[RMabo]

While the 50d does not have HD video (I'm a firm believer that video and still photo devices should be separate anyway) it was a higher FPS and Megapixel and it came out in 2008. We're a model year later and we're still behind in those areas and possibly others (I haven't compared all the specs.)

Many feels that the EOS 50D has hit the wall when it comes to Mp vs high ISO noise.
Pentax and Samsung simply felt that 14.6Mp is the perfect balance, offering high enough Mp without making high ISO too compromised. The EOS 50D actually has more noise at high ISO than the 40D before it, so Canon is moving backwards.

Of course the technology can improve, but we are not there yet. Not even Canon, obviously.

As for fps - making a camera is about finding a balance between cost, performance, features and size. I see K-7 as a much more balanced camera than the EOS 50D. K-7 offers a wholeness of performance and features that the EOS 50D lacks, and it does this in the most compact size of any pro / semi-pro DSLR. This is remarkable.

A few fps here or there doesn't make so much of difference. It is like saying that car x is the best because it is 0.2 seconds faster to 0 - 100 km/h than car y.

Are you a photographer, or are you simply reading technical specifications?
Do you want to impress others by your images, or the technical specification that your camera has? "Look, my camera has x more fps and 3 more Mp's than yours. I win, I win, I win!".

[Big G]

Uh oh, better sell all my Pentax gear - i'm stuck with 720p video, how will I cope.