Quote: The quotes that matter are those that call it "broken":
Pentax K-x Digital Camera - Hands-On Preview - The Imaging Resource!
Everything else you quote is Pentax ad copy, not independent preview.
Bad word, cheap. Even today.
There you go again placing the ultimate value on the website reviews given to a camera. I conceded that the reviews will probably note the omission of red points.
The K200D as you said pleased a lot of reviewers, yet it didn't sell very well. The K20D got good reviews but it was also a disappointing seller. Good reviews don't necessarily correlate to the success of a product, though I will concede that they certainly help.
And cheap may be a bad word. Is affordable one, too? I don't think so.
Quote: If there is no K200D replacement, no, it will be given exactly the same market placement it has already received. Something in the middle.
It is common for reviewers and market analysts to reposition products where the market average demonstrates they should be, industry wording notwithstanding.
Reviewers and market analysts won't be the people buying this camera.
Also, reviewers commonly make mistakes of comparing one camera to another when they shouldn't. It's happened with reviews of every Pentax camera that I can remember. Usually because Pentax can't afford to have as many models out as their competitors so they find themselves in between model categories defined by the larger companies.
Quote: OK. So basically you mean that Pentax should just do what Canikon does, except a little cheaper?
In this case, yes. In all cases, not necessarily.
My argument is not so much what Pentax should do, it's what I believe they are doing with the K-x, which is to try to capture the lowest price point for HD video. If this was their goal, which I believe it was, it makes sense for them to omit the features that would have made it a true K200D replacement, including red focus points.
Quote: That goes to the heart of the debate, doesn't it? What does Pentax stand for? Why not buy more brand insurance with the big guys?
Why indeed? Maybe, in this case, because it would save you a few hundred dollars?
Some of the things I think Pentax stands for and has stood for for a long time: Small, quirky, good image quality, good value for the money although not necessarily inexpensive.
I don't think the K-x violates any of these precepts.
Quote: Pentax must make a more expensive model with modestly improved featureas (WR, better AF, HDMI out) or drop the K-7 substantially, to get the mid-range consumer. A $600 gap is market foolish.
I would also personally like to see something in between the K-x and the K-7, but what defines these gaps? Why does Pentax have to have a model at every price range? How about Pentax acts like Sony and offer what seems like 9 different camera bodies now.
While we're at it, Pentax lacks a body at the plus $1,300 range, at the plus $1,700 range, another at the plus $2,000 range, at the mid $2,000 range, at the nearly $3,000 range, at the $5,000 plus professional range. Why can they have no models at all these competitive levels yet a gap between $650 and $1250 is foolish?
In other words, it would be nice if Pentax could afford to have a camera at every price range, but they tend to have to pick their fights.
What hurt the K200D, in fact, is it got lodged between the K-m and the K20D. Also it inherited its sensor from the K10D, which many people already (and still are) happy with. It's not enough just to have a camera at a price range, it has to offer something different.
Quote: No, this strategy will work, but only at the low end, not mid-range where there is a huge vacuum and a $600 price gap between models. There are enough initial poor comments and things missing to keep it out of the mid-range.
Very few companies in tech are profitable only at the low-end. They all need a strong middle. Where is the mid-range body? Where it the one that punches up to the D90 and down to the D5000?
Well technically, the K-x punches up at the D5000 and the D90 on specs while the K-7 punches down at both. The K-x also strikes down against the Nikon D3000 and the Canon XSI and XT. Again, would it be nice for there to be something in between the D5000 and the D90? Yes. And that still could happen.
That's not really a mark against the K-x, though
Quote: Right, You just made my point. She bought a big name brand because it offered comfort she could not get from Pentax without pricing AND specing in a way that blew the D40 out of the water.
Now wait a second here, I must protest. You can argue my anecdote was not valid, but you can't conjure motivations from my key witness without cross examination
Brand may have factored in, but from what she reported to me, price was the key.
Quote: I went the other way. Dumped my D40 and bought a K200D. Why? Look at the feature set for the price. BAck then, at that price point, Pentax had more features than the other guys. Now, big, big, big hole.
It didn't really help the K200D become a best seller, did it? In fact, through the lifespan of both cameras, the D40 was in its prime and was one of, if not the, best selling DSLR cameras, even though a camera like even the K100D Super would have offered better features for the money.
Again, this is because the D40 offered, and still does offer, a great value to beginners for the price.
Quote: Actually market data shows now that almost 80% of people read online reviews. They are very powerful gatekeepers.
They can be influential, especially with Pentax not having a lot of shelf space. I will contend that more people that will be interested in the K-x (beginners, people wanting to upgrade from point and shoots) will read reviews on non-photography sites, which I will further contend will not be so hard on the lack of focus confirm points.
You know, a place like CNet, where they'll line up the specs of the entry level cameras in nice looking charts, and some guy browsing along will ponder to himself "Why am I going to pay $150 more for the D5000 when the K-x has better specs?"
Quote: It will wreck the non-video E-620, but Oly is rumoured to have an upgrade soon.
Well when they do, that will be a different comparison. My point was that even a critical darling that is arguably the best in its (entry level) class will be beaten by a camera like the K-x, even though the K-x is missing the red focus confirm dots.
Quote: But……for the non-vieo person, we're back to the "what is entry level?" price point issue, and that price point is now clearly well below what Pentax defines as DSLR entry level.
If the market does not take to video (small chance IMO) then Pentax is over-priced and niche. you have no choice because they've shut down production on the non-video models. I agree with that risk BTW.
First off, much to the dismay of purists, the market is taking to video, and I don't see that changing any time soon. How many cameras have been introduced this year that haven't had it?
Secondly, the fact that there is a price point below the K-x without video just shows even more that it is almost impossible for Pentax to have a camera in every price range just because that price range happens to exist.
Quote: We will. Pentax will tread water with this model partly because it has a few publicized flaws, the T1i and D5000 can and will price match (or close enough with their brand comfort level), and a lot of mid-range consumers will choose other brands. The thunder from M4/3 also has to be evaluated.
If what you say in this final paragraph is true, I don't see how a K200D replacement is going to help things at all.