[eyeswideshut]

Were they all released in the same day and sold as one camera with upgrades to it? I kind of doubt that...
They are different models, not different trims of the same model. If anything, keeping the same car example... one is a Civic released in 2006... the other one is still a Civic released in 2010... and so on.

Now if they are the same and they have the same options with no actual improvement to them, that is completely different story. That's the camera manufacturer trying to sell you the same old goose but with a different color. In the end is still the same camera with no trim level for it.

Well then explain what you mean by trim with respect to same year camera models.

---------- Post added 20-01-15 at 19:25 ----------

How close does the Nikon DF get?

Some like it, some not so much. IMO it does not go far enough towards 'pure photography', which is what Nikon promised in their ad campaign.

If I read the OP correctly he thinks of a real back to basics model and I am in great sympathy with something like that. You know like a digital K1000 to use that analogy again. For me the crucial differentiator would be the viewfinder - it would need to be significantly better than anything currently available on the market for me to buy such a camera. To get it I would even go without autofocus and be happy with a full frame optimized for mf primes only (It would not be my only camera of course!)

[mrNewt]

Well then explain what you mean by trim with respect to same year camera models.

Sticking with the cars first... Honda Civic model (this will be your camera model) has the following trims for this year:
DX
LX
EX
Touring
Si

Each trim has different package options that the factory is offering and the end use can choose what suits him best.
One is a sport version for more spirited drivers, one is a touring version for people that drive a lot and its more comfortable for that, then you have a luxury version and so on and so forth...

Honda Accord is another different model that Honda offers... and by its own has its own trims as well with hardware and software built specifically for that model.




Applying this to cameras...

The K-3 is a camera model that has the following trims...
K-3

Only one option for that camera... no, video specific package for that model... or photography specific for that model... or mirror-less version of that model... or just a B&W version of that model... and so on and so forth.
Is only one option/trim for that camera. Is either that model... or a different model.

Another camera model will be Pentax K-01 or Pentax K-50... but they are build different even though they have some similarities. K-01 and K-50 is not a trim of the K-3 since its physically a different model camera.



Now, years from now when Honda decides to upgrade their Civic model, they will do so and that model will have his own trims. A different year model doesn't make the car a different trim even though it bares the same name - same with the cameras.

No, I do not work for Honda, it just the first brand it came to mind .

[Clavius]

But I'm pretty darn sure that camera companies are not, as a whole, run by clueless fools who don't understand their market. What you are wishing for is amazingly marginal by all accounts, otherwise it wuold exist.

By that logic anything that doesn't exist yet, shouldn't exist. Heck, it goes for that FF K-mount DSLR flagship we're all rooting for.

[zapp]

What I want in a Pentax (or any other) flagship camera. A fully manual, match-needle DSLR of minimum 30MP, no modes, no flash, no frills - just a shutter, aperture, top-notch sensor, minimalist menu, on/off switch autofocus with only a central focussing dot, absolutely solid, a DSLR version of a Topcon RE Super or an Alpa. Don't care if it's a Cmos or full sensor. Just the most basic, beautiful, and toughest camera ever made. Weather sealing would be the icing on the cake.

Dream on, Gord, dream on.

Does ANYONE else out there even sympathize, or am I alone??

get an iPhone with correct app

[eyeswideshut]

Sticking with the cars first... Honda Civic model (this will be your camera model) has the following trims for this year:
DX
LX
EX
Touring
Si

Each trim has different package options that the factory is offering and the end use can choose what suits him best.
One is a sport version for more spirited drivers, one is a touring version for people that drive a lot and its more comfortable for that, then you have a luxury version and so on and so forth...

Honda Accord is another different model that Honda offers... and by its own has its own trims as well with hardware and software built specifically for that model.




Applying this to cameras...

The K-3 is a camera model that has the following trims...
K-3

Only one option for that camera... no, video specific package for that model... or photography specific for that model... or mirror-less version of that model... or just a B&W version of that model... and so on and so forth.
Is only one option/trim for that camera. Is either that model... or a different model.

Another camera model will be Pentax K-01 or Pentax K-50... but they are build different even though they have some similarities. K-01 and K-50 is not a trim of the K-3 since its physically a different model camera.



Now, years from now when Honda decides to upgrade their Civic model, they will do so and that model will have his own trims. A different year model doesn't make the car a different trim even though it bares the same name - same with the cameras.

No, I do not work for Honda, it just the first brand it came to mind .

OK. Sony A7, A7S, A7R plus the MarkII. Same camera (give or take) different sensors. Alternatively the Panasonics I mentioned. Same innards, different trim. Manufacturers easily adapt their models in an attempt to fill niches. It's easy.

[mrNewt]

OK. Sony A7, A7S, A7R plus the MarkII. Same camera (give or take) different sensors. Alternatively the Panasonics I mentioned. Same innards, different trim. Manufacturers easily adapt their models in an attempt to fill niches. It's easy.

I give up...

[ChristianRock]

Are you alone?

In a way, yes you probaly are. There are a few people here that want that "caveman DSLR" but as the Nikon Df proved, if it's not *exactly* like the caveman wants, he/she won't buy it. In your example, you want a certain combination of caveman controls, someone else's will be slightly different - no AF, for example - and they'll tell you if it has AF they won't buy it. Someone else won't buy it if it's 30Mp or higher, they want 16Mp, or 20Mp, or 24Mp, or even 12Mp. So you are probably alone in the exact specs that you want.

[stevebrot]

No, you are not alone. I had owned my K10D a total of about six months back in 2007 when I posted a similar desire here on this site. Give me the dSLR equivalent of the Epson RD-1.

Epson R-D1 Review

Yes, I am even favorable to manual shutter cock if that will save on weight and battery consumption.


Steve

[stevebrot]

Give me the dSLR equivalent of the Epson RD-1.

Here is an article by a photog who migrated to the RD-1 from a Canon 10D. Note that the reason was the lack of a comparable dSLR.

https://cameraquest.com/Epson-R-D1/_r-d1/


Steve

[kadajawi]

You can't really save money by leaving away the features you don't want... the flash yes, AF too if you leave it away completely, but apart from that to get a camera that works at all you'll have to use a processor which is able to do most of the things anyway, you can only chose to not use them, but there's no advantage in doing so.


Leaving away all these things does limit the audience it is for though, making it more expensive and probably not financially viable.


Though, having a needle for metering like with those old film bodies that were completely manual (FM2 e.g.) instead of the digital readout that is used today would be really cool, should be lit up though.


What I do think should happen is that you can select in the menu what mode the camera should be in. i.e.


For stills:
Regular mode, which is what we have now.
Simplified/K1000 mode: Only the bare minimum of stills features... all but the bare essentials are disabled, basically creating the camera the Gord Lucas wants.
Pro mode: They go crazy with the features... if it is possible and someone thought of it, it will have it. Bracketing for sensor position (minimal shifts for higher resolution, minimal shifts for a Foveon like image, maximal shifts for greater coverage), focus bracketing, everything is adjustable, etc.


Same thing for video, with an added mode where you can completely deactivate video. It's not mentioned in the menu anymore (except for the point where you can switch these modes), buttons and switches that get used for video can be reassigned, mode dial item video becomes another user mode.


I mean, the camera is a computer running an operating system, why shouldn't it be possible to control and change the menus the way WE want it? I want more video functionality, others don't want video at all. IIRC on the Sony A7 you can chose which interface you want. That of the NEX series of cameras, i.e. consumer oriented mirrorless, or that of their alpha series of cameras, which back then were proper DSLRs/DSLTs with a decently advanced interface.

[stevebrot]

Though, having a needle for metering like with those old film bodies that were completely manual (FM2 e.g.) instead of the digital readout that is used today would be really cool, should be lit up though.

Now you've got the spirit.

I am seriously thinking there may be a boutique market for a camera of this sort made in limited edition. Kickstarter here I come


Steve

[kadajawi]

Now you've got the spirit.

I am seriously thinking there may be a boutique market for a camera of this sort made in limited edition. Kickstarter here I come


Steve

The FM2 was my first serious camera. I liked it, a lot, and there's nothing wrong with a bit retro, is there? It's a functional design anyway, and it would free up space on the display down there for those who'd need it.


IMHO such a design could very well be used on the K-3 successor, doesn't have to be some limited edition camera. It grabs some attention/press too.

[bdery]

By that logic anything that doesn't exist yet, shouldn't exist. Heck, it goes for that FF K-mount DSLR flagship we're all rooting for.

I disagree. By that logic, things that don't exist on the market sometimes simply are not interesting for that market.

The trend for more automation in cameras started many decades ago, and the market as a whole enjoys it quite a lot.

And I'm pretty sure the dreaded Pentax FF is not yet available because the market didn't want it oh so much. If it had been such an interesting market, it would have been done years ago. And Nikon wouldn't be loosing so much money right now

[kadajawi]

No, you are not alone. I had owned my K10D a total of about six months back in 2007 when I posted a similar desire here on this site. Give me the dSLR equivalent of the Epson RD-1.

Epson R-D1 Review

Yes, I am even favorable to manual shutter cock if that will save on weight and battery consumption.


Steve

I think the main reason was more like they were using bodies that did have the manual shutter cock, and thought it'd be extremely retro if they made use of that. The R-D1 was a very cool camera, I agree.


As for the car analogies that are mentioned here... the problem is these cars have _different_ hardware, and are designed in a way to be flexible. Swap the suspension? Sure. No air conditioning vs aircon vs climate control? Can be swapped. Different seats, rims, ... all can be done during production.


Where are the hardware changes for different camera versions? What changes are possible? Isn't it mostly a software thing? Developing a new processor that doesn't do anything but M, but that DOES offer metering, makes no sense at all. If you don't want that feature it's better to deactivate it.


The reason why higher end CPUs are often labelled as lower end ones, with deactivated functions is because a) some will be defective, so if out of 4 cores 1 is defective you can still sell it as a 2 core CPU, b) some just can't reach the same speeds and c) because there is demand for lower end more affordable parts. Producing different CPUs may cost more in the end.


All I can see is them offering different sensors, i.e. a black & white sensor, one that has lower or higher resolution, ... but BSI sensors make the resolution less important, you can now get a sensor that can catch most of the light, without having to give up on resolution. Something like a 28 MP BSI APS-C sensor = 20 MP non-BSI APS-C sensor for pixel size, IIRC.


Customization should come through software, and be available to all owners. M only camera? Sure can do. They could even integrate a mode that says regardless of mode dial position it is in M, as a "practicing mode". Or a simulation mode, where you can select which feature set you want. That of the K1000? LX? More modern film cameras perhaps? Though that might be a bit gimmicky.

[Michael Barker]

What I want in a Pentax (or any other) flagship camera. A fully manual, match-needle DSLR of minimum 30MP, no modes, no flash, no frills - just a shutter, aperture, top-notch sensor, minimalist menu, on/off switch autofocus with only a central focussing dot, absolutely solid, a DSLR version of a Topcon RE Super or an Alpa. Don't care if it's a Cmos or full sensor. Just the most basic, beautiful, and toughest camera ever made. Weather sealing would be the icing on the cake.

Dream on, Gord, dream on.

Does ANYONE else out there even sympathize, or am I alone??

Not quite.

I want:

* match-needle APS-C DSLR
* centre-weighted metering and spot metering only
* modern, ergonomic grip
* available battery/portrait grip
* Dual SD slots with % full readout
* control wheels with built-in setting displays for aperture, shutter and ISO, and clicking/detent ability to feel 1/3 stop adjustments
* minimum 14 MP
* minimum 14 Ev Dynamic Range, 3200 ISO low light, 25 bit colour score on DXOMark
* DNG only
* single shot mode only. No bracketing, no continuous shooting
* 1.0x equivalent magnification, 120% coverage viewfinder (using a magnifying prism, and a mirror that reflects more than what the APS-C sensor can see. Some vignetting in the viewfinder outside the 100% range with some APS-C lenses)
* shock, dust, moisture and temperature resistant from -30 to +50 degrees Celsius
* Shake Reduction and sensor cleaning function
* sleep function
* cold boot in less than 50 ms
* power off in less than 50 ms
* less than 50 ms shutter lag
* subdued, modern styling
* comes with case made of natural materials resistant to mould and fungus
* non-slip strap included, works with lenses weighing up to 1 kg, fits in case
* the kit lens is the 31mm f1.8 but without the "Limited" marking, smaller, without autofocus
* standard tripod interface as usual
* made in Canada, in a carbon-neutral facility

To the people who always say "it's just as expensive, you still need a big CPU, etc": here is what would not be required:
* large buffer
* sensor with live view capability or fast readout
* autofocus sensor (since I did not ask for a focus dot)
* sophisticated mirror (since there is no autofocus sensor below, and no fps requirement)
* dim screen (since there is no autofocus)
* plugs or jacks or hotshoes for flash or HDMI or USB
* electronic displays such as top or rear LCD
* JPEG engine, white balance controls, contrast controls, on-board defishing or filleting, etc
* speaker for sound effects
* delete, play, or arrow buttons, since there is no review
* exposure compensation, since there is a needle
* flash
* interoperability with any devices other than lenses and SD cards
* complicated CPU
* software bundle
* user manual
* being the "digital equivalent" of anything in particular

To the people who always say "get a Leica": this has the following advantages over a Leica:
* it is not a piece of jewellery, nor is it a showpiece, nor does it masterfully balance form and function
* the average person can learn to use the viewfinder to compose and focus very easily and accurately
* it does not have a $1000 red dot
* it works with Pentax lenses :-P
* did you read the feature set?