[kevinschoenmakers]

I think everyone's eyes have shifted from MP to ISO (especially the eyes of people shopping for this kind of camera). So if anything, the ISO performance will have to be improved. I'm not sure many people buying a Pentax will be using it for studiowork and are thus mostly interested in high MP and good low-ISO performance, Ben. They could do both a K7 Super with the k-x's sensor, and a K8 with a new 18+ MP sensor to satisfy everyone, but that'll never happen.

[Pål Jensen]

I think everyone's eyes have shifted from MP to ISO (especially the eyes of people shopping for this kind of camera). So if anything, the ISO performance will have to be improved. I'm not sure many people buying a Pentax will be using it for studiowork and are thus mostly interested in high MP and good low-ISO performance, Ben. They could do both a K7 Super with the k-x's sensor, and a K8 with a new 18+ MP sensor to satisfy everyone, but that'll never happen.

99% of all images are shot at "normal" ISO values. The obsession with noise performance at extreme ISO is just measurebating by people never shooting anything in real life. They are the same people that complain about fps and AF speed in spite of never shooting action. The 1% that do need low noise at high ISO will have me excused (and buy a D700 for niche usage)

[kevinschoenmakers]

99% of all images are shot at "normal" ISO values. The obsession with noise performance at extreme ISO is just measurebating by people never shooting anything in real life. They are the same people that complain about fps and AF speed in spite of never shooting action. The 1% that do need low noise at high ISO will have me excused (and buy a D700 for niche usage)

I'm just saying I think that's what people are looking at now. People used to be overly obsessing on megapixels, and that doesn't really have much baring on how good your camera is either.

[lesmore49]

You've seen...? I've worked with RAW from 7D. It's the worst APS-C camera in terms of IQ. It's 100% product of marketing. Early diffraction, noise from ISO100, very narrow DR and it's almost unreal to get pictures with good sharpness.

Add the problems with AF of 7D.

I've seen many pix from a 7D...wildlife shots...they are excellent. A guy in my group has one...AF top noch, noise fine...but you have to know how to adjust it ...kind of like it took me awhile to set up my K10D.

[Miserere]

I thought it had been established that 15mp was the sweet spot for APS-C, if that still holds true, an 18mp camera makes no sense.

Established in what way? The only way it should be established, and set out in stone, is by asking Miserere. Let's do that.


People: Hey, Miserere, thanks for agreeing to talk to us. We're honoured.

Miz: You should be! I'm glad you realise the magnanimousness of my nature in allowing this to happen.

People: Well, we don't want to take up your time, so we'll only ask one question, because it's a very important matter. What is the sweet spot for megapixel count on an APS-C sensor?

Miz: 12MP.

People: Nuff said.

.

[lesmore49]

Since Pentax have already recycled the old film KX name for the digital K-x, I think it would be fitting for the next flagship (after the K-7/K-7s) for Pentax to be bold and recycle the estemed LX name, and call their new APS-C flagship the L-x. K-8 sounds too boring.



You could see in the styling of the K-7 they were reaching back to the LX anyhow, especially around the pentaprism.

One of my regrets is never managing to own a LX body. I have a MX, but no LX. If there was a digital L-x, I'd buy it just for that reason alone.

I like that idea, but call it the LX-1...then the next model...the LX-2, etc.

I have a KM digital the namesake of the old film KM.

[ytterbium]

How about a camera without a model name.
Just Pentax Digital. Would sure make a hell of finding one in google .
I like the ideo of metal finish. Not silver color, but real metallic body.

[benjikan]

I'm with those above who are "perfectly happy" with their K200ds. I've been amazed by this little machine's reliability and performance. I can't imagine getting any better photos using another camera body... and even if the pics were technically "better," with my eyesight I doubt I'd be able to tell the difference. (It's the same with my stereo system... with my 70+ year old ears, there's not much point in laying out thousands for a Bose system!)

I used to think that if I had a $1,000 lens how much better my pictures would be. I no longer believe this. I just paid $13.50 on eBay for a Sigma Pantel 135 that is razor sharp with great color, contrast and bokeh. I doubt if I used it on a K7 there'd be any distinguishable difference in the images.

My biggest problem is what to do with literally hundreds of what I think are "terrific" shots I've acquired over the years - I don't have enough walls on which to hang the 16x20s I'd like to have made even if I could afford to have them made. Back in the "old days" the cost of film & processing was the limiting factor. Now the world is so awash in such fabulous photos that it has to be something REALLY special to get an "oooh" or "wow" out of me.

Do a Book. You can do a beautiful Book of 120 pages for around 30 euros. Most of the print stores are doing them with hard cover, text and any layout you want. I have actually stopped printing for my portfolio for this reason. So, no wall space, do a table top.

It's Easy to Make Your Own Photo Book | Blurb

[Arpe]

The obsession with noise performance at extreme ISO is just measurebating by people never shooting anything in real life. They are the same people that complain about fps and AF speed in spite of never shooting action. The 1% that do need low noise at high ISO will have me excused (and buy a D700 for niche usage)

Rubbish. In real life I'm shooting sport at 5:30pm in the middle of winter. It's very dark then. I'm often at ISO 3200-4500 at 1/350, f2.8. I'd really rather be at 1/500 minimum. I do not measurebate, I would just like cleaner images at higher ISOs. Yes I realise what I get now is astounding compared to the old days, but if it can be done to make it even better, I'll say "Yes please". I also used to complain about af speed, but I do shoot action so that's okay, now I just want better tracking!

[photogerald]

K200D replacement? What are you talking about?
There's no space in the current lineup. They either have to push the K-7 higher (K-7 Super or whatever) so they can introduce a middle range camera or chase ultra cheap segment (can Hoya compete on price?) and replace K-m with basic sensor, no LiveView à la D3000 and pull a K-1000 at 450 Euros with kit lens.

Yes, that's what I said - with the K-7 Super the K200D replacement could fit in.

[Itai]

Seriously, given the K-7 and refreshed K-x, the next move from Pentax is a refreshed K20D, perhaps called K-30 or K-z... I'm assuming we are ignoring the 654D from this discussion of course since that was announced for 2010.

The K20D successor probably won't have a 100% viewfinder as I would want it too, just to keep it away from the K-7 market. It will probably get an upgraded sensor and faster drive, based on whatever Sony is cooking right now, which I assume is a 19-24 MP APS sensor to beat Canon at the numbers game but not reach full-frame numbers yet. It would need at least 5 FPS to stay ahead of the K-x.

The other option they have is to reduce the megapixel count with something really special like a ultra-high ISO sensor using black-silicon or extra-terrestrial meteor rocks

- Itai
Neocamera

[pureluck]

I would prefer to stay at 14.6, but move in the direction of higher usable ISO's. What if you could get 200iso noise levels when shooting at 6400iso??? I'd buy that in a heartbeat. Nikon has got the 100K ISO

[thibs]

There won't be a K20D successor. That was K-7 (which should have been called K30D but has not because of so much different from K10/K20)

100K ISO? Looking at the pics produced as such setting, frankly it smells marketing crap (for 99% use, there's of course exceptions...). Now 12800 usable setting is certainly interesting and well done from Nikon.
Pulling a very high ISO setting is easy. Anyone can do that by pushing it under PS/LR. Having good results is completely different.
Again, well done from Nikon for High Iso quality. The Ultra High 100K Iso setting on the other hand... LOL

[paulelescoces]

One neat idea I have seen in recent P&S Cameras is that if EXR for Fuji. The technology where you can change the sensor capture mode based on specific needs... would be interested to see if this every makes it onto a dSLR

e.g. combine photosites for High Iso / Lower Res
... Split sensor and capture multiple images simultanously (handheld HDR)
... Normal full sensor... resolution priority.

[cateto]

^ Thom Hogan predicted a couple of days ago that Olympus will use an EXR sensor in an updoming camera (I don't remember if he stated a 4/3 dSLR or a m4/3). Whether that's bullshit or founded speculation, we will see in the coming months.