[wlachan]

So you are saying the puffed up plastic Rebel was a facade done intentionally.

I am actually quite surprised by some who actually believed Rebels were significantly poorer built than other entry models, including Pentax. The "feel" can be deceiving.

[Blue]

Junyo, I don't know what fan boys you're talking about. It seems like most of the people on several Pentax forums I've visited want Pentax to do one of three things -- if not all three things:

1. Full frame
2. EVIL or some form of mirrorless system
3. Better autofocus

Personally I wish they would come out with a full frame camera, but I clearly don't call the shots. I wouldn't mind a EVIL micro 4/3 camera from them either because I think that is something Pentax could actually do pretty well based on both their past history and current strategy.

You're right about the fact that if Canon and Nikon are finally making small cameras that threatens Pentax's appeal in that area, but that doesn't mean they should stop doing what they are already good at. I don't see anybody telling Panasonic they should stop making micro 4/3 just because the big dogs decided to join the game.

Good post. The size of the bodies isn't a problem for Pentax. The single biggest advance would be the AF and a bigger sensor. However, there isn't anything magical about 24 X 36 in a sensor size.

[Blue]

I am actually quite surprised by some who actually believed Rebels were significantly poorer built than other entry models, including Pentax. The "feel" can be deceiving.

Maybe that's because Pentax hasn't done that many entry level dSLR until the K-m & K-x and I've been comparing them to the *istD line and the K200d.

Edit: Besides, the Rebel bodies in my posted examples were the smaller canon bodies. The interview in Reuters gave the impression that it was the upper-end bodies that Canon wanted to make smaller.

Maeda also said the company was working on a smaller version of its upmarket single-lens reflex (SLR) cameras in a bid to compete with the new breed of mid-range so-called "mirrorless" cameras launched by Sony Corp, Olympus Corp, and Panasonic Corp.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTOE66J04U20100720

[nosnoop]

The size of the bodies isn't a problem for Pentax.

One of the biggest selling point of the mirrorless system, and why they have been selling so well is the smaller-than-DSLR body size!

[Blue]

One of the biggest selling point of the mirrorless system, and why they have been selling so well is the smaller-than-DSLR body size!

I haven't argued that point. Plus, the linked blurb and related articles don't say that Canon is heading that way but is looking to make some of their upscale dSLR bodies smaller. However, small P & S cameras by and large are sold to people who don't know and don't care. They've been conditioned to look at a LCD to compose a shot. You guys that are harping on mirrorless systems are in direct opposition to the group clamoring for a FF because one has a larger sensor and the other smaller. How big do you reckon the R & D department is at Pentax & Hoya?

[junyo]

Can you read the title or did you just cut an past it from that week blurb that you linked? You came in here like a big old troll saying that Pentax needs to follow Canon's lead and make smaller dSLR bodies.

Where did I say that? Show me. Quote me. Or stop making stuff up.

[Blue]

Where did I say that? Show me. Quote me. Or stop making stuff up.

Right here. I see you went back and edited your post.

So it seems that everyone has to acknowledge the existence and impact on the market of m4/3... except Pentax of course.

Or how about the whole quote. This thread started out in a Pentax forum and was moved here.

Canon working on smaller DSLRs to compete with mirrorless/EVILs - 1001 Noisy Cameras

So it seems that everyone has to acknowledge the existence and impact on the market of m4/3... except Pentax of course. So when Canon sets up camp on the outskirts of that whole 'small bodies and primes' niche that Pentax fanboys seem to think is perpetually viable, what then? FF, and try and pull lenses and a pro support network out of their ass? Oh wait, used, legacy glass will make it work. Or try to jump into the EVIL market ("Treason! Heresy!" hiss the fanboys)? Or simply the acceleration of the slide to obscurity?

---

Last edited by Blue; 07-22-2010 at 08:00 AM.

[Urkeldaedalus]

I do agree that whatever Pentax does this fall, it's important that they either change their current strategy or recommit to their old one with new, compelling releases -- a DA* 400 or weather resistant flash would be good examples of this. They gained some momentum with the K-7 and K-x, and they can't afford to take a step back with the way everyone else is progressing.

[Clicker]

"It's not a question of whether or not you have a mirror. There is a consumer need for good-quality cameras to be made smaller," Maeda said. "We will meet this need."

The answer is right there

good-quality cameras to be made smaller,whether or not you have a mirror

and this is what Pentax has always been working on and hopefully we'll see them accomplish it this Fall within their digital line. It's not so much they can't produce one but can they do it and still represent "value" as they alway have, they bumped up their prices recently and i think they realize they can but with some limits...they must not have too many issues (SDM) that cannot be easily remedied. People want value but with little or in a perfect world no issues.