[kkoether]

Frankly speaking I don't want to see them any smaller. My hands are already too big for a lot of them! My K200D is too small for my hands without the grip.

[derelict]

Serious question: who cares? Honestly, who buys a camera based on a negligible weight difference?

[paulh]

Do we want these?

I don't! I prefer the more substantial-feeling bodies over something like the plastic, toylike Rebels.
Just a quick nit to pick, however - the *istD & DS both had large pentaprism viewfinders, some of the biggest I've seen in a Pentax DSLR. But, yes, their simpler design, lacking modern electronics, video, SR and having only a small rear LCD kept the size down.

[Oldbayrunner]

No thanks.. I owned the OLY E-300, 500, 510 & 620 and finally E3. None of which, with the exception of the E3, was built as well as my K50 or K5 lls. The E620 I added a battery grip to give it more weight and to fit my hands.The E3 was heavy enough and built like a Pentax but still I added the battery grip to add more to it and fit my hands. I have added a battery grip to My K5 ll's also, if I could put one K50 I would ... Basically what I have found it is a lot easier for me to hand hold a heavier camera steadier vs a light one.

Mirriorless is what drove me from OLY when they all but abandoned their traditional dslr users, no thanks I'll leave that for others to play with. I'm quite happy with my heavier, bulkier traditional Pentax. Maybe I'll switch to smaller and lighter when I'm too old and feeble to lift these.... Others may like smaller, lighter, using an Lcd exclusively or an electronic viewfinder. Me I like reasonably heavier, better built and looking through an OVF as my personal preference.

[fuent104]

I agree that it would be nice to have lighter dslrs, but I'm not sure how they would make it happen. Graphite bodies? All I know is that shooting my classic film slrs (particularly my ZX-5N) can be nice because of the weight difference. I wonder how much the Fuji XT-1 weighs? That looks the closest to a classic camera, in terms of form factor. I am aware that it is mirrorless.

In regards to reducing the toughness of a camera to make it lighter...I think that is a perfectly fine tradeoff for people who are interested in having a light camera. There is room for both schools of thought in the market, I think. Realistically, we're probably not going to be using our dslrs for 25 years, so it might be okay if they don't hold up like the premium dslrs do.

[VoiceOfReason]

I'm perfectly fine with what I have. When I pick it up and compare it to a Canon/Nikon I prefer the nice solid feel it has while retaining a compact size.

[philbaum]

K3 w/ batteries: 800g

D7100 w/batteries 765g

A77 II w/batteries: 647g

D610 FF w/batteries: 850g

D800 FF w/batteries: 1000g

A6000 aps w/batteries 344g

Nex 6 345g aps w/batteries 345g

All the above are 24mp with the exception of the Nex6 (16mp) and the FF cameras with larger physical sensors.

Camera weight usually has pros and cons to it. One example: After owning a few Pentax dslrs, i was never convinced that the tripod thread on the Nex 5n and 6 were very strong. sure enough, after starting to read the Sony forum on dpreview, i encountered a coupla Nex posts who had the threaded tripod connection in the camera give way. Sure, you can use Nex cameras on tripods, but its best not to put too long of lens on the camera except when that lens has its own tripod connector and secondly, don't put a lot of torque on the tripod connection. I have no doubt that the K01 has a much stronger tripod connection. And the DSLRs from Pentax will take a lot of abuse from me.

Features can add weight: double SD slots, pentaprism, onboard focusing motor, anything that forces more camera perimeter, e.g. a reflex mirror, WR, longer registration distance,etc.

One of the most striking things from the above list is the difference in weight from the K3, D7100 vice the A77 II at 647g. I think the primary difference in the weight saving is the optical viewfinder on the K3 and D7100 vice the EVF on the A77. And then look at the weight on the Nex 6, and that seems to me to be due to the shorter registration distance = less metal/plastic, and the lack of an optical viewfinder. Fixed mirror in the Sony dslr vice a reflex mirror in the other dslr probably doesn't mean much for weight savings, but i may be wrong.

I don't mind the weight in my K3, but it does feel heavier than the K5. I use the Nex cameras for walk-around use and find that weight more appropriate for casual use.

[esrandall]

I'm the new guy to all of this, so I don't have the extensive hands on experience with so many generations of bodies, but I think my K-50 is just perfect for weight, and I actually wish it was a little bit wider. The first DSLR I used was the K10D -- and I loved how substantial it felt. I was actually a little disappointed that the K-50/K-5 felt a little smaller than the K10D, but when I compared them to the Nikon 3200/3300/5200/5300 and the T3i/T5i, those models felt like toys. I know they're quality units (so those that straddle multiple camps, please don't get your panties in a bunch over the choice of words), but they just didn't feel nearly as sturdy to me, so I went with the K-50. I'm a decent sized guy with pretty big hands (can palm a basketball pretty easy) so I'm probably an exception. The only bummer part for me, is that I didn't have the foresight to think about getting a model that had an available grip. My buddy's K-5, while a little smaller, still feels nice and Pentax sturdy, but with the grip -- it feels awesome. Dropped the ball on that one...

[ziscwg]

Fine. Go with HSM only and take the motor out of the body, and cut all support for entry level cameras and legacy lenses like Nikon and canon entry level cameras.

Is that what you want. Also, forget body only weights. I never knew anyone who took photos with the body only. Stick a kit lens on them first. Then do a comparison

Oh don't go all logical and practical on us........................

Cyclists are the same way. They are concerned with what the frame weighs by itself when it's totally useless in that condition.

[MJSfoto1956]

and what compares to the featherweight Pentax DA* 60-250mm f/4? (35mm equivalent of 90-380mm f/4)

• Nikon offers two 70-200mm lenses and an 80-400mm (variable aperture).
• Canon offers four 70-200mm lenses and a 100-400mm (variable aperture).
• Both offer consumer-grade 70-300mm lenses (variable aperture).
• None really compare IMHO to the combination of sharpness and lightweight of the Pentax.

YMMV

Michael

[carrrlangas]

I see very good points. But having the DA limited line up it makes sense to wish for a body ala K-x but with the update AF module, and 16Mp or 24Mp AA filterless sensor. Some grams may not sound like a lot but when in your hand for several hours, you can tell the differce.
For example, standard trekking poles are 60 a pair and weigh 400grs. A "pro" 300 grams pair will cost 300U$D.. I am not saying lighter is more expensive (sometimes it is) but that the little difference for handheld devices matters and you can see that reflected on price

[aleonx3]

Seriously, when I bought the k-7 (a design change after the K10/20D model), I was really pleased and because it really fits into my hand. I had the k10D and Nikon D70 before (that was chunky). When a friend asked me about the best setting for flash photography with his 5D (MKI model?), when I held it in my hand, I get the same impression, "man, this camera needs to be on serious diet as it is so beefy and clunky" - of course, I didn't say it not to make him feel bad.

[MD Optofonik]

What's missing is more plastic.

[monochrome]

I actually prefer my K10D to my K3 for size, weight and fit of my hands and for the greater stability with any lens mounted. Sure, we have come to the point that the K3 is so much more sophisticated that it overcomes its disadvantages, but three hours with the K10 - even with the D-BG2 grip - wasn't a problem before. I guess I didn't know better.

I've never liked Rebels, going all the way back to film Rebels. They feel cheap and fragile. K10 and K3 are solid tools.

[JPT]

Thanks for all the responses. It seems that most people are happy with larger bodies. My point was not really criticism of the existing Pentax bodies, rather regret that they no longer produce a really small one.

The idea that Pentax's smaller lenses compensate for the larger bodies is kind of similar to what I am trying to say. You can get a 90g DA40, which is uniquely small in the DSLR field, but then the smallest body you can pair it with is the 650g K-50/K-500 and you lose most of the weight saving.

A body I really love is the MZ-3, (just like the MX-5 mentioned above) that has all the mechanics and optics required for a Pentax DSLR with space for film and two batteries. Given the miniaturusation of electronics in cameras like the Panasonic GM-1, I'm sure they could fit everything necessary into a body of that size. Perhaps they would need to make it a little thicker behind the mount. When I mount my DA lenses on the MZ-3, it feels just about perfect.