File :-(, x, )
Pentax K-m Anonymous
the K-m looks to be a lower-cost take on the K10D, with the same 10.2 megapixel Sony sensor and in-body stabilization but a lighter and smaller plastic case and slightly larger 2.7-inch LCD display. Sadly, there's no live view, but if the rumored pricing -- €500 ($725) for the single (18-55m) lens and €600 ($875) for the 2-lens kit (18-55mm and 50-200mm)
>> Anonymous
oh no they didn't

silver trim

on my dslr?
>> Anonymous
potentially good news for pentax. seems like they're going to try to grow in the enormous entry level segment. Which is where the bulk of DSLR sales are, pretty much.

If it succeeds it'll give Pentax a much needed boost in both R&D dollars and userbase. if it doesnt', well, they didn't dump too much money into conceiving this model.

Maybe, if it sells well, we might finally get the much wanted higher end than k20d camera (Kxd). Hell, might even be full frame, though only the Limited lenses in the current lineup would work with it.

if the prices quoted are right, though, i think they'll be somewhat lower in the US, maybe 750 to 800 for the two lens kit, which would be a very attractive price, IMO.
>> Anonymous
Sounds good.
I'd trust this over any of the Sony Alpha cameras.

Sorry Butterfly.
No offense to Sony, I just trust Pentax more, and there's a lot of cheap old Pentax glass out there.
>> Anonymous
Pentax doesn't even sell the K10D anymore

>> lower-cost take on the K10D

that would be the uhhhhhh K200D?

this model makes absolutely no sense

10.2 MP, the K200D has it
2.7 LCD, the K200D has it
no live view, same thing on K200D

and looking at the prices, unless this thing sells for $500, it's the same price as the K200D
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
That's a good way to get your faithful users to stop complaining about not having any high-end cameras. Just cram more models below the K20D so it seems more impressive. Really, who needs a full frame body?
>> Anonymous
>>258808

Pentax: Hey..... guys.... what's.... going.... on.... in..... this.... industry......... oh...... do.... you.... think.... we.... should..... make.... a.... full............ frame........... camera...................... at........................... some..................................... point..................... ?
>> Anonymous
>>258812
>>258808

*sigh*

i thought we'd been over the whole FF/no FF thing.

FF is a scam. APS-C can produce images that are just as good. Also, Pentax doesn't produce any 'LOL FULL FRAME' lenses aside from their Limited series, and those can almost be counted on one hand.

Please, get real. Pentax's market isn't full frame, and it doesn't need to be for them to be successful. Granted, they are sure hurting for a success sooner than later. Hoya is sure not going to give them infinite leeway.

Maybe in a few years, depending on how things go, pentax might make a full frame body, but it'd be more for 'LOL LOOK WE DID IT' reasons rather than the fact that anyone really needs it.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>258793
I'd agree if sony had just started making SLRs for fun, but they didnt. Minolta knew how to make awesome glass / cameras but had a pathetic marketing team.

Now can everyone please please ignore this so i dont sideline a pentax thread (as rare as they are)
>> sunshine !!WK+Lu8k4giy
>>258812
I lol'd whether it's factually accurate or not.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>258831
>APS-C can produce images that are just as good
Proof by repeated assertion in the face of evidence to the contrary?
>> Anonymous
>>258836Minolta knew how to make awesome glass / cameras but had a pathetic marketing team.

lol, according to Butterfly, good marketing can win everything

except these thousand dollar toys are bought by people who actually know what they are buying so that 14 megapixel badget in front of the body doesn't really mean anything
>> Anonymous
>>258808
>Really, who needs a full frame body?

Ok, faggot, tell me. Who does need a full frame body?

Please explain to me – with all the great wisdom that befits a fat, sweaty, bearded man such as yourself – which of the hobbyist/amateur photographers that the Pentax brand specifically targets that needs a fucking full-frame camera?
>> Anonymous
>>258831FF is a scam. APS-C can produce images that are just as good.

okay, let's just assume for the moment image quality is the same

where is my XBOX HUEG viewfinder?

where are my true wides?

where can i use my 50mm as a 50mm?
>> Anonymous
>>258849which of the hobbyist/amateur photographers that the Pentax brand specifically targets that needs a fucking full-frame camera?

LOL

so are you saying Pentax should only be bought for amateurs?

oh wow
>> Anonymous
>>258851
>LOL
>so are you saying Pentax should only be bought for amateurs?
>oh wow

1) 95% of the people who buy DSLRs are amateurs & hobbyists.

2) The vast, vast fucking majority of people who buy DSLRs do not buy full-frame cameras.

3) How, exactly, is it bad for a company to tailor their product to meet the needs of THE MAJORITY OF CONSUMERS?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>258849
>which of the hobbyist/amateur photographers that the Pentax brand specifically targets that needs a fucking full-frame camera?
The set of hobbyist/amateur photographers who would like to move up to the pro level without having to give up their investment in glass and move to Nikon, Canon, or--God help us all--Sony.

Without a pro-quality body, Pentax will always be a third-tier camera maker.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>258860
>2) The vast, vast fucking majority of people who buy DSLRs do not buy full-frame cameras.
a. That's changing, given the 5D, 5DII, and D700. The price of full frame is getting lower and lower and Pentax is well behind the curve here.
b. The vast, vast fucking majority of people who buy DSLRs *want* to buy full-frame cameras. People will buy other entry-level cameras because they want to upgrade to full frame at some point. Fully 50% of the Pentax users I know are planning to ditch Pentax and get Nikon D700s.

(Granted, I only know two Pentax users. But I'm about to know just one because Pentax doesn't have a full-frame option, is my point)
>> Anonymous
>>258863
>The set of hobbyist/amateur photographers who would like to move up to the pro level without having to give up their investment in glass and move to Nikon, Canon, or--God help us all--Sony.

And what percentage of the consumers do you think that is? 1%? 2% 3%? Certainly not more than 5%.

And most of that piddling little dickwart of a set of consumers go out of their way to buy Canon or Nikon because they're massive fucking tools.

The. Majority. Of. People. Who. Buy. DSLRs. Only. Ever. Use. The. Kit. Lens.

Pentax is tailoring their bodies for what people actually buy. If you're going to fault them because they don't have ZOMG PRO-KWALITY BAWDIEZ that's fine, but you need to understand that THE VAST MAJORITY OF CONSUMERS don't even know what full-frame MEANS, let alone have any fucking interest in buying that shit.
>> Anonymous
>>258869
>The vast, vast fucking majority of people who buy DSLRs *want* to buy full-frame cameras. People will buy other entry-level cameras because they want to upgrade to full frame at some point.

Wrong.
Period.

GB2 Market Studies.
You have no fucking idea what you're talking about and it's painful to watch you hit the pavement like this.
>> Anonymous
>>258869

hahah way to murder your own argument faggot.

try to take a basic debate class or at least learn some argumentation skills. Making broad claims is never a good idea, but then later admitting that you actually don't have any firsthand experience with what you're making claims about (HURF DURF I KNOW TWO PENTAX USERS, THUS I KNOW ALL OF THEM) really just proves to me you're a gigantic faggot, please get your face raped.
>> Anonymous
the "pro" segment drives photo advancement the same way gamers do for computer technology

>> And what percentage of the computer market do you think gamers are? 1%? 2% 3%? Certainly not more than 5%.

>> The. Majority. Of. People. Who. Buy. PCs. Never. Upgrade. The. Video. Card.

>> but you need to understand that THE VAST MAJORITY OF CONSUMERS don't even know what megahertz MEANS

fixed

without the "pro" segment, we wouldn't have autofocus, we wouldn't have fast lenses, we wouldn't have higher resolution and better quality sensors

nikon, canon and sony released their latest cameras for the "pro" segment so that every thing they innovated on can later be filtered down to consumers

it seems like you can't seem to accept that consumers actually do want things to be faster, better and cheaper, it doesn't matter what it is.

except of course Pentax because they have no upgrade path LOL
>> Anonymous
nice
>> Anonymous
>>258881

HOW DOES I FORGET MY ac TRIPCODE?
>> Anonymous
>>258881
>without the "pro" segment, we wouldn't have autofocus, we wouldn't have fast lenses, we wouldn't have higher resolution and better quality sensors
>except of course Pentax because they have no upgrade path LOL

...huh... how weird that Pentax cameras have AF, fast lenses, high resolution, in-body stabilization, and all the other features of most Canon/Nikon/Sony cameras...

Because, as you clearly said, without a PROFAG FULLFRAME body, it is impossible for any company to advance...

What a stumper!
>> Anonymous
>>258883

please do not confuse me with him, although i do spend as much time on here, if not more

i type in this distinct way, that someone else already called me out on recently

i break off sentences like this and don't bother with punctuation unless i really want to prove my point
>> Anonymous
>>258885
>i am ac. trying very hard to type in a different way. so that it does not look like it is me.

>you can tell because. the way i type is so obviously forced.
>> Anonymous
>>258881
>except of course Pentax because they have no upgrade path LOL

hah, so funny when it's a completely irrelevant argument. Only a small percentage of users ever actually upgrade their cameras while still having a working camera that's older. please. I'd be willing to put money on the fact that joe six pack with his pentax k10d couldn't be happier and isnt sitting around in front of a computer waggling his dick all over the place about how pentax isn't delivering with a k1d because he wants to upgrade his perfectly working camera that takes pictures that he finds completely great.

yes. that makes perfect sense. Get real. the only reason a majority of DSLR owners will ever upgrade is because their current one broke and they have to get a new one.
>> Anonymous
>>258884...huh... how weird that Pentax cameras have AF, fast lenses, high resolution, in-body stabilization, and all the other features of most Canon/Nikon/Sony cameras...

where is your high speed camera body for sports?

where is your high resolution studio camera?

where is your low cost full frame option?

where _is_ your full frame option?

where is your video mode?

where is your actually usable live view mode?

>> Because, as you clearly said, without a PROFAG FULLFRAME body, it is impossible for any company to advance...

why do you put words in my mouth?

i said the "pro" segment actually forces these advancements, i didn't say shit about full frame, not in that post anyway

calm the fuck down for one post and actually see what everyone else sees
>> Anonymous
>>258890
>the only reason a majority of DSLR owners will ever upgrade is because their current one broke and they have to get a new one.

Yup.
The problem with fags like AC is that they spend so long jacking off to pictures of cameras and charts of features that they forget what the actual market looks like.

LOTS OF PEOPLE BUY THE FUCKING NIKON D40.
AND THINK IT'S AN AWESOME CAMERA.

I'm not saying that's how it ought to be, but it's how it is.
Of my friends with DSLRs, I'm the ONLY ONE who has more than one lens, and all but one of the rest of them are still using their kit lens.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>258870
>>258873
Yeah, concentrating on just the low end is working out really well for Pentax. I guess they make the best low-end/midrange bodies that nobody ever buys.
http://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2008/07/pentax-still-comes-last-in-2007-dslr.html

When people ask their gearfag friend (who I assure you either has a full frame camera or wants to one day upgrade to them) which SLR they should buy, that gearfag friend is going to recommend the brand he uses. Because Pentax doesn't offer a high-end body for him to lust after, Pentax doesn't get recommended.
>> Anonymous
>>258892
>where is your high speed camera body for sports?
Consumers don't need/want/understand this.

>where is your high resolution studio camera?
Consumers don't need/want/understand this.

>where is your low cost full frame option?
Consumers don't need/want/understand this.

>where _is_ your full frame option?
Consumers don't need/want/understand this.

>where is your video mode?
LOL WHAT? GB2P&S

>where is your actually usable live view mode?
LOL! Remember how you Canikon faggots were shitting all over Sony for featuring live view, and saying it was faggy shit for soccer moms who were used to P&S cameras?
Hilarious to see you jerking off about it now.

Everything I said before still holds true.
You're just repeating the shit you've already said, which I've already explained is fucking irrelevant.

Good job, AC.
>> Anonymous
>>258895

LOL @ making this a popularity contest.
I guess silver-bodied Rebels must be the best cameras in the world then.
>> Anonymous
>>258850
>where is my XBOX HUEG viewfinder?

Don't know about you, but as long as I've got a large enough finder to focus, I'm fine. As long as that's met, which any above-entry-level DSLR I've shot with has, any size is fine.

Oh, and the Kx0D series has the largest viewfinders of any non-full frame DSLR. Don't compare it to your D40.

>where are my true wides?

Hopefully up your ass, where they belong. Many great photographers shot when 28s were exotic, the widest lens in existence. Munkacsi, Capa, Cartier-Bresson, all their contemporaries. You don't need ultrawides to make good pictures, in fact most people- and I include myself in this- aren't good enough at composition where they should work wider than, say, ~24mm at the very widest. We're not Jim Nachtwey, we can't handle a 16-35 on full frame.

Seriously, get yourself a lens that's either a moderate wide (like a 35 on "full frame") or a normal and learn to shoot without relying on cool gimmicks like "true wides." 24, 28, 35 on 1.x crop. There.

>where can i use my 50mm as a 50mm?

Who cares? Get a 28 (actually a better normal IMO, at least for me) or a 35. Your fifty is now a very nice short tele, I've found 75mm equivalent perfect for shooting concerts. You might as well be whining, "why can't I use my 80mm as an 80mm," or "why can't I use my 210 as a 210." They're different formats.
>> Anonymous
oh come on, man

please be a troll

>>258890hah, so funny when it's a completely irrelevant argument.

it's about to get funnier

>> Only a small percentage of users ever actually upgrade their cameras while still having a working camera that's older. please. I'd be willing to put money on the fact that joe six pack with his pentax k10d couldn't be happier and isnt sitting around in front of a computer waggling his dick all over the place about how pentax isn't delivering with a k1d because he wants to upgrade his perfectly working camera that takes pictures that he finds completely great.

by your logic, every company selling any product should only make a single model because the vast majority of consumers only need one model that works perfectly fine for them

no, it doesn't work that way
>> Anonymous
>>258903
>>258901
>>258900
>>258890
>>258884
>>258883
>>258876
>>258873
>>258870
>>258860
>>258849
>>258831

samefag who is butthurt Pentax sucks and keep saying it's for amateurs

rofl
>> Anonymous
>>258905
>by your logic, every company selling any product should only make a single model because the vast majority of consumers only need one model that works perfectly fine for them

UGH. Don't any of you stupid shits know anything about marketing?

The whole point of new models is to come out with shit that will appeal to the people who didn't buy the last one, NOT to try to get the people who bought the last one to get a new one.

FORD puts out their slightly-improved 2009 trucks to try to appeal to people who DIDN'T BUY their 2008 trucks, not to try to sell upgrades to the people who already own their trucks.

Are you fuckers actually this dense, or are you just trolling?
>> Anonymous
>>258900Consumers don't need/want/understand this.

okay.... so again, are you willingly admitting Pentax is a brand for amateurs only and that no one who would want a serious camera consider Pentax

>> LOL! Remember how you Canikon faggots were shitting all over Sony for featuring live view, and saying it was faggy shit for soccer moms who were used to P&S cameras?

it was Olympus who pioneered live view first, actually

>> You're just repeating the shit you've already said, which I've already explained is fucking irrelevant.

oh come on, troll harder next time
>> Anonymous
>>258906

Hi again, AC-posting-as-anon.

And no, we aren't samefag.

Sage for you having to resort to that attack instead of a real argument.
>> Anonymous
>>258863
>Without a pro-quality body

Except for not having a 100% finder (which is serious), the Kx0D is a pro-quality body, weathersealed, etc.

>>258869
>The vast, vast fucking majority of people who buy DSLRs *want* to buy full-frame cameras

Because it's been over-fucking-hyped by companies looking to cash in on how people can always be persuaded to want what a little number says is THE BEST. Same thing behind how people used to (and still do, to a lesser extent) lust after superteles or superfast lenses they have no use for. It's stupid. Find a body that you like, they're all good enough on the technical end and have been for years, get a few good lenses you like using and get good results with, and just take pictures. You know, pictures? Those wonderful side effects Niépce found when he invented the camera as a device to create envy, lust, conspicuous consumption, feelings of inadequacy, and arguments on 4chan?

Also, you're underestimating the number of people who buy DSLRs just to shoot their kids playing soccer with a Rebel and 55-200. Where the smaller sensor actually helps.

Also, FWIW, I (I'm also>>258903) don't shoot Pentax. I don't like the feel of any of their K-D bodies, although the *istD I played with in a store with once felt nice.
>> Anonymous
>>258908
>a serious camera

Define "a serious camera."
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>258907
Yeah, either you're a troll or a butthurt pentaxfag. I'm assuming the former. The
>Don't any of you stupid shits know anything about marketing?
is what really clinched it for me.
>> Anonymous
>>258910
>Find a body that you like, they're all good enough on the technical end and have been for years, get a few good lenses you like using and get good results with, and just take pictures. You know, pictures? Those wonderful side effects Niépce found when he invented the camera as a device to create envy, lust, conspicuous consumption, feelings of inadequacy, and arguments on 4chan?

Nobody on /p/ actually takes pictures.
This board is for talking about whose mom bought them the best camera and posting pictures of gear.
>> Anonymous
>>258912
>Yeah, either you're a troll or a butthurt pentaxfag. I'm assuming the former.

1.) There are at least 3 people making anti-FF posts right now.

2.) Actually, I just really, really hate you and think you're an idiot.

3.) I was actually very serious about that question. We had to take Mass Media Methods classes at my university, and I assumed everyone else did too, but it's clear from reading a lot of the posts in this thread that most of you have gotten wrapped up in a very small subset of DSLR buyers and don't have any concept of what the larger market looks like.

4.) You should really go back to promoting the use of AUTO mode and posting incredibly horrible pictures. It seems to be what you're best at.
>> Anonymous
>>258903Don't know about you, but as long as I've got a large enough finder to focus, I'm fine. As long as that's met, which any above-entry-level DSLR I've shot with has, any size is fine.

okay, that doesn't change the fact you can't get a considerably larger and brighter viewfinder

>> Hopefully up your ass, where they belong. Many great photographers shot when 28s were exotic, the widest lens in existence. Munkacsi, Capa, Cartier-Bresson, all their contemporaries. You don't need ultrawides to make good pictures, in fact most people- and I include myself in this- aren't good enough at composition where they should work wider than, say, ~24mm at the very widest. We're not Jim Nachtwey, we can't handle a 16-35 on full frame.

umm, maybe you've been hanging around too long in the Pentax world

some of us have actual investments in 35mm film lenses, my 24-70 is no longer a 24-70 on a crop camera

therefore, where are my true wides?

i like how you went on a long tirade about some BS though, misdirection always works on simple minds

>> Who cares? Get a 28 (actually a better normal IMO, at least for me) or a 35. Your fifty is now a very nice short tele, I've found 75mm equivalent perfect for shooting concerts. You might as well be whining, "why can't I use my 80mm as an 80mm," or "why can't I use my 210 as a 210." They're different formats.

stop thinking like a digitalfag, come on, man

you've been using your trusty 50mm for years with film, and now you have to find a 35mm to fill in the gap?
>> Anonymous
I'm just going to leave these right here...

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2008/09/doesnt-suck.html
>> Anonymous
>>258918
>some of us have actual investments in 35mm film lenses
>you've been using your trusty 50mm for years with film

You are less than 1% of the DSLR market.
You grow increasingly irrelevant every year.
Your segment of the market shrinks exponentially every year.

Why, exactly, should anyone give a fuck about you?


PS: When are you going to explain what "a serious camera" is?
>> Anonymous
>>258918
>where are my true wides?
hi, i'd like you to meet the FA limited series.
pentax doesn't make true digital wides in huge numbers because most people that buy their cameras are happy with the kit zoom lens. really, why waste money on that when you're already operating on huge losses and struggling to stay in the game?

FA Limiteds are sex in lens form, btw.
>> Anonymous
>> You grow increasingly irrelevant every year.
>> Your segment of the market shrinks exponentially every year.

uhhhh do you realize that aside from the 10 or so lenses Nikon and Canon make for digital only, the rest of their entire line up are lenses made in the film era that have been updated to conform to modern standards?

LOL how is that segment shrinking, rofl
>> Anonymous
As long as you have the BEST GEAR and you shoot in AUTO MODE your photos are gonna be FUCK WIN.

FUCK YEAH!!!!!!
>> Anonymous
>>258918
> my 24-70 is no longer a 24-70 on a crop camera

It is still a 24-70.

It produces the same field of view as a 36-105 on 135 film when put on a DX sensor, which is for most people actually more useful.

>therefore, where are my true wides?

Right there. 24mm is wide on 1.x crop. 36mm equivalent is wide. There's, say, a 16-50 if you want wider.

>you've been using your trusty 50mm for years with film, and now you have to find a 35mm to fill in the gap?

Unless you're destitute, a couple hundred for a decent 35 should be fine. If you are... well, I'm honestly sorry, but camera equipment is and always has been pretty costly.

I understand your "trusty" argument, really, if you're not attached to your gear you either have the wrong gear or you're shooting wrong. But in that case- shouldn't you stick with your trusty film camera, too? That's always an option.
>> 0/10 Anonymous
>>258922

facepalm.jpeg

fewer people shoot film every year.
because of this the number of people who have lenses from when they shot film that they want to use on a digital camera gets smaller every year.

come on man it is pretty simple to figure out.
>> Anonymous
>>258920
>PS: When are you going to explain what "a serious camera" is?

Stop playing dumb for the sake of making a dumb argument in a dumb argument on 4chan. We all know what a serious camera is.

>>258924here, that's right, I'm arguing against the same guy and I don't want you shitting up my "side" with asking him for the meaning of a phrase we all understand.
>> Anonymous
>>258924It produces the same field of view as a 36-105 on 135 film when put on a DX sensor, which is for most people actually more useful.
>> Right there. 24mm is wide on 1.x crop. 36mm equivalent is wide. There's, say, a 16-50 if you want wider.

oh wow, so your answer is to actually go out and buy another lens to replace the one i currently have?

that's great stuff man

>> Unless you're destitute, a couple hundred for a decent 35 should be fine. If you are... well, I'm honestly sorry, but camera equipment is and always has been pretty costly.

so your answer again is to go out and buy something else to replace it

gotcha, great protips
>> Anonymous
this has to be the most replied to pentax related thread i've seen on this board ever.

Maybe this is stealth marketing at its best?

oh wait, not on /p/, where even mentioning pentax is like praising niggers at a klan rally
>> Anonymous
>>258929
You quite obviously went out and bought another camera to replace the one you already had.

Unless you were using a 24-70 and 50mm as garden decor all these years.
>> Anonymous
ITT: AC releases his pent-up rage from never getting laid by trolling /p/.

This thread would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad.

Also, LOL @ all these folks who shoot on crop bodies arguing about how full frame cameras are crucially important and the only things worth using.
>> Anonymous
anon 1
ac 0
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>258942
Agreed.

I really need to learn to stop arguing when people are obviously trolling me. :-/
>> Anonymous
>>258951

um, i meant it more in a way that those anon people totally owned you and you silently stepped out of the thread

i wasn't rooting for you or anything
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>258960
Eh. I stepped out of the thread when it occurred to me that this particular Internet Argument was even more useless than most:
1. One of the Anons (>>258915for reference) is only arguing because he has a personal dislike for me. If I argued that Pentax was awesome, he'd be in here ranting about how they suck because they don't have a full frame body.
2. The facts speak for themselves. Pentax is last in the DSLR market right now. The anons are, I suppose, arguing that Pentax should just keep on doin' what it's doin' and everything will work out okay. I own no Pentax stock, so I have no real personal investment there.
3. What's the downside of other people thinking they won the argument? People may buy more Pentax cameras? Not much of a downside there. Pentax makes good cameras. I wouldn't buy one because I'm in that anon-assumes-a-tiny-percentage of users who want a full-frame some day, but I have no problem with other people buying 'em.

So, fuck it. He wants to argue, he's welcome to do so.
>> Anonymous
>>258967
christ, even when your making concessions you still fail. Pentax isn't last in the DSLR market. Panasonic is the proud holder of that position.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>258972
>Panasonic is the proud holder of that position.
Eh. Fine. Last of the DSLR makers who even vaguely matter.
>> Anonymous
>>258972Panasonic is the proud holder of that position.

sigma is last
>> Anonymous
>>258975

you know, a wiser person would have completely just forgotten about this thread by now, but you keep replying even after saying that you'd rather have nothing to do with it.

Watch you reply to this comment also. pathetic.
>> sunshine !!WK+Lu8k4giy
>>258980

You didn't even sage it. Don't bump the thread you're flaming others for replying to. |:
>> Anonymous
can't we just talk about the camera pliz?
I am the only one, for istance, that believes the price drop from the k#0d revolves around the loss of the delicious pentaprism (tried one in a shop, loved it)?
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>258847
It can, look at Apple.
>> Anonymous
>>259334
Dot dot dot
>> Anonymous
>>259334


ZING
>> Anonymous
>>259334

come on butterfly, are we going to do this every few days?

i don't know how you do it. what's going to happen after this post?

you spout off bullshit and come back saying LOL JUST KIDDING or will you just ignore it and do this all over again in the next thread pretending this never happened?

>>259334It can, look at Apple.

flawed analogy is flawed, with Apple, they actually offer an imaginary status symbol when you flaunt that iPhone around

last time i checked, Sony didn't have that kind of reputation in our world

digital cameras is a small market, digital slrs is even smaller

everyone needs "marketing" but pleaaaase, you couldn't say Sony is going to win over any market share by that "godly" "marketing" you keep throwing around with a straight face

stop posting, please
>> Anonymous
>>259334

haha it's true.

damn.
>> Anonymous
>>259330
>>259330

unfortunately the pentaprism had to go and in its place is a pentamirror system. Along with the plastic mount kit lenses, pentax are really going for the cost cutting with this to probably position it as a worthy competitor to other low end entry level cams. This is making up for the mistake in market research they made with their Kxxxd models. They're too well designed and featureful to be priced to compete with lesser cameras such as the d40/1000d, and as such, pentax had to offer huge pricecuts once they realized that the high price was turning people away in spite of them being real good cameras.

Seems like they finally did some research. I would honestly be surprised if this thing even comes close to 650 dollars. they'd just be shooting themselves in teh foot again because that's too close to the k200d and would make no sense in the product lineup. Unless they're planning to kill the k200d.....OOOOOH SPECULATION MODE FIRE UP.
>> Anonymous
so this is below the k200d?

k-m < k200d < k20d?

but the k-m has no difference from the k200d
>> Anonymous
>>259696
if you're only looking at things like megapixel count and numbers, well that's sort of true. But there are some other important differences, as some have mentioned earlier, two of the most significant being pentamirror instead of pentaprism for the VF systems and also the new "L" line of lenses that come as kit.(basically, the same lenses as before but with plastic everything almost, even the mounts). Specification wise, they haven't changed much, but they are trying to cut costs as much as possible while still retaining image quality. someone else could proably explain this better.
>> Anonymous
>>259716

the k200d has a pentamirror

>> this model makes absolutely no sense

>> 10.2 MP, the K200D has it
>> 2.7 LCD, the K200D has it
>> no live view, same thing on K200D

sooooo what's the difference between the k-m and the k200d?
>> Anonymous
>>258935
>LOL @ all these folks who shoot on crop bodies arguing about how full frame cameras are crucially important and the only things worth using.

great point.
this thread is mega-fail on so many levels.
>> Anonymous
because you can't argue that full frame is superior when you are not using it?

we should tell people in /o/ that they can't argue about exotic cars because they drive civics
>> Anonymous
>>259721
from what i've seen, most of the difference will be in build quality and cheaper manufacturing process, like no weather sealing, more plastic everywhere, building it in vietnam instead of japan, etc.

I might be wrong though, i'm not too well versed in pentax. Where are the pentax faggots when you need them?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>259735

it runs on AA batteries
>> Anonymous
>>259738
LOL so does the K200D. what makes them all that different again?

Oh, not much right? Basically, this is just pentax doing what it does best in the market, releasing ill conceived products that don't quite have a target market and confusing the fuck out of anyone who tries to make sense of them.

Pentax are the epic trolls of the DSLR world.
>> Anonymous
>>259744

And what percentage of the consumers do you think that is? 1%? 2% 3%? Certainly not more than 5%.

And most of that piddling little dickwart of a set of consumers go out of their way to buy Canon or Nikon because they're massive fucking tools.

The. Majority. Of. People. Who. Buy. DSLRs. Only. Ever. Use. The. Kit. Lens.

Pentax is tailoring their bodies for what people actually buy. If you're going to fault them because they don't have ZOMG PRO-KWALITY BAWDIEZ that's fine, but you need to understand that THE VAST MAJORITY OF CONSUMERS don't even know what full-frame MEANS, let alone have any fucking interest in buying that shit.
>> Anonymous
>>259756
is dat sum new pasta?
>> Anonymous
>>259744
Pentax isn't trolling anyone but themselves. They're likely to run themselves into the ground with shit like this.
>> Anonymous
>>259756
> i'm angry at everyone else for not supporting pentax like i did and are now not getting screw by pentax like i am

gotcha
>> anonymous
I actually shoot with a K10d. I know most of you don't actually shoot, but if you did, you wouldn't be able to tell who's camera shot what without reading the EXIF data. Someday you'll all be fags for defending your lame-frame 5DII cameras when the march of technology has moved on and the new hot shit is medium format with 500Megepickles.

Back to the original topic: K-m vs. K200d
Pentax: great engineering, terrible marketing
>> Anonymous
yeah, their marketing aint fantastic and sometimes they do some dumb shit..

oh hay, lets make a camera that no one can google or pronounce its name.

but, the k10d was pretty special. im sure if canon had built it, it would have a cult following

truth be told, i wish i bought a k10d + 21mm pancake instead of the piece of crap 30d, which i upgraded to a 40d......weeks before the 50d was announced
>> Anonymous
>>259962

agreed. getting rid of the exif data would help /p/ greatly.
>> Anonymous
>>259986
It takes like three seconds to wipe EXIF in PS. If you don't want people to see what you're shooting with, feel free not to show them.
>> Anonymous
>>258776
official as k2000d for North america, K-m for euro and asia.

700 dollars for the camera, kit lens, and (something odd IMO) a kit flash, the AF200FG.

LOL pentax, the list price is too high for this (a k200 can be found for 650 new...), but knowing them there's already rebates lined up to bring the price down to maybe 500. Rebates in the UK are already out at around 30 pounds. Maybe a 75-100 dollar rebate here in the states.

not bad if indeed the pricing is accurate. Haven't seen anything about a two lens kit outside of the UK though.
>> Anonymous
>>260139
>LOL pentax, the list price is too high for this (a k200 can be found for 650 new...), but knowing them there's already rebates lined up to bring the price down to maybe 500.

Well, the K200D was, what, almost $1,000 USD when it came out?

This will probably drop to right around $499 USD, which is pretty fucking perfect for a low-end DSLR, and it'll be significantly better than the shit-tastic Nikon D40.

It's too bad Pentax doesn't get more props.
They make solid cameras.