[jms698]

The K-5 (without battery) weighs 670 g (1.4 lb)
The K-5 (with battery) weighs 750g (1.6 lb).

The K-r without battery weighs: 515g (18.2 oz)
The K-r (with D-LI109 battery) weighs 598g (20.5 oz)
The K-r (with AA batteries) weighs approx 625g (22 oz)

So, disregarding the heavy weight of AA batteries, the K-5 is about 150g heavier than the K-r, both with and without batteries.

My question is "why"?

Is weather sealing and a larger prism that much heavier?

I'd really love to see an SLR that is both fully featured and really light. Wondering if such a thing is possible...

[Wheatfield]

There is more metal in the K5.

[Adam]

The K-r is very light and plasticky, the K-5 has a metal chassis and is weather-sealed. Completely different build quality (and size) if you use them side-by-side.

I would still say that the K-5 is a light camera- for me personally, without the grip it would be too light!

[Ash]

A light yet fully featured dSLR is certainly possible, but why risk making one without the solid build and weather sealing?

Even non-weather sealed prosumer dSLRs from rival companies are bulky and heavy. They can't be as streamline as the totally mechanical film SLRs, even though they too were mostly metal.

[TOUGEFC]

Simply because metal weighs more than plastic.

[Quicksand]

Because the K-5 is full of awesome, and awesome has a high density.

[steve1307]

I dont think either of them floats, so whats the issue.


The K-5 replacement will be lighter as the body will be made from Carbon Fibre woven with strands of Titanium.
A new material called....... CARBO-TANIUM !!!! Phwoarr !!!

Prices will be slightly higher for this option.

Disclaimer: This is all BS that I just made up.

[calsan]

In addition to the magnesium body, the K5 has a glass prism viewfinder, whereas the viewfinder in K-r is just a mirror. So there's a solid glass block in the k5, which the KR doesn't have.

[Mareket]

There is a tiger inside the K-5, a feature that you won't find on lighter cameras like the K-r, which generally contain domestic cats.

And tigers weigh more than domestic cats.

[Rondec]

Basically what others said. K5 is a little bigger, but its magnesium internal shell weighs quite a bit. K5 is smaller than the K10/K20 body type, but it weighs about as much and actually feels more solid.

Truthfully, it is fairly small for the semi-pro/enthusiast level camera level (compare to say, a Nikon D300s or Canon 7D). I doubt you could get much smaller than the K5 body and still keep the same functionality.

[RioRico]

Pentax has only a limited supply of antigravitonium, and they chose to incorporate it into their entry-level supercameras rather than their pro-level superdupercameras, so that entry-level users could have the ultimate camera experience. The K5-market customers already know how to deal with the densitonium used in standard cameras. Still, the K5 will probably float longer than the Kr. Go figure.

[ccd333]

Just to clarify some erroneous information.....the K-r DOES have a stainless steel chassis (for those that don't know the chassis is the internal skeleton.....not the outside). It's a far cry better built than most entry-level DSLR's, and it certainly does not feel "plasticky" in comparison with rivals from Nikon and Canon. The K-5, for the price difference, absolutely should be better built.

[unixrevolution]

The K5's entire body shell is Magnesium, whereas the Kr is a plastic shell around a stainless steel chassis, as ccd333 said.

If you want lightness, get an Olympus Pen or some other mirrorless thing, though by then you don't have the same sensor size.

As long as it doesn't cause you pain to carry, a heavy camera is a good thing...it reduces motion shake.

[Jodokast96]

The K-5 has electrolytes!

[kenafein]

My K-7 with my Tamron 28-75 did weigh heavily around my neck after awhile, but try out a Canon 7D with a 24-70 L lens. I think it weighed a couple pounds more.