[clackers]

Good lord. Well so long as it's mockups he's gripping under the table at Photokina and not the goolies of the Pentax Forums interviewer, I'm sure we'll be hearing more in due course.

Anything to close a sale!

[virusn3t]

I expect to see on the new gen apsc camera the K1 with obviously APSC sensor and higher fps: of course minus the third scroll wheel and more compact&lighter body, i dont expect Ricoh launch a very new electronics with higher capacity on the viewfinder or AF, i expect those improvements on the new gen of FF camera.

Maybe, if Ricoh bring a new format camera, mirrorles or with a new compact mount as m3/4 i can expect more improvements.

[Barry Pearson]

Having a K-3, what features would make you buy (a real decision) such APSC flagship ? Would you spend 1k for the 4k video ? or 10fps? anything else?

I'll change this question then try to answer it: "Having a K-1, with a K-3II as backup, what features would make me buy a new APSC flagship?

It would obviously be a massive challenge for Ricoh to tempt me! It couldn't regress on the K-3II. It would have to provide features that would sometimes provide a compelling reason to leave the K-1 in the car and use the new APS-C flagship instead. Then it would also have to have features that I've found very useful on the K-1.

I can think of only one set of features that would be compelling. Far better support for some types of action photography than either the K-3II or the K-1. (And I have been pretty successful shooting certain types of action with the K-1).

I don't think simply incorporating SAFOX 12 and increasing the burst rate a little beyond the K-3-series would be sufficient. I've found I'm not as limited by the K-1 burst rate as I thought I would be. (Although the option for more fps would always be useful). . And the number of megapixels in the K-1 enables me to use a "center-focus, pan, shoot, recompose in post-processing" style that avoids much need for sophisticated AF tracking. But I have often been limited by the buffer capacity on the K-1.

In effect, it would have to enable me to explore the sorts of sports/action photography that I haven't tried much yet. It might have to get closer to the D500 than is likely from a Pentax camera. It would probably not have enough megapixels for my "center-focus, pan, shoot, recompose in post-processing" style. This would need more than a natural evolution of the existing Pentax AF capability.

And it would have to have an articulated LCD, (although not necessarily with the 4-legged feature of the K-1), for using the camera low down or high up. The "Lock" feature from the K-1 would be very desirable. (It wouldn't need the extra dials on top - they haven't been as useful to me as I thought they would be).

I don't think we are going to see such a Pentax in the near future.

[RonHendriks1966]

I'll change this question then try to answer it: "Having a K-1, with a K-3II as backup, what features would make me buy a new APSC flagship?

It would obviously be a massive challenge for Ricoh to tempt me! It couldn't regress on the K-3II. It would have to provide features that would sometimes provide a compelling reason to leave the K-1 in the car and use the new APS-C flagship instead. Then it would also have to have features that I've found very useful on the K-1.

I can think of only one set of features that would be compelling. Far better support for some types of action photography than either the K-3II or the K-1. (And I have been pretty successful shooting certain types of action with the K-1).

I don't think simply incorporating SAFOX 12 and increasing the burst rate a little beyond the K-3-series would be sufficient. I've found I'm not as limited by the K-1 burst rate as I thought I would be. (Although the option for more fps would always be useful). . And the number of megapixels in the K-1 enables me to use a "center-focus, pan, shoot, recompose in post-processing" style that avoids much need for sophisticated AF tracking. But I have often been limited by the buffer capacity on the K-1.

In effect, it would have to enable me to explore the sorts of sports/action photography that I haven't tried much yet. It might have to get closer to the D500 than is likely from a Pentax camera. It would probably not have enough megapixels for my "center-focus, pan, shoot, recompose in post-processing" style. This would need more than a natural evolution of the existing Pentax AF capability.

And it would have to have an articulated LCD, (although not necessarily with the 4-legged feature of the K-1), for using the camera low down or high up. The "Lock" feature from the K-1 would be very desirable. (It wouldn't need the extra dials on top - they haven't been as useful to me as I thought they would be).

I don't think we are going to see such a Pentax in the near future.

That is a lot of work to be done. This needs a new electronic hi way inside the camera. Faster processing with a larger buffer that save images in a much faster way to the sdxc card inside the uhs-ii cardholder. I think that once you do that the prime IV engine can really shine to it's performance.......But then we would want faster. This would make the camera seriously more expensive.

---

Last edited by RonHendriks1966; 09-05-2016 at 05:24 AM.

[biz-engineer]

I'll change this question then try to answer it: "Having a K-1, with a K-3II as backup, what features would make me buy a new APSC flagship? It would obviously be a massive challenge for Ricoh to tempt me! It couldn't regress on the K-3II. It would have to provide features that would sometimes provide a compelling reason to leave the K-1 in the car and use the new APS-C flagship instead. Then it would also have to have features that I've found very useful on the K-1. I can think of only one set of features that would be compelling. Far better support for some types of action photography than either the K-3II or the K-1. (And I have been pretty successful shooting certain types of action with the K-1). I don't think simply incorporating SAFOX 12 and increasing the burst rate a little beyond the K-3-series would be sufficient. I've found I'm not as limited by the K-1 burst rate as I thought I would be. (Although the option for more fps would always be useful). . And the number of megapixels in the K-1 enables me to use a "center-focus, pan, shoot, recompose in post-processing" style that avoids much need for sophisticated AF tracking. But I have often been limited by the buffer capacity on the K-1. In effect, it would have to enable me to explore the sorts of sports/action photography that I haven't tried much yet. It might have to get closer to the D500 than is likely from a Pentax camera. It would probably not have enough megapixels for my "center-focus, pan, shoot, recompose in post-processing" style. This would need more than a natural evolution of the existing Pentax AF capability. And it would have to have an articulated LCD, (although not necessarily with the 4-legged feature of the K-1), for using the camera low down or high up. The "Lock" feature from the K-1 would be very desirable. (It wouldn't need the extra dials on top - they haven't been as useful to me as I thought they would be). I don't think we are going to see such a Pentax in the near future.

That's interesting, we have different wants / desires. Although , since I have the K1 I have not desire to buy anything else.
After owning the K1, I'd only eventually get smaller lenses, if not, I'd only spend money on a large sensor mirrorless with a pancake lens camera for when I don't want the bulk of a K1+lens (and now that I'm used to full frame quality, I don't see myself shooting with a u4/3 or other compact camera, I like high quality images. I don't like Sony camera because they are too skinny for my hands, I like the size of the Leica SL but its sensor is a disappointment). One thing I noticed with the K1 is that it is still rendering images like digital cameras, and I'm really questioning why no-one came up yet with a non linear sensor. Reagrding AF and burst rate, even if Pentax would come up with an AF beast with lots of FPS, not sure I'd buy one because I am able to get more good results than I need with the K1 (I hate to waste my time deleting 10 shots when I only want to keep one, so I would hate the D500).

I'm summarize what would appeal:
- small full frame lenses for the K1
- otherwise, a digital camera smart enough to expose without clipping of the high lights (with a film like response), whether it is apsc or ff.
- stylish vintage large sensor camera with stylish primes as smaller alternative to K1 DSLR (something similar to a Fuji XT2, Nikon Df or Lecia SL)

I don't know if that's only me (other photographers can tell), but I consider that the style and finish of vintage DSLR cameras is a reason to own one especially if a camera is priced >$1K or >$2K, manufacturers have no excuse to produce ugly FF DSLR like Canon, Nikon, Sony... do (also Pentax sorry...) (not even mentioning white pink yellow red blue cameras that I consider to be insulting). I like using a weather sealed DSLR for wildlife and landscape, however, I much prefer a very nice vintage style digital camera when going downtown, site seeing kind of things.

[Fenwoodian]

I do like the articulated LCD on my K1. However, I find that seemingly at the most inoportune times I find that the screen has been accidentally pulled out just a little bit.

In new Pentax cameras that come out I would like to see a mechanism on the LCD that locks it into position, so that it only comes out when you want it out.

[Kunzite]

Duct tape?

[HopelessTogger]

Duct tape?

Or a fragment of sticky pad?

[Poit]

There's an interesting article by Kevin Raber just out (it may be behind a paywall, though) about visiting bears in Alaska with a Sony A6300 (among other things). He said he used it with the the big Sony 70-400mm telephoto lens with an adapter but otherwise has the Sony 16-70mm crop-format zoom for use at home. This seems to me to be a sensible way to do things. You get a modern crop-format camera with very good AF indeed yet it is small and not too expensive, paired with a combo of APS-C lens (or lenses) and one big telephoto lens for wildlifing. I don't imagine one wants to get too close to hungry beasts in Alaska. You come home with some great images and no need to visit a joint specialist. OK it's Sony, which isn't my cup of tea at all, but one gets the idea.

My guess is that the key to the future of APS-C compared to FF is Canon. They seem to be on a roll at the moment and are introducing some kick-ass new ideas such as dual-pixel. If Canon develop the M mirrorless series to the point of signalling that smaller formats = mirrorless and larger formats = DSLR (predominantly though not exclusively in either case), then everything will start to change. I guess we'll know over the next couple of years. If you believe some commentators, Canon are well on the way to taking the #2 spot in mirrorless after Sony and I'm sure their target would be #1 if they are serious about it. Either way, the notion of "they can buy FF or they can eat cake" from the big DSLR companies when it comes to pairing modern APS-C lenses with sophisticated AF on smaller, APS-C cameras doesn't strike me as having a lot of mileage left in it. Earlier this year Thom Hogan estimated that more than 80 per cent of Nikon's DSLR sales were for "consumer DX", and yet he pointed out that Nikon's lens programme was largely ignoring these customers, four-fifths of their userbase. Perhaps it's easy to overlook how much FF anything is a minority interest, for budgetary reasons if no other.

Mate, I've read all your comments up to this one, and finally had to reply despite the fact that you may have posted more in the last couple of days.

I disagree that Pentax/Ricoh will turn their back on APS-C. Someone once told me that big PC companies trial their newest tech on consumer products, because it's easier to deal with complaints at that level, and iron out any issues, before introducing the tech to the business laptop/PC market.

I can see, quite clearly, that Ricoh is taking this approach. Introduce new tech at the lower end first, make sure it works and is reliable, then introduce it to the top-end. Look at pixel-shift, and the new KAF-4 mount.....

Someone else told me that Ricoh was going about their plan very sensibly. Play to your strengths and build those markets first (APS-C and 645) then move into new areas. They've delivered to that plan perfectly. They built the APS-C range to it's maximum, then turned their eye to the 645z, then attacked FF. It makes sense that, having built the largest APS-C lense range in the industry, it's time to look FF which will also be useful on APS-C.

This is the opposite approach to Canikon. Maybe Ricoh's ability in the commercial printing industry has taught them a thing or two about introducing new tech.

Either way, Ricoh are approaching this from a different angle, and I don't see them letting the APS-C market slip one little bit!

[mecrox]

Mate, I've read all your comments up to this one, and finally had to reply despite the fact that you may have posted more in the last couple of days.

I disagree that Pentax/Ricoh will turn their back on APS-C. Someone once told me that big PC companies trial their newest tech on consumer products, because it's easier to deal with complaints at that level, and iron out any issues, before introducing the tech to the business laptop/PC market.

I can see, quite clearly, that Ricoh is taking this approach. Introduce new tech at the lower end first, make sure it works and is reliable, then introduce it to the top-end. Look at pixel-shift, and the new KAF-4 mount.....

Someone else told me that Ricoh was going about their plan very sensibly. Play to your strengths and build those markets first (APS-C and 645) then move into new areas. They've delivered to that plan perfectly. They built the APS-C range to it's maximum, then turned their eye to the 645z, then attacked FF. It makes sense that, having built the largest APS-C lense range in the industry, it's time to look FF which will also be useful on APS-C.

This is the opposite approach to Canikon. Maybe Ricoh's ability in the commercial printing industry has taught them a thing or two about introducing new tech.

Either way, Ricoh are approaching this from a different angle, and I don't see them letting the APS-C market slip one little bit!

I don't think Ricoh is about to give up on APS-C either, for the reason I gave: the majority of their customers buy APS-C cameras. It would be madness. I was posting in response to folks who seemed keener on FF. However, there is probably a hurdle coming up in the next few years - mirrorless in one form or another - and that may change how Ricoh go about things. Who knows.

The accelerator chip in the K70 is a case in point about introducing new tech first to consumers and only later to professionals. I doubt Ricoh would have gone to all that trouble and expense just to remove a little noise and help with jpeg acuity a bit. Unless the chip is a complete gimmick, I suspect it is planned to do rather a lot more than that, perhaps when combined with pixel shift. We'll see over the next few generations of cameras. The Holy Grail is easily handheld pixel shift with a very low noise floor and for that one certainly needs processing power. Again, who knows.

[reh321]

....
(also Pentax sorry...) (not even mentioning white pink yellow red blue cameras that I consider to be insulting). .
..

Nobody said you had to buy one of those cameras, and some of us find them to be very useful.
I currently have a blue camera ... but the K-70 "classic" look would be fine for me
I now refuse to buy a black T-90 clone, because I do a lot of photography I call "Street Photo like" - the picture I want depends on people continuing their regular activities and definitely not thinking of me {if they notice me at all} as a serious photographer.

[awscreo]

Hope Sigma will release the 50 1.4 for K mount i've been dreaming of that lens for about 2 years, unfortunately my previous system did not have those, hope K mount will get it sometime in near future. Seems like a perfect fit) In-body stab coupled with fast and silent, would be great

[pres589]

awscreo, not to rain on your parade, but I think it's smart to assume Sigma is not coming back to the k-mount. If you really want that lens, you should buy a body that supports it, or find an alternative; Pentax FA 50 1.4 or DA* 55 1.4 come to mind as alternatives and there may be others. In any case, until Sigma actually comes out with new product you can buy in k-mount, I would consider them dead regarding Pentax.

[RonHendriks1966]

awscreo, not to rain on your parade, but I think it's smart to assume Sigma is not coming back to the k-mount. If you really want that lens, you should buy a body that supports it, or find an alternative; Pentax FA 50 1.4 or DA* 55 1.4 come to mind as alternatives and there may be others. In any case, until Sigma actually comes out with new product you can buy in k-mount, I would consider them dead regarding Pentax.

We will find out at Photokina.

[awscreo]

awscreo, not to rain on your parade, but I think it's smart to assume Sigma is not coming back to the k-mount. If you really want that lens, you should buy a body that supports it, or find an alternative; Pentax FA 50 1.4 or DA* 55 1.4 come to mind as alternatives and there may be others. In any case, until Sigma actually comes out with new product you can buy in k-mount, I would consider them dead regarding Pentax.

Well, I know there are good alternatives on the K-mount, and if they don't come back, I'll just get the 55 1.4 and be completely fine with it. But, here and there, in reviews and discussions, people mention that Sigma will eventually release the art lineup on K-mount. Hope they are right, if not, well then I'll find an alternative. Honestly for me, features and advantages of K-1 outweighed my desire to get 50 1.4 for another mount.