Hmm... I've been telling myself I might finally get into digital when Pentax release some new DSLRs... but I can't really see what this does that the various *ist models don't do already. I can see what it doesn't do though... go below 200 ISO! Again! What do Pentax have against low ISO?
My thoughts exactly... really wish Pentax would really step up to the plate and do some really revolutionary stuff. I'm still waiting for the Pentax of the 50s-70s to return.
If the K100D brings the price of the *ist D down to dirt cheap levels, I might.. just might consider getting a used or new *ist D.
6mp is a bit lacking for a new DSLR of today.
2.8 fps which is about what my ol'ElanII delivers
200iso... whats happened to 100iso and lower
Anti-shake in the body is nice.... especially with those that love those Takumar lenses.
I do like how they've stayed true to the Pentax name and still provide one of the most compact bodies in the market.
Just like Epson, who produced a "return from the past" Leica like rangefinder, I think it would be neat to produce a K1000-D. Complete with the original match needle metering, full manual, and metal construction.. No frills.. no high cost...
It seems to recycle everything from the *ist cameras... I have a suspicion they're actually all the same camera with slightly different letters written on them to convince us that the Pentax design team are doing some work. I hope for the 10mp body, but not as much as I hope for full-frame... though I should really hope for something more realistic than that, like world peace or to discover my toaster lets me travel back in time.
They must be kidding, right? Having introduced a new entry-level SLR that seems virtually identical to the last series of entry-level SLRs (all of which were virtually identical to each other), they're now also introducing a "starter" version of that entry-level SLR which, you'll never guess, looks to be virtually identical.
How can you have a "starter" model of what is already an entry-level SLR? What is it, the toddler's SLR? Does it include a "how to take a picture" mode voiced by Barney the dinosaur?
This is all a big joke, right? I mean, surely it has to be? ... but what's the punchline?
It's all about money. Normal consumers will see these "new" cameras out and buy them up. While at the same time Pentax saves a bundle on developing them. Look at the prices. $600 list for camera and lens. Basically they are doing what they need to put out a lower cost dslr. And one of the ways to do that is to just repackage something that already works.
whatever happened to the medium format digital camera that Pentax announced a few years ago? When I first heard of the news, I thought just maybe the ol'Pentax was still alive an kicking. I'd like to see a digital insert for the 645... The inserts seem physically large enough to fit the electronics and its the same insert for the old and new AF 645.
I wish Pentax was alive and kicking, unfortunately to me it looks more like they're dying. I was very disappointed to see the end of Minolta, but it came as a bit of a surprise to me since the digital Dynax range were very good cameras indeed. The end for Pentax seems more painful because it's so slow.
EU legislation means Pentax's medium format film cameras are now apparently unsafe due to containing lead solder. Therefore Pentax are no longer producing medium format film cameras. This is of course ridiculous; Pentax's own statement on the matter makes it clear that no one is at danger from the lead solder in their camera. Also that legislation wouldn't stop them from designing or manufacturing new cameras using different methods. Call me paranoid, but it looks to me like a case of Pentax jumping on this legislation as an excuse to pull out of medium format without having to openly admit to their MF film users that "We don't care about you".
We will apparently still get the digital medium format apparently... quote - "the commercial role out of new digital SLR and medium format cameras... will continue unabated." Well they certainly seem to be rolling them out commercially. In fact I would say cynically. I appreciate that a company's priority is to make money, but that doesn't mean I have to like it when they do so by screwing over their loyal support base.