[Azergoth]

K10D with battery: 793 g (1.7 lb)
K-3 (inc. batteries) 800 g (1.76 lb)

7 grams seems like a reasonable weight price for all the improvements over the older camera IMO.

I know, but i'd like something lighter That's why the K50 or K5II or their successors would be better :-)

[IchabodCrane]

Well keeping the PRIME M would be the cheapest. So that means 12-bit RAW. I don't think 24 megapixel would be a problem for the PRIME M, it just takes a little more time to calculate.

All camera's are getting 4k video and I don't think PRIME M can do that. We don't need 4k video, since we still don't have TV's for that. But when all camera's can do, then Ricoh has to think about that. That would mean a new generation processors for all camera's. Not this year I think.

I've seen several 4K televisions in stores.

[RonHendriks1966]

I don't know enough about processors, but all competitors have 14 bits depths. (even the entry level canon I think).

This is one major reason why I don't buy a K50!

I have an old k10d and I would like to upgrade but there is nothing decent yet

No not true, lots off camera's still have 12-bit.

Your K10D also has 12-bit RAW.

---------- Post added 10-06-14 at 22:37 ----------

I've seen several 4K televisions in stores.

Still expensive and not mass products.

We also didn't take on the 3D tv's at home and bought the Panasonic 3D videocam.

[Azergoth]

No not true, lots off camera's still have 12-bit.

Your K10D also has 12-bit RAW.

---------- Post added 10-06-14 at 22:37 ----------

I know, my D10D has 12 bits, but was released in 2006. About 8 years ago... That's huge for electronic devices. How many generation Pentax DSLR have there been between the K10D and the actual lineup?

Others have 12 bits? I don't think so:

Canon EOS M --> 14 bit
Canon EOS 1100D --> 14 bit
Canon EOS 1200D --> 14 bit
Canon EOS 100D --> 14 bit
Canon EOS 700D --> 14 bit

Nikon: D5100 --> 14 bit
Nikon D5200 --> 14 bit

in fact, only the Nikon D3x00 series is still 12 bit, I would not recommend those DLSR

need I say more?

[aurele]

need I say more?

Do you see any difference between the two in everyday life picture that you PP ?

[Azergoth]

Do you see any difference between the two in everyday life picture that you PP ?

In an "out of the cam" picture, no, I dont think you can see the difference. But it allows more post processing. Particularly dark an light recovery will be easier.

It's like audio: you don't need 196kHz 24bit recordings to play on your iPhone, but you do for mixing-mastering-editing...

[monochrome]

Do you see any difference between the two in everyday life picture that you PP ?

In an "out of the cam" picture, no, I dont think you can see the difference. But it allows more post processing. Particularly dark an light recovery will be easier.

It's like audio: you don't need 196kHz 24bit recordings to play on your iPhone, but you do for mixing-mastering-editing...

If youa re seriously comparing editing RAWs to mixing and mastering 192kHz 24bit recordings you should use a K-3. There's no need for a mid-tier camera to offer 14-bit RAWs to iPhoto.

[Azergoth]

If youa re seriously comparing editing RAWs to mixing and mastering 192kHz 24bit recordings you should use a K-3. There's no need for a mid-tier camera to offer 14-bit RAWs to iPhoto.

Sorry, but I really disagree. Look at Canon (all EOS) and Nikon (all from the D5000 series) offer 14 bit raws. There is no need to buy a top shelf camera to have those two extra bits . Almost every "entry level" DSLR has this feature.

The major asset of the K3 (besides it's higher resolution sensor) is "everything around" the sensor, like focusing, high burst ratio, duals memory slot, no AA-filter, ...

[monochrome]

What competitors' cameras 'have' has nothing to do with what mid-range camera users 'need.' You don't need 14-bit RAW to export in-camera jpeg's or open and auto-process a file in iPhoto. Pentax should offer other, more useful features in the mid-range.

Honda Accord V-6 and Nissan Altima V-6 (both mid-range sedans, decidedly NOT BMW's) can go zero-60 in 6.1 seconds. Honda added the 7 HP and cut weight to compete with the Nissan, but why does an Invisible Dad Car need the capability at all?

[Azergoth]

What competitors' cameras 'have' has nothing to do with what mid-range camera users 'need.' You don't need 14-bit RAW to export in-camera jpeg's or open and auto-process a file in iPhoto. Pentax should offer other, more useful features in the mid-range.

Honda Accord V-6 and Nissan Altima V-6 (both mid-range sedans, decidedly NOT BMW's) can go zero-60 in 6.1 seconds. Honda added the 7 HP and cut weight to compete with the Nissan, but why does an Invisible Dad Car need the capability at all?

To export in camera to jpeg and to autoprocess in iPhoto, no, indeed. But to process an image in LR of Photoshop, recover darks and highlights, those two bits might be handy.

My point being: it's not the size (and surrounded features) that should affect final image quality. IMHO, a camera could be split in two parts: a "core imaging part" (sensor and digitizer) and "performance/comfort features" (such as a buffer size, autofocus, image stabilization, burst rate, back/front focus correction, AA simulation, ...)

And it's exactly what Canon does, I think: many cameras are built around the same sensor but implements extra features. So in theory, one could use a very light camera to go hiking, and another a very heavy camera to shoot sports, for example. But both sensors (and digitizers) would produce images of the same quality.

[Nicolas06]

Azergoth, i don't want to be offensive, but I would say you care to much about the numbers/spec and not enough about the real photos. You are not happy because of the file format, or one camera that is good but too old and another one that is too heavy.

Just for the 12bit vs 14bit thing:

The best FF from Canon, with all their shiny 14bit, they are less effective at shadow recovery (dynamic range) than a basic Kr or a K30.
The best APSC from Canon cannot neither achieve the high iso performance of a K30.
The best APSC from Canon is worse than a K10D in term of color deph.

There 2 bit in difference between K3/K5-II vs K500 for example, but when you read the charts: all 3 have same color deph, the K500 is arround the same level for dynamic range as K3 and the isos perf difference is maybe within 0.1EV range difference.

You eyes would not see the difference.

Worse: if you try to recover too much the shadows, even at iso 100 with the best Camera, the colors start to feel dull, the noise become much more visible, and the result is just so-so. The solution to good shadow is proper exposure from the begining, not moving cursors in LR or DxO.

For me you just buy into the marketing garbage here making you think the inferior product is better because it show a better number of some spec sheet.

[Azergoth]

Azergoth, i don't want to be offensive, but I would say you care to much about the numbers/spec and not enough about the real photos. You are not happy because of the file format, or one camera that is good but too old and another one that is too heavy.

Just for the 12bit vs 14bit thing:

The best FF from Canon, with all their shiny 14bit, they are less effective at shadow recovery (dynamic range) than a basic Kr or a K30.
The best APSC from Canon cannot neither achieve the high iso performance of a K30.
The best APSC from Canon is worse than a K10D in term of color deph.

There 2 bit in difference between K3/K5-II vs K500 for example, but when you read the charts: all 3 have same color deph, the K500 is arround the same level for dynamic range as K3 and the isos perf difference is maybe within 0.1EV range difference.

You eyes would not see the difference.

Worse: if you try to recover too much the shadows, even at iso 100 with the best Camera, the colors start to feel dull, the noise become much more visible, and the result is just so-so. The solution to good shadow is proper exposure from the begining, not moving cursors in LR or DxO.

For me you just buy into the marketing garbage here making you think the inferior product is better because it show a better number of some spec sheet.

You are right, maybe I care too much about specs. I have not compared real life situations between the the K30/50 and k5/k5ii.

I'm very surprised about what you say about the canon FF!

But I'm really convinced Pentax are great cameras and don't understand why I see so much CanNikon around

Edit:
If you compare DxO scores (I know, it's not a "real life" image), look at dynamic range and sort the Pentax cameras by resolution (same sensor), we clearly see a difference between the 12 and 14 bits ;-) The K5 family has about 14 Evs and the K30/50/500 have 13 Evs.

And for me, dynamic range is an important point

[Nicolas06]

You are right, maybe I care too much about specs. I have not compared real life situations between the the K30/50 and k5/k5ii.

I'm very surprised about what you say about the canon FF!

But I'm really convinced Pentax are great cameras and don't understand why I see so much CanNikon around

Edit:
If you compare DxO scores (I know, it's not a "real life" image), look at dynamic range and sort the Pentax cameras by resolution (same sensor), we clearly see a difference between the 12 and 14 bits ;-) The K5 family has about 14 Evs and the K30/50/500 have 13 Evs.

And for me, dynamic range is an important point

For the Canon score, just compare the K50 scores with the different Canon APSC devices, you'll see they perform worse than a K500 for all scores and for some sub score, even a FF Canon is worse than a K500 APSC. Adding more bits doesn't help Canon as the sensor is unable to record such dynamic range anyway. But it convinced you that Canon DSLR are better for dynamic range while they are really worse. Look how marketing is powerfull !

For comparison between K50/K3 & K5 we can see 13EV for K50, 13.4 EV for K3 and 14.1EV for K5. The 14.1EV for K5 is just the result of 80iso you can select on the K5. At iso 100, the K5 is down to 13.7isos "only".

But even the K3, latest and greatest is 13.4 only almost the same that K50/K30/K500, the upcoming K70 is likely to use the same 24MP sensor as of K3 and will have no better dynamic range that K3 himself I'am affraid.

But why care of all that? Do you really see the difference of dynamic range in practice between K50 & K5? I do not mean mesurement or theory, but in practice? Are K5 picture looking better, is there really more room for shadows recovery with K5 than K50?

I had the K5 and, yes you can recover 5EV if you want. But theses 5EV look like crap. There lot of noise, shifted hugly color with no deph. You can recover a few EV exposure error, but the result is bad anyway. In pratice, I think that if you don't push more than 1EV it is ok and pushing the shadows is just fine, at lest if you are at a low iso setting. But now I have the K3 I can still do that... i didn't really miss the 0.7EV less of dynamic range by switching to the K3...

More, the dynamic range setting of the K3 is better than the one of the K5 and allow me to take photos with more dynamic range and keep overall good exposure off my photo with far less need to push shadows in post processing...

I don't care at all that DxO say it is only 13.4 EV for K3!

[Biro]

If and when there is a K70 released, here's what I'd like it to be: A K-3 with the 16mp Sony sensor. There. That's it. I know I'm in a tiny minority but I think 16mp is still the sweet spot for APS-C. That will change, of course, as sensor technology improves. But I don't think we're there yet. Meanwhile, as for those who may think the K-5 IIs is too old, I just picked one up on close out and it works just fine - takes great images. Don't let GAS make you crazy.

[Alizarine]

Keep in mind the K-50 is basically the same as the K-30, so it might be time to stop the usage of that 16MP sensor (as great as it is!). I doubt the next camera will have 16MP. Its too bad Canikon restarted the MP race with their low to mid tier bodies. I expect it will have the same sensor as K-3, but slower stats, smaller body and lower price.
I would really like there to be a tilt screen. I doubt Pentax will introduce any game chancing new features on a low to mid tier body, though.

when the K-x came out it somehow beat the flagship K-7's sensor in IQ... The K-01 and K-30 also beat the K-5 in video, so we might be surprised. Hopefully the K-50 successor will have at least the SAFOX X for AF and an articulating screen (it's a general-population cam after all) would be welcome additions!