooner we will see the return of some of the classic Pentax lenses, I would love to see Pentax produce another 600mm lens, or a new 200 macro, or a new tilt shift design, or an 85 1.4, or a new 135 2. Pentax is an incredible manufacturer capable of great things, but the fact of the matter is that a mid range body lacks the justification for a full system. My point here all along is that this camera is not completing Pentax's lineup, it is almost redefining it midway through. Where do they go from here?

Without wanting to wade deeply into the K7's (or whatever it's name really is) performance specifications, a smaller camera body certainly fits in with the philosophy that the company seems to be moving towards with small, high quality prime focal length lenses.
A camera sized similarly to the K-M, but with the sensor from the K20 and sensible but upgraded build and performance specifications is also in keeping with the companies historical design philosophy of compact yet competent camera bodies suited to photo enthusiasts who put image quality ahead of raw high performance specifications.

If what I have read about what the K7 will be is even close to correct, it indicates that Pentax has finally found it's way back to the path it so successfully walked through the 1980s with the A series camera bodies and compact A series lenses.

As far as the K20 goes, it is a good camera for what it is, but it does now need a performance upgrade, as the cameras it is competing against have moved forwards, and a new camera needs to be released with higher performance specifications.
Whether this new camera is that camera, or if the rumours of a K20 upgrade that is seperate from this new camera are true, we'll see soon enough.

At some point, Pentax will be forced to enter the full frame (or larger format) arena. I don't think there is any doubt about that. I don't believe that this time has come yet though. Most of the lenses being produced now will not cover the 35mm sensor format, and there is also the issue of shake reduction and image circle to take into account, as SR does increase image circle requirements by a significant amount.
If they stay with their traditional philosophy of regarding small format cameras as amateur market and larger format cameras as professional format, they may well skip the 35mm form factor full frame format completely and go to the 645 form factor camera as their entry into the professional camera market.
This does not obviate the possibility of a higher specified APS-C format camera, and frankly, I believe that in order to be taken seriously, they have to continue moving in the direction of a higher specified camera, in much the same way that the K20 is higher specified than the K10.
I believe that there is a market for a Pentax with performance specifications similar to a Nikon D300 class camera, and I believe that Pentax will produce it, I suspect sooner rather than later, since the K20 is now, by DSLR standards, getting a bit old.

Your comments regarding comparisons to cars is absolutely spot on, although there is a tremendous brand loyalty towards car companies from people (I have a Nissan Titan and a Nissan X-Trail sitting on my driveway for example), there are really very few accessories, and no really expensive ones that would be shared between a compact car and a full sized truck.
For the comparison to be valid, one would need to be wanting to be sharing accessories costing several times the price of each vehicle between each vehicle.
This is, obviously, simply not the case, and the comparison is a strawman attempt to deflect from a logical arguement.

[Wheatfield]

You get inspired by an equipment?

Doesn't everyone?

[eurostar]

- The video may be gimmick, or actually more useful than on a 5Dmkii.

Sadly, the inclusion of the video-mode among the exposure modes tells volumes about how it will be implemented. Unless it's a sort of user-position to store preferred setting for the video, it says that it will be a full automated, you-can't-choose-anything video mode like the Nikon D90 one.

A "serious" video mode should go with the drive modes (single, continuos, burst, self timer...) allowing for choosing the exposure mode preferred (at least, if the frame rate is fixed, you should be allowed to choose between manual and TV).

[cateto]

The fact that we can seriously state that we are disappointed about a new camera from which the official specs are completely unknown (regardless of the word of different rices of the net) is truly stunning to me.

I mean: get excited or disappointed, as you want, but AFTER known the actual features, not a single second before!!

[Wheatfield]

The fact that we can seriously state that we are disappointed about a new camera from which the official specs are completely unknown (regardless of the word of different rices of the net) is truly stunning to me.

I mean: get excited or disappointed, as you want, but AFTER known the actual features, not a single second before!!

Obviously, you were never the little kid who rattled his Christmas presents to see if he could figure out what they were.

I mean: Where's the fun in doing as you suggest?

[cateto]

Well, I see no fun whatsoever in getting disappointed for no reason at all.

I do find fun in getting hints of info (I try to contribute to this little game in my blog), but getting everything with many grains of salt. THAT is fun.

But posting something like the first post here, when NOTHING is known for sure?
That is fun???

Not in my book, at least.