Originally posted by ivoire Had a k10, then K20. One of the reasons i went for the K7 was its size. I can see why someone with xtra large hands would want a K30. I would have liked a less expensive K7/K5 without video and would go for a K30 with K5 specs, lower price and no video.
Since I haven't handled the K-5 yet, I can't comment on it. I must say that compared to a Canon 7D, I have a vast preference for the K10D/K20D's ergonomics and button layout.
But as to a DSLR without video - You will never see a DSLR without video again. Why do you hate video so much? Name a situation where the presence of video capability has been detrimental to the camera's still capabilities.
Cost is not a valid argument - Pentax uses Motion JPEG, which is such a simple codec (and more specifically, uses the JPEG codec for stills already present in any digital still camera) that it is, effectively, free with the exception of a tiny bit of user interface work in the firmware. Having a camera with video capabilities is attractive to many users and will increase total sales numbers, meaning that in the end, even if you don't use it, because it was so cheap to add, the camera with video is CHEAPER for you due to the effects of economies of scale.