[Jewelltrail]

I sense all this bodes well for the Pentax brand & its followers. This is the kind of camera which can shift momentum in a big way. Let's meet back here in 6 to 9 months?

[TwoLegged]

Right. and the K-7 feature set is about the same? To be fair, add the MEII winder. now at least your gloriously small MEsuper can at least shoot 1/2 the frame rate of the K-7.

So, MEsuper + Winder = 793 grams.
{{snip}}
How about if someone told you twenty years ago you will be able to buy a camera that:

{{Snip features list}}

I never had a winder for my ME super. Never needed one, never wanted one, and have v rarely used the continuous mode on any digital camera. I'm not interested in action photos; I do landscapes, and that stuff is not much use for landscapes. Similarly, autofocus is not important, I prefer to compose a picture, focus it and shoot, and the time needed for a manual focus is trivial. YMMV if you do a difft style of photography.

So for my uses, the winder is a red herring: the actual weight of my ME Super body is 445g, plus film: say about 480 grams. The "lightweight" K7 is 50% heavier, at 750g (inc battery_SD card)

My ME Super is now getting on 30 years old, but it captures images as well as a newer film camera with the same lens, because it can take the latest film.

That doesn't apply to a dSLR, where the "film" is built-in, as a sensor; only the latest cameras gets the latest sensor. The sensor is a crude thing, with tolerance of a fairly limited dynamic range, so lots of tweaking is required is capture the full glory of the image. All the pushing and such tricks which I used to do in the darkroom can now be done on-camera, but I more-or-less have to them on camera because of the sensor's limitations.

Similar with the dust exclusion and removal. All needed on a dSLR, but on a simple old film camera, there was much less need for this stuff, because the camera could be cleaned very easily with simple tools.

Some of the stuff built in to digital cameras is there only to cope with the inadequacy of the sensors, and some of the rest is feature-bloat. The cheaper dSLRs tend to of be flimsy construction, have poorer sensors, and lack the necessary control over the sensor to overcome its limitations. So to get good images out of a solidly made dSLR, you have to go higher upmarket and pay for all the stuff like histogram displays and movie mode and 5-squillion-zone metering which you may not want.

There's clearly a market for all these features, and I hope Pentax does well in satisfying that market, but sadly for those of us keen to keep things simple and light, there's nothing which follows the logic of the old recipe: strong, simple, and light.

Like most electronic gadgets, the current dSLRs will be archaeological relics in five or seven years time, sooner if you are a pro photographer. That wasn't the case with film, as much as I like the convenience of a dSLR, there are many ways in which we have taken a big leap backwards.

Anyway, thanks for discussing this. It reminds me that on those occasions when I don't want to lug the K20d around, I don't have to just stick with the slow and uncontrollable compact: I'll take the ME super in its handy leatherette case (something else dSLRs lost), and get better images than I do with digital.

[KungPOW]

So why use a DSLR at all?

Why not stay 100% film?

[elkarrde]

I'll take the ME super in its handy leatherette case (something else dSLRs lost), and get better images than I do with digital.

handy leatherette case? i've never seen leatherette case that's handy, especially if you carry two or three lenses all the time. but, as you said, YMMV.

on the other hand, i think you're just whining about the progress. sure, all you said is true, film cameras from the past are still working like new (heck, i'm using camera from '31. and it's still working like it did 70 years ago, but with better film!), but you have to pay the price of progress - and digital photography is the future, film isn't coming back.

accept the new stuff and stop whining, it just makes you miserable and unhappy. and please, do continue shooting with your ME Super, film is (still) not dead.

[TwoLegged]

So why use a DSLR at all?

Why not stay 100% film?

Because digital is convenient. Lower quality quality prints, but less hassle producing them, and they are easily transmitted.

It's horses-for-courses, a trade-off between quality and convenience. It just annoys me that part of the convenience of digital is lost by the bloat which afflicts dSLRs.

[TwoLegged]

handy leatherette case? i've never seen leatherette case that's handy, especially if you carry two or three lenses all the time. but, as you said, YMMV.

My Kit with the ME-Super is a 28mm lens and a 50; the case closes over which evr is in use, and the other lends fits in a pocket. The telephoto zoom only gets dragged out for special occasions

accept the new stuff and stop whining, it just makes you miserable and unhappy. and please, do continue shooting with your ME Super, film is (still) not dead.

The new stuff has plenty of good points, and if I didn't think it had its uses I wouldn't use it all.

My concern is that what some people are happy to lug around a lot of weight to get tons of features, some of us would like the option of a dSLR built to a different set of priorities, without finding our choices restricted to flimsy entry-level cameras. Maybe Pentax will use this new frame as the basis of a lighter and less feature-packed dSLR.

[elkarrde]

My Kit with the ME-Super is a 28mm lens and a 50; the case closes over which evr is in use, and the other lends fits in a pocket. The telephoto zoom only gets dragged out for special occasions

i meant "handy" as in easy to open and shoot with that thing dangling from the camera. i've never found that thing as convenient to use.

Maybe Pentax will use this new frame as the basis of a lighter and less feature-packed dSLR.

i agree with lighter camera, but less feature-packed - no way. i use all the feature i can find in K100D super, even all the features in (borrowed) K20D, so it's really big no go for less featurefull camera for me - if i'm lugging digital camera, i want all the bells & whistles, something have to replace features of film cameras i lost.

[KungPOW]

Have a look at the Olympus e-420.

Nice build. lighter then the ME, and all the basic features.

There are options on the market that will suit you.

As for the weight of the K-7, for its class, it is one of the lightest. For its class it is one of the best spec'd. And for its class it will suit the needs are far more people then any other Pentax to date.

You are not going to see DSLR that are feature reduced. It would limit the range of people that would be interested in the camera. Just have a look at the 1/180 vs 1/250 sync speed thread.

[TwoLegged]

Have a look at the Olympus e-420.

Nice build. lighter then the ME, and all the basic features.

I did, before buying my K20D.

But several factors put me off.

The Olympus dSLRs have an even smaller sensor than the AS-C cameras, and one of the main reasons for not sticking with a compact for my digital photography was to get the biggest sensor I could afford, for the low-light benefits. The Olympuses don't rate too well on image quality.

Also, the Olympus dSLRs use CF cards, which are a nuisance -- expensive, and not compatible with any of my other gear.

You are not going to see DSLR that are feature reduced. It would limit the range of people that would be interested in the camera.

I'm not so sure about that. At the moment, the technology is still unstable, so there's a features war underway. But once the technology starts to mature and ti stabilise a bit, we may seem the dSLRs benefitting from some products which follow the same logic that produced the very popular netbooks: powerful enough, but emphasising simplicity and lightness rather than power or features.

[rparmar]

As for the weight of the K-7, for its class, it is one of the lightest. For its class it is one of the best spec'd. And for its class it will suit the needs are far more people then any other Pentax to date.

You are not going to see DSLR that are feature reduced. It would limit the range of people that would be interested in the camera. Just have a look at the 1/180 vs 1/250 sync speed thread.

No doubt the K-7 will attract lots of people to Pentax. That is super-good! But that does not mean that there is no market for a smaller, more convenient camera. And really, how many features must be lost? Most of them are electronic and firmware-driven. The sync speed thread is a total red herring, since that has nothing to do with the camera's size. And since we don't have faster sync it can hardly be removed as part of a future "reduced feature set".

I think the only question is stabilisation. Give me a smaller Pentax K-7 that is still stabilised and I will willingly give up the top panel, several useless buttons and shrink the LCD back down in size.

Evaluating The New Pentax K-7

[Vertex Ninja]

k-m/k2000?

[rparmar]

k-m/k2000?

Yeah, something like that but with photographer's features. I won't get repetitive here but will write up a new blog article soon.

[TwoLegged]

I think the only question is stabilisation. Give me a smaller Pentax K-7 that is still stabilised and I will willingly give up the top panel, several useless buttons and shrink the LCD back down in size.

Evaluating The New Pentax K-7

Great post, Robin.

And I did like your review: a very thoughtful attempt to separate the genuinely good things about the K7 from the hype.

[Douglas_of_Sweden]

wow, I cannot believe my eyes, RiceHigh is defending a Pentax camera

Actually not the first time, he defended the 1/180 sync in another thread by explaining that faster sync would be impossible in this small body, so one cannot eat the cake and have it (or was it the other way around?). If he goes one like this, someone is soon going to call him fanboy

[Vertex Ninja]

@TwoLegged

It kinda seems like you expected something for nothing, realized it wasn't going to live up to your hype, and then started a new flame thread. When people are talking about the K-7 being a return to the days of the LX, I always assumed they were talking about how the LX compared to it's competitors, not how it compares to the digitals of today.

I'd love to have the convenience of a mini van or a truck, get 40+ mpg, and have the performance of my sports car. Along those lines, I think we'd all like Pentax cameras to be built out of titanium and carbon fiber, but very few of us would be willing to pay the cost.

To me the K-7 is the perfect compromise, even more so than my beloved K10.