I had a chance to shoot the prototype of the K-30, it is really good with very sexy styling.
Another thing worth mentioning about the K-30 is that it can use regular AA batteries too. ...
Focusing should be very good with old MF lenses. My K100d gives audible and visual confirmation with all my M-42 lenses.
It would seem that these are offered with a few different kit lenses, But the lenses are not all WeatherSealed so that kind of defeats the purpose of this camera.
Buyers who really want the whole "WR" package need to make sure that the lens(s) are properly marked "WR" as well. ...
IMO (and in my experience with several Pentax dSLR bodies and a swag of lenses) precise manual focusing through the optical viewfinder is not very good as the camera is designed around auto-focus...
Nice photo but actually most old professional (and I assume modern) cameras are waterproof. I have in my possession a 35mm Pentax that was used in Vietnam in the war (not by me) and I assume in that year long tour the camera saw high humidity and rain and it still functions as the day it was made. When I purchased a Nikon F3hp I inquired about weatherproof. Unless the camera would be touring the most extreme weather conditions (Artic or Desert) it was not necessary. Unless you are planning to photograph in a rain forest then probably any new camera in that class is going to be weatherproofed to some extent. Will you be standing in the rain for hours waiting for that photo?
Love Pentax bodies, but don't like their modern lens line up. Top heavy with zooms, hardly any primes. You can keep your slow zooms. On a APS-C body, 35mm = 50mm. They have a 31mm f1.8 that's close to $2,000 dollars. The Nikon 35/1.8 is around 1/10th the price and it's a fine optic. Sorry. No sale for this amateur at 2 grand. They have a 50/1.8 but I hate this focal lenght on APS-C. Too short for portrait, too tele for much else. If Pentax had an affordable modern 35/1.8 which is the equivalent of the classic "50mm/1.8" of yore I'd probably own a Pentax right now. I'm a "Nikonian" only because they were the first to come out with a good, affordable 35/1.8... my modern "nifty-fifty".
Agreed at least as concerns my K20D. I'd be keen for someone to get some hard data on how many users shoot MF either clumsily, using short-throw MF ring on the current AF lenses; or by mounting true MF lenses whether old or new. It seems like enough people might do that to warrant Pentax offering at least one factory-installed focusing screen with focusing aid (split-image or similar). Otherwise those of us who shoot manual focus have to buy the camera, then straight away buy a KatzEye screen. I realize a factory split-image screen might cost the same USD 100ish extra as the KatzEye does, but would simplify things and not leave me with a useless OEM autofocus screen sitting in the cupboard forever. I know modern supply chains want as few SKUs as possible, but how hard would it be to offer this? I'm not suggesting they offer 6 or 12 different screens/finders as the professional SLRs did 30 years ago.
To be fair, same question applies to all DSLR makers, not just Pentax.
--Dave
Love Pentax bodies, but don't like their modern lens line up. Top heavy with zooms, hardly any primes. You can keep your slow zooms. On a APS-C body, 35mm = 50mm. They have a 31mm f1.8 that's close to $2,000 dollars. The Nikon 35/1.8 is around 1/10th the price and it's a fine optic. Sorry. No sale for this amateur at 2 grand. They have a 50/1.8 but I hate this focal lenght on APS-C. Too short for portrait, too tele for much else. If Pentax had an affordable modern 35/1.8 which is the equivalent of the classic "50mm/1.8" of yore I'd probably own a Pentax right now. I'm a "Nikonian" only because they were the first to come out with a good, affordable 35/1.8... my modern "nifty-fifty".
I tried a KatzEye, and while it had the split-image focusing aid, it also suffered from the same problem as the original - it was not placed at the correct height (in its mount) to accurately coincide with correct focus at the sensor plane.