[Pentaxor]

I'm heading back to Nikon. oh wait, I can't bring those limiteds back there with me. I guess I'm stuck here. lol.

[Pentaxor]

At any rate, K-7 will not be a major threat to D300s sales.

why is that? they almost have the same features as that of the K-7 except for notable features such as SR body, weather-sealing and a -500 price tag value. the 6fps versus 5.2 fps difference doesn't look that much for the ordinary consumer, nor does the ordinary consumer would know about the Nikon's much better AF system nor would they notice it unless they had ample amount of experience with previous dslrs or dslrs of different brand or type. at the end of the day, the ordinary consumer would had their eyes set on the most noticeable or unique features in a camera. and marketing would be an essential part in introducing these features.

Most of the the dSLR users in my own social circle are Canikon loyalists.
I can see that the K-7 is the first Pentax camera in a long time to pique their interest.

One of the key issues which Pentax has to fix quickly is to make the K-7 available in traditional retail camera stores. The K-7 is really impressive when you get to hold it and try shooting with it. It just performs differently from any previous Pentax body.

Trouble is, it takes a lot for someone who has invested in one brand to switch.

[vinzer]

I believe if you read down the Dpreview summary of the D300s, they say the quiet mode is only "relatively" silent, and requires you to have the mirror up, which you can do on the K-7 as well with quiet results.

The D300s still seems like a pretty cool camera, though, if you need the FPS and have good Nikon glass for it. Similar to many Pentax users, if I were a Nikon user with a D300 I'd probably just keep that, but if I had a D90 or lower I know what camera I'd be interested in. Well, actually I'd still be craving the D700, but that's besides the point.

I like that the K-7 has staked out its position where it has, right between the D90 and the D300s cost and performance wise. It seems to be a well researched move by Pentax.

Pentax, Olympus, and Nikon seem to be done until the fall. It will be interesting to see if Canon or Sony have anything up their sleeves.

Not really sure about Canon, but I'm guessing Sony will be rolling out cameras before the year is over and in time for Christmas. The A700 really needs some replacing, not only because of it's age (the A700 is good, but you know how consumer minds think - old is always inferior), but also because of releases like the D300s and the K-7. Olympus might have an E-3 successor, too, if only because the smaller relative E-P1 is spanking the E-3 in image quality.

Canon already has a good stable of cameras, and their 1000D can still hold the line over the D3000, which, if I understand, still doesn't have live view.

If weather resistance, price, or size are critical to you then I would argue the K-7 is a better choice than the D300s.

Frankly, though, I've never understood the D300 when the D700 is just a bit more. Unless you've got a ton of digital-only glass, that is.

I guess Nikon felt the need to address the video mode of the 5D Mark II. Don't quote me on that one, I'm just guessing.

[snogglethorpe]

It will be interesting to see if the K7 is the start of a resurgence, a repeat of the status quo like the K20d, or the last gasp of a past player. We don't have any idea about profitability or if they have a vision. I personally think that niche players can survive (they do in computers, cars, and other areas) *if* they can differentiate. The K7 is a stab at that - small, tough, weatherproof, etc. In some ways it is a far better move than making the "K30d". The K7 is different than the D300 and 50D. It is easy to differentiate between them.

Markets are funny. Everyone took Apple to task for years saying they needed to lower their prices and increase their performance. Instead they had a vision and stuck to it.

You make many good points.

Features and quality are very good to have, but they aren't sufficient. A product from a smaller player like pentax or olympus has to have a vibe, catch people's eyes, or something.

That's what olympus has done with their new little camera (even though it surely is wanting in many practical aspects). People see it, and it seems different and cool, and they want it. I did too, at first glance -- then later realized I didn't really -- but that extra impetus is very important, I think. It's very hard to win by plodding along checking off features on your feature-list.

The K-7 has something similar in my opinion. In many ways, it's an evolution of the k20d, but besides extra (and necessary!) features like faster focusing, it has something their earlier dslrs seemed to lack. It feels elegant.

Notice I only joined this site recently? It's because of the K-7. Though I've owned older pentax gear for a long time, and I like the company, their digital gear has always somehow lacked a spark, and never quite seemed to live up to the standard set by their earlier film cameras. With the K-7 there's a sense that maybe something is changing; it feels a little bit more like a camera the Pentax of old would have made...

[I'm curious what impact the Hoya acquisition had on such things...]

[falconeye]

With the K-7 there's a sense that maybe something is changing; it feels a little bit more like something the Pentax of old would have made...
[I'm curious what impact the Hoya acquisition had on such things...]

Good points.
From what we've heard, the K-7 started out as K30D, in an effort to upgrade the K10D body. But along the road, in particular after seeing that K20D did not really gain momentum and based on feedback they gathered during Photokina last year, they (Hoya?) decided they need change. So, it was decided that the spirit which made successful the limited lenses, or the old LX body, must be grasped for the K-7 body development.

[jogiba]

I would take a D300S over a K-7 any day of the week.

I would also take a D300S over a K-7 then sell it for some new glass for my K-7. I also like that the K-7 is the same size as my *ist DS2.


YouTube - Pentax K-7 using AE-L with Celestron 9.25 (2350mm F10 ) in 1536x1024 *** mode



YouTube - Pentax K-7 test with Celestron C6-R 1200mm F8



YouTube - Pentax K-7 with Celestron 9.25 and F6.3 focal reducer (1480mm F6.3) in 1536x1024 *** HD video mode

---

Last edited by jogiba; 07-31-2009 at 06:02 AM.

[EricT]

I also like that the K-7 is the same size as my *ist DS2.
[...]

Yeah, I can see why you need a small, compact camera...

[deejjjaaaa]

Pentax needs placement in publications/sites like Outdoors, REI, etc. If they are going to play the niche card then they need to target the customers. If you get a community buzzing about it (say hikers, climbers, etc) then they can move product. Hell, if they were smart they'd partner with Subaru and give away a camera with every car.

no, they should partner w/ Chase like Subaru and have PentaxBucks (like SubaruBucks - which is now a 3% cashback on all credit card purchases that you can use to buy/pay for anything in Subaru dealership - cars, parts, service)... the same way PentaxBucks (just make it 5% will ya ?) should be available to buy anything Pentax (cameras, lenses, service, etc).

[GaryM]

I would take a D300S over a K-7 any day of the week.

That's because you're "Big" G. I would rather carry the much lighter and smaller K-7 around with me all day, with a few Limited primes. Choice is good!

[eyou]

you forget a big point. the ordinary customer has never heard of pentax. everyone has heard of nikon. when i was going to buy my dslr, i almost waived off pentax, b/c i had never heard of it. After mentioning it to another camera user, they said oh pentax? they were huge back in the day, so i decided to research a bit more.

why is that? they almost have the same features as that of the K-7 except for notable features such as SR body, weather-sealing and a -500 price tag value. the 6fps versus 5.2 fps difference doesn't look that much for the ordinary consumer, nor does the ordinary consumer would know about the Nikon's much better AF system nor would they notice it unless they had ample amount of experience with previous dslrs or dslrs of different brand or type. at the end of the day, the ordinary consumer would had their eyes set on the most noticeable or unique features in a camera. and marketing would be an essential part in introducing these features.

[MGV]

The Canon 50D MkII is the real target of the D300S. I do not think Nikon worries much about Pentax.


K200D, DA17-70, DS55-300, DFA 50 macro

[pingflood]

The Canon 50D MkII is the real target of the D300S. I do not think Nikon worries much about Pentax.


K200D, DA17-70, DS55-300, DFA 50 macro

There is no such thing.

The 50D (not MkII) is a lot cheaper than the D300s.

The 5D II is a full frame, slower camera target for a different audience.

[lesmore49]

Good points.
From what we've heard, the K-7 started out as K30D, in an effort to upgrade the K10D body. But along the road, in particular after seeing that K20D did not really gain momentum and based on feedback they gathered during Photokina last year, they (Hoya?) decided they need change. So, it was decided that the spirit which made successful the limited lenses, or the old LX body, must be grasped for the K-7 body development.

Falconeye...interesting story , also I'm impressed with the speed of change that apparently Hoya was able to change from a K30D approach...to the K7.

I've only handled a few K7's, not taken any pictures with it yet. I do very much like the smaller size from my K10D and in handling the K7 it did remind me of my old Pentax ES 11, which I feel typifies the lithe and elegant feel and look of the old Spotmatic series.

My K10D while a great camera is a bit on the clunky side, esp. with the battery grip. Although my KM has more elegance.

If the story is accurate it gives me hope for the future of a Hoya managed Pentax.

[jstevewhite]

Markets are funny. Everyone took Apple to task for years saying they needed to lower their prices and increase their performance. Instead they had a vision and stuck to it. They still are more expensive than "equivalent" hardware but one can argue that the design is more elegant and fits certain niches better. Perceived value is a powerful concept. imho Pentax cannot go head to head with Canikon at the entry level - the lack of margins will kill them. Likewise they can't go head to head on "performance." They also can't compete on shelf space (Hoya evidently doesn't want to spend the $$$). So they've put a flag in the sand with the K7 and they'll see how it goes.

First - mostly, you can't compare apples to Apples(tm). There aren't really "equivalent hardware" systems; find another laptop built like a Macbook Pro, for instance. The "Apples cost more" meme is much overblown, IMO.

I think what Pentax is losing is the marketing war, nothing more, nothing less. They certainly have a line that should appeal to enthusiasts and pros of many flavors, but they call their own top-end system "semi-pro". Maybe they don't think they have the marketing capability to overcome the propaganda-drunk scoffers that say "Pro? Without FF? Absurd!" This is a tribute to Canon and Nikon's marketing skill and advertising budget.