K30 or K50?

I'm looking to upgrade from my trusty K10D and was going to purchase a K30. However it seems I've come to the market just as the K50 has become available. Looking at the specs there’s no a great deal to separate them, however the wife wants to use the camera for holiday videos (the budget is not going to stretch to a camcorder). I have seen various reviews with regards to the K30's video capabilities but as yet can't find a comparison to the K50. If the Video capabilities of the K50 are no better than the 30 I'm off to buy it on the weekend, however if someone does have any info indicating the K50 is more capable in this area it may sway my decision. Any information gratefully received.

Why not get the K30? K50 was just announced and I don't think a view sample will be out so soon.

K30's video is capable enough as I have tested it and I can record for a good 15 minutes without he sensor heating up, unlike the K5 which heated up after 5 minutes of video even in an air conditioned room.

I say get the K30.

I usually buy cameras at the end of their production cycle. That way there are terrific deals to be had. There will be improvements in the K50, but then there always will be, so wherever we jump in something else will be following.

Perhaps if you go for the K30 now you could add a lens or two instead of paying a higher price for the K50?

While I agree that is good to know that it can do that, why would you want to? A more interesting video comprises numerous shots of normally not more than 10 seconds each - even that is a long time! Long shots leads to boring productions; the average shot length in profession productions is apparently 2.4 seconds!

link

John K

Totally agree - and as a Yorkshire man it is expected of me

K30. Right now they offer tremendous value.

In terms of feature set, there are negligible differences between the K30 and K50.

Not that I really know anything about video but perhaps:
a) Because I only have one chance to record an event and one camera to do it not the luxury of multiple cameramen taking 'artistic' quick varied snippets each or having the chance to re-shoot it multiple times?
b) It is for some sort of news reportage type use where there are often long continuous shooting sequences?
c) Even those short 2.5 second snippets are usually edits cut from longer sequences so you have to be able to take the longer sequences first?

Many thanks for the replies, much appreciated, K30 it is and Bob some of your shots are superb, congrats.

I'll be looking at the same question later this year although by Nov/Dec i suspect all the K30s will be gone meaning my decision will be made for me. When the K50 was announced I thought i'd definitely go with that, particularly as they apparently do it in olive to replace my olive Kx. Ironically, in view of your video requirement the video on the K50 is supposed to be improved over that of the K30 but for me this is not an issue as I have never even tried video on my Kx after 2.5 years!

However...on reflection the differences are mainly cosmetic. The body on the K50 is definitely more attractive due to the curved lines but tbh the only ugly part of the k30 is the hooded flash which I can put up with...and i never use the flash anyway. Also the kit 18-55WR lens on the K30 is the better quality one with metal mount rather than new one on K50 which has a plastic mount...so i'd say definitely a K30 for me at this moment in time.

Depending on how urgent your requirememnt is my gut feeling is that there will be a small nett reduction in the K30 price in the near future...probably once the money off promotion comes to an end because at the moment it is being outshone by the K5 in value for money terms.

Like many other posters above i almost always only buy at the stage when they are
clearing out the last few to make way for the new model...can't beat a genuine bargain end of line.

I agree with all you say other than to add that watching someone's 'home movie' as a long 15 minute continuous take would likely be torture! And yes, there are many like that.
Bear in mind the old Standard 8mm cameras ran out of film after 2 minutes and you had to turn the film over for another 2. Super 8 was just 3 minutes 20 seconds and many an award winning film has been shot on both formats so the K-5's 5 minute run shouldn't really prove to be a restriction.
If you really want video rather than stills you'd be better off with a dedicated video camera.

John K

The difference between K30 and K50 is so marginal and both are very good. I'd take the cheaper between these two.

Sounds like the K5 II and IIs issue?

The K30 at the lower price would make sense. Only glass holds value of any worth.

Bodies are effectively disposable.

Best regards

Being the school photographer, I normally shoot stills but on that occasion, the Head of Department asked me to shoot video at the last minute so I told him I would try.

Lo and Behold, I managed to capture the performance and the video was mono but turned out great.

I happened to have a SanDisk Extreme 16GB SDHC card in the camera at that point of time.

Congrats on managing to get the whole thing without overheating. I agree with some of the comments above - I would see video on a DSLR as a creative tool (where shot length isn't an issue), rather than a dependable camcorder for doing long locked-down shots of plays etc.

Thanks for all the replies.

Managed to nab myself a K30 (a really bright blue one!) on the weekend. It's a bit different from my K10! It's smaller, lighter and has a better grip. Obviously feature wise it's like night and day and I'm slowly making my way through the instruction manual and the moment so there's still a ton of stuff for me learn. Took a few test shots and really happy to see that I didn't need to mess with e/v like I do with the K10 on every shot. As for the Video did A couple of minutes and quite surprised with the quality.