What do we want from the K-5 replacement

In my opinion the Pentax K5 is almost perfect. My sugestions for improvement would be:-
Faster autofocus, but still retaining accuracy.
Better positioning of the card door, to enable easier ejection.
The addition of a robust flip-out viewing screen.
More megapixels, if it does not increase noise.
Better High ISO Performance, if that's possible.
A more robust lens changing button.

Pentax have got the best position for the lens change button; under the right hand. Pentax must stick to this. This to me, is a major feature for good handling. Canon and Nikon have lens change buttons on the left hand, which ruins the handling, when changing lenses.

Not sure if the menu system has changed from the D90 to the D800 (sounds like it has) but I quite like the menu system. Particularly 'My Menu' - you can select items (up to 20) and add them to your own custom menu, that works very well indeed.

Selecting a focus point (lockable) other than centre is done via the rotary selector so no need to access the menu at all.

Absolutely correct ! The Nikon system is horrible !

I havn't used a DSLR from any other maker, but from reading reviews a lot I am aware that some Canon bodies have a 'customisable' menu option - a bit like the idea behind the 'User' mode on Pentax. You can create your own customised menu page with your most used options accessable one the same page.

I have found the User mode helpful - I have it set up to shoot 5 bracketed shots for the purpose of HDR processing, so it is set to 'Drive mode Bracketing' AVpriority, iso 100, plus 1 stop (to ensure good shadow detail from the darkest shot), and daylight WB (I am usually taking this kind of shot outdoors in sunshine). This way you can switch from single shots to 5 brackets in one turn of the mode dial.

Now this kind of customisation for the menu structure would be helpful for us too. Wouldn't it be nice if the Control Panel could be changed to show our own preferred options?

Actually I don't doubt it, but no matter how good something is there's always room for improvement. I shoot in low light a lot so I'm likely to notice any shortcomings the existing AF system has more than most.

I covered fashion shows several months back. I used the K5, D700 and D7000. Neither the K5 or the D7000 would lock on in the evening sessions which were in very poor light. The D700 locked on without fail. Maybe I need to bin the K5 and D7000 and get a Panasonic as a back up camera.

Best regards

I thought the point of having a through the lens optical viewfinder was to facilitate composing and focusing? why not switch to manual focus in low light?

Smaller centre spot focus sensor, geo tagging, tilting screen.

Howabout a tilting screen with a clip on sun shield to make it a "waist level viewfinder" type screen. Just a thought.

With girls on the move and swirling, it did not occur to me at the time. If a piece of kit will do the job, best to use it. I've no reason not to use MF and often use it with macro shots.

Best regards

So do I. The K-5 needs a lot of improvements in that area. It took until software V1.03 to get any real performance and evne then there's a lot of room for improvement

So do I. The K-5 needs a lot of improvements in that area. It took until software V1.03 to get any real performance and evne then there's a lot of room for improvement[/quote]Too true. There is a bit of an imbalance in the technology there at the moment. The K-5 has fantastic low-light performance in terms of IQ, but the AF system can't keep up.

I haven't used one but from what I've read the Canon 5D mkIII proves that excellent low-light AF performance is possible. Whether it's feasible to put such a system in camera which retails for around half the price or not is a different matter, since I have no idea how much it would cost to implement.

For someone interested in low light performance I can't see
any low light f/1.4's or f/1.7's on your list? I would have
thought that would have been the 1st thing to look into
instead of a Canon 5D mkIII

In all honesty I have found the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 quite sufficient for my needs. With a lesser camera than the K-5 it might not be the case. An f/1.4 lens would gain me two stops over an f/2.8, but the K-5 has a 3 or 4 stop advantage over previous generations of camera. The brilliant noise reduction in Lightroom probably gets me another stop or two.

I've looked at f/1.4 lenses - they're pricey and I like the convenience of zooms. I'm more strongly considering extending my range at f/2.8 by getting a DA* 50-135, or possibly Sigma or Tamron 70-200 f/2.8.

And BTW, just because I brought up the Canon 5D MkIII does not mean I have any intention of buying one. I have none whatsoever.

Sigma do a 17-50 f/2.8 with HSM & OS I wonder what that's like?

My sentiments exactly