[aleonx3]

Enough reasons for me to NOT jump ship. BTW I have owned the Canon EOS 5D for several months and it just was not the camera for me. Certainly not a photographer's camera. I did like its output though.

I think it will be cool if Pentax can pull this one off, FF in smaller body. I tried to handle a 5D MK II, don't like it. I use my DLSR mostly for travelling, lugging around a heavy duty camera such as 5D is very uncool.

Some may argue that why spend all these money getting intermediate level camera models when you can get one that does it all with full featues like the 5D MKII (that's their argument). For me, that is not the case - I still would get an APS-C camera for longer reach.

[Pål Jensen]

I disagree. Now that Sony's in the DSLR business for themselves, they're gonna be giving less and less away. If they do sell to other manufacturers, I guarantee they'll only get the sensors a good six, twelve months after Sony's put them in the cameras. .

No. It is Sony semiconductor that sells sensors; not Sony camera division. The former is in the market for selling sensors to others and they are marketleaders for sensors for DSLR's.

[aleonx3]

Good points, but if you're one of those people who are moaning for a FF Pentax, which again, according to Pentax is not in the cards anytime soon, you have options, whether or not you take them or not is up to you. My feeling has always been, if you cant produce good work with what Pentax has on the market now, it's highly unlikely a FF model is going to be your Messiah. (that's not meant as a jab to you, just a thought in general)

Jason

Hmm, didn't want to say that to my friends who own the FF models and hurting their feelings. I usually let the images from my K10D speak for itself - they haven't figure that out yet - still thinking that I have a better PP software.

[Aristophanes]

All either older or WAY older, meaning they've had time to depreciate from their MSRP. Apples to oranges.

As pointed out, the K-m kit was $699 at launch and can now be had for $450.

It does not change the fact that the price point is not "entry-level". It's not. You can call it that, but it is not. There are lower price point DSLR's. It's irrelevant what Pentax calls it or whether the K-M/2000 stays in production or not. What matters is where on the continuum this model at this price point the K-x fits compared to the competition.

If every other brand has a lower price DSLR, and Pentax does not, then Pentax no longer has an "entry level" model. For awhile, when the K110 Super was gone and it was only the K20 and K200D, there was no entry level Pentax, and no one called the K200D entry level. Read the DP Review and other sites about where they take the price and market position the camera, and where sales sites put it.

That price point is middle market. Doing so excludes its sales volume from entrants who want and can source a DSLR from a competitor at a lower cost.

And one last thing: the pre-order shows it US$ 650 with the non-WR kit lens. That's $160 more than an E-520 with 2 lenses ($225 more than a single lens) and $110 more than the D3000 with lens. The latter is pretty much as new as the K-x. The Oly E330 is $300 less.

The K-x competes with the $80 more expensive D500, but the latter has a few more features than the K-x, including an articulating LCD, and proven AF system with assist lamp,

So, you get video, but pay more for it. Video is not an "entry-level" feature right now. The K-x is a great price, but it's the K200D price point relative to competitive offerings. market target are now definitively not entry level.

It's basic marketing and micro-economics.

---

Last edited by Aristophanes; 09-17-2009 at 11:56 AM.

[deadwolfbones]

It does not change the fact that the price point is not "entry-level". It's not. You can call it that, but it is not. There are lower price point DSLR's. It's irrelevant what Pentax calls it or whether the K-M/2000 stays in production or not. What matters is where on the continuum this model at this price point the K-x fits compared to the competition.

If every other brand has a lower price DSLR, and Pentax does not, then Pentax no longer has an "entry level" model. For awhile, when the K110 Super was gone and it was only the K20 and K200D, there was no entry level Pentax, and no one called the K200D entry level. Read the DP Review and other sites about where they take the price and market position the camera, and where sales sites put it.

That price point is middle market. Doing so excludes its sales volume from entrants who want and can source a DSLR from a competitor at a lower cost.

It's basic marketing and micro-economics.

This is insane. You cannot compare the price of a camera that has been on the market for 3 years (D40) to one that hasn't come out yet (K-x) and that has a vastly superior feature set. If you're going to compare it to something, compare it to cameras with similar feature sets that have come out recently (D5000, T1i).

Pentax simply doesn't have the volume to keep older cameras in production the way Nikon/Canon do. It's a false comparison.

[Aristophanes]

This is insane. You cannot compare the price of a camera that has been on the market for 3 years (D40) to one that hasn't come out yet (K-x) and that has a vastly superior feature set. If you're going to compare it to something, compare it to cameras with similar feature sets that have come out recently (D5000, T1i).

Pentax simply doesn't have the volume to keep older cameras in production the way Nikon/Canon do. It's a false comparison.

The Oly E330 was released less than 2 months ago and (with an excellent kits lens) is $300 less. So, it is a DSLR, and you trade-off and entry-level price for no video.

Basically, Oly has redefined what entry-level means. That is a huge price difference, designed to re-position the market, not just the product.

Furthermore, it speaks volumes about the Nikon D40 that a 3 year-old DSLR sill has legs. Every one of those that sold was $ that went to Nikon and not to Pentax. Using Flickr stats, the Nikon D40 does in one day of uploads on Flickr what it takes the Pentax K-M 4 months to achieve.

That is the power of price points. It is hardly "insane" to make such market comparisons. It is what I do for a living.

[opiszon]

The Oly E330 was released less than 2 months ago

Olympus E-330 was launched on 30 January 2006

what camera are you talking about ?

It is hardly "insane" to make such market comparisons. It is what I do for a living.

sorry, but apparently, You're doing it wrong !

[Pål Jensen]

If every other brand has a lower price DSLR, and Pentax does not, then Pentax no longer has an "entry level" model. .

With that logic there can only be one entry level body on the planet; the cheapest money can buy.
To me, the K-x is clearly an entry level body as it is targeted and appeals to entry level buyers. The fact that there exist cheaper cameras doesn't change this fact....

[gnaztee]

Video is not an "entry-level" feature right now.

It is if you want video...

[deadwolfbones]

Olympus E-330 was launched on 30 January 2006

what camera are you talking about ?


sorry, but apparently, You're doing it wrong !

I guess he means the E-450? (MSRP $699; Current price... not available new)

[nosnoop]

Furthermore, it speaks volumes about the Nikon D40 that a 3 year-old DSLR sill has legs. Every one of those that sold was $ that went to Nikon and not to Pentax.

Apart from Oly E330 being a discontinued model, D40 has also been discontinued. It is no longer listed in Nikon US web site.

That is the power of price points. It is hardly "insane" to make such market comparisons. It is what I do for a living.

There is no point comparing the prices of a discontinued inventory clearing model vs pre-orders for a yet to be sold brand new model.

As for lower pricing model, it may not be worth Pentax while to go after it, as the profit margin is paper thin for models.

The Oly E330 was released less than 2 months ago and (with an excellent kits lens) is $300 less. So, it is a DSLR, and you trade-off and entry-level price for no video.

Basically, Oly has redefined what entry-level means. That is a huge price difference, designed to re-position the market, not just the product.

Furthermore, it speaks volumes about the Nikon D40 that a 3 year-old DSLR sill has legs. Every one of those that sold was $ that went to Nikon and not to Pentax. Using Flickr stats, the Nikon D40 does in one day of uploads on Flickr what it takes the Pentax K-M 4 months to achieve.

That is the power of price points. It is hardly "insane" to make such market comparisons. It is what I do for a living.

You're clearly made up your mind and any arguments won't convince you otherwise. I suspect the lack of some features you were interested in broke the deal for you which is fine by me you're entitled to your opinion. What bothers me is you keep saying the AF system is the same as K200D's although you have exactly zero proof. If the AF system is at least at K-m's level it will be really competitive in that class of cameras without much doubt IMO.
It's common knowledge that Nikon has a huge user base compared to Pentax and surprise, surprise their rise against Canon began with the humble D40 and after that continued with the D3/D300 pair. K-x won't be the God's gift to any photographer but it will make buying Pentax really cool again for the youth and women (two market segments pretty thin for Pentax recently). One more thing although K-7 and K-x I think will stay close the MSRP for a while their simple presence on the market will help vendors sell stocks of K-m and K20 as it is clear Hoya means business with Pentax and more good things will come in the future.

Although the kit price is not the lowest you'll be hard pressed to find out better deals than for the 2 dual kit vesions. The one with the DA L 50-200 will probably make up a lot of the sales and for a measly 100 dollars more you can have the reach and optical qualities of the DA L 55-300 one of the best consumer tele zooms optically.

Radu

[falconeye]

With that logic there can only be one entry level body on the planet; the cheapest money can buy.

Shizz... you make the point I wanted to make.

There only is one entry level camera and this is a refurbished D40

Read the DP Review and other sites about where they take the price and market position the camera, and where sales sites put it.

That price point is middle market. Doing so excludes its sales volume from entrants who want and can source a DSLR from a competitor at a lower cost.

You may feel expert on the topic but thgis statement simply doesn't hold true.

Not only does dpreview call it "upper-entry level DSLR" (read it on their news page). But as a matter of fact you cannot launch anymore an entry-level SLR without video. A high end SLR: yes. But for the entry level, people expect this feature they now consider a commodity in their P&Ss. And the K-x is the most affordable such camera on the market.

What is the point in having a cheaper SLR w/o video if nobody buys it anymore?

[Aristophanes]

Shizz... you make the point I wanted to make.

There only is one entry level camera and this is a refurbished D40

You may feel expert on the topic but thgis statement simply doesn't hold true.

Not only does dpreview call it "upper-entry level DSLR" (read it on their news page). But as a matter of fact you cannot launch anymore an entry-level SLR without video. A high end SLR: yes. But for the entry level, people expect this feature they now consider a commodity in their P&Ss. And the K-x is the most affordable such camera on the market.

What is the point in having a cheaper SLR w/o video if nobody buys it anymore?

Create a market divisor. Bracket the price points based on # of units sold and see where each model fits in from the competition on the curve. Do that and the K-x looks too high for "entry-level". It's a shifting scale, but Pentax does not have the # of models nor market heft to move that scale. As someone pointed out earlier, they cannot keep taking market share by pumping out legacy models.

Video is just another "feature" So is "losing" selectable AF points and a superimposed focus point at this price point, especially if Pentax is going to a 2-model line. This means the K-x has less photographic tech than the K200D. One could say that sans video, the K-x has downgraded the experience compared to every other DSLR (a standardized market class for T&T BTW) in this category, something that 2 previews have said already.

The Oly E-420 is the one I mistakenly called the E-330.

You'd think maybe that more successful and profitable companies like Oly and Nikon (D3000) still putting out non-vido DSLR's may know a thing or two about cornering the "entry level" and redefining it? Pentax's rightly maligned marketing efforts make one think that when they say "entry level" it's likely they barely understand the term.

Right now there are 6 models of DSLR category camera on the market at price point 10-25% lower than Pentax. This puts Pentax's model clearly in the mid-range going by the historical market placement. It's darn well-priced and smart to include video, but drop the Nikon D5000 (Nikon's usually entering the market at a silly premium) to where it should be at the current K-x point, and the K-x looks average. Which is why it is brilliant to have the colour wheel option.At least if you're forcing people up to the price point, they get consumer choice over aesthetics.

What you get, however, and all the reviewers will pick up on this, is a mid-range model with a single crippling feature (the AF problem) that competes on eye candy and not specs.

Compare that the K-7 which is all about specs. The K-M did not sell well. It got generally poor reviews compared to its peers. It was not competitive. Since it came out, apparently Pentax lost market share, despite this camera for awhile being the bottom feeder. The whole point of issuing a low-end model is to take market share, attracting new users who would not normally enter the market until the market came to them. In general, all makers have issued lower-end models than Pentax. They play that game too, and have deeper pockets to do so.

Why Pentax insists on issuing cameras with an AF system what reviewers have called "showing its age" and "slower than the competition", and without the most basic helper for an entry-level camera, the AF assist lamp, is baffling. Consistently, in review after review, the Pentax line gets slammed for this, costing sales and otherwise great engineering to toil in the shadows.

And Pentax marketing is all over the map. On the one hand, less than a year ago, its own marketing guy related the company to Subaru. Steadfast, durable, rugged, engineered, etc. Now it is pretty colours and no WR, with very useful photographic features missing at price points where they were previously available. No other manufacturer does that (except Fuji, as with the F31 weirdness).

There is nothing more poisonous to a product review than to have a model look worse on a feature than the previous model at that price point. It makes the brand look cheap and incompetent. Competitors leap on those comparisons with glee. Why not? The other guy gave them the dynamite.

Petax's quirkiness when it comes to melding design with market-driven facts is unnecessarily self-destructive and a very valid market criticism. When the first Preview went up on Image Resource, it nailed the problem immediately. You get bad PR like that on launch day (hinted at in DP Review as well), someone should get fired. This is not "my" point. There's likely to be a growing, sustained reviewer consensus that this type of crippling is poor equipment design, and they'll call Pentax on it publicly and cost the brand customers who should otherwise be looking seriously at what is a very good camera. Again, a totally foreseeable and unnecessary exposure to reviewer and user criticism that the other guys have long moved past. It's mystery.

[falconeye]

Create a market divisor. Bracket the price points based on # of units sold and see where each model fits in from the competition on the curve.

You don't have or at least you don't provide market research data necessary to support your kind of claim.

A short look at amazon ranks for Nikon yields (#rank. model (remark how specified with respect to K-x):
1. D90 (at or slightly above K-x)
2. D40 (way old)
3. D3000 (below K-x)
4. D5000 (direct competitor of K-x)
5. D700 (above K-x)
6. D60 (way old)
7. D300s (above K-x)

For me, positions 1.-4. represent the "entry level" and K-x is a direct and perfect match. Entry level doesn't necessarily mean cheapest possible but best price performance translating into bestsellers. I would call D3000 lower entry level, D5000 entry level and D90 upper entry level. D300s and D700 (like K-7) are what is known as mid class or enthusiast level. Next comes the pro level.

With only two lines a company the size of Pentax can afford, they have a perfect market positioning (middle of entry and middle of enthusiast level).