[RobA_Oz]

Pentax is behind many good aspects of the DSLR photography, because it never catered for the professional market. That decision to not cater for professionals, has cost Pentax many lost opportunities, good excuses for prosperity of the brand and development of new technologies. As a consequence, the company and the camera brand has slipped off people's radars slowly, through decades. It almost vanished several years ago.

With Pentax, the flash system, the AF, video capabilities, etc., were all behind the (D)SLR competition, because the competitors did cater for the professional market, and were advancing more in all those crucial areas that makes the (D)SLR photography worthwhile.

And for that advancement made by Nikon and Canon in particular, the halo effect was created, that helps the whole photography industry sell more DSLRs — even in midst of economic troubles — than any other ILC cameras. Because DLSRs are, still, the most sophisticated, versatile and soundly designed image capturing devices, thanks to enormous investments of Nikon and Canon. Pentax cameras are in part sold thanks to that halo effect, and not because Pentax camera deserved to be bought based on their own merits, or Pentax's "contribution to DSLR photography".

During the last 2 decades, Pentax was just enjoying the good outcomes of that halo effect, by hiding itself under Nikon's and Canon's shadow, carefully avoiding any more serious investment, and adding only so much to its offer to slightly differentiate itself. And that was all.

So after the early 1990s, as you can see from the brand's timeline, Pentax has stopped being leader in anything particular. If it got a new sensor a few weeks before the others, doesn't count as any "advancement", only circumstantial opportunity, because underlying technologies haven't changed much because Pentax was never addressing them thoroughly.

Ricoh Imaging has to catch up with so many things to make Pentax up to date, that I'd leave out, for now, any optimistic prognosis about the bright and bold future. Before starting to clap, let's rather see in which direction Ricoh Imaging now wants to go with the Pentax brand. So far, we have no clue about it — all assumptions are based only on our wild guesses and unfulfilled desires.

As much as that's true, the discussion was centred on where Pentax had led the industry, and there are several instances that have been noted. We're all acutely aware of their failings in other areas, such as the ones you've indicated, and of course they need to be addressed. Ricoh has stated, publicly, that they intend to turn the brand into a market leader. Given the scant regard previous ownership has given to long-term strategy, no reasonable person would expect a rapid recovery and there's been no statement that changes that vision. The work to date indicates some further incremental progress is being made toward that goal. As you say, we'll see what indications we get from this as-yet unrevealed next model.

[Pål Jensen]

Let's stop blaming Hoya. Hoya happened to Pentax exactly because Pentax never cared about finding good excuses for brand uplifting, for new tech, to be leader in something.
If Pentax had a different mindset, Hoya would never happen to them.

Actually, Hoya happened to Pentax due to the market situation in the medical equipment market. Nothing to do with (D)SLR's.

[monochrome]

Pentax is behind many good aspects of the DSLR photography, because it never catered for the professional market. That decision to not cater for professionals, has cost Pentax many lost opportunities, good excuses for prosperity of the brand and development of new technologies

That certainly isn't true of Pentax throughout its history - perhaps since about 1997, and certainly after the MZ-D fiasco (which killed Contax). As will many a market-dominant company, they stuck to the leading M42 mount far too long and allowed everyone else a head start in bayonet mounts. For much of the first 25 years of its modern history I believe Pentax lived off license revenue from its coatings process, which was licensed by every lens manufacturer save Leica.

And I believe therein lies the gradual erosion of Pentax's innovation and market leadership in cameras. They became cautious and stuck to the technology they knew. They milked their licensed process for marginal revenue. That revenue was redirected into and built the eyeglass division that was spun off and the medical devices divisions that Hoya so prized. In so doing they lost their position in cameras, always hoping to release the "next big thing" that would save the company.

You can read Pentax's place in historical camera market leadership HERE and of their Milestones releases HERE.

And I defy you to convince me the LX wasn't a market-leading professional camera system. Even today I can do things with an LX that no mere DSLR can approach.

It is Ricoh, in fact, that is an incrementalist. They improve and improve and improve, never fixing what ain't broke. They are absolutely relentless about marginal competition and gathering large market share in small bits over long periods of time. That is why they express their goal ("There is room for a third camera maker, and it will be Ricoh") as over the intermediate term, which is 5-7 years.

We will need to adjust what we want - because Ricoh isn't going to give us what the old Pentax tried to do. That didn't work so well for Pentax anyway, so I'm willing to sign up just to see what happens.

[MidwestPentax]

I would say this one is for real. I would expect this one real soon and not so bulky.

[SimplyCreativePhotography]

OK then, if I go through the effort to expose these guys, what are you going to do to make it worth my while? Because it's not going to be that easy. You think they are going to make it obvious? The one guy I did expose was a second hand dealer who was hoping to sell second hand Nikon gear in the marketplace to users he was trying very hard to swing from Pentax to Nikon. In the end he admitted there was more second hand gear for him to sell from Nikon and getting Pentax gear was harder. He was trying to kill two birds with one stone. Buying cheap Pentax gear from guys switching systems, plus trying to move old Nikon lenses he had in inventory. He had a valid point, but still, it was biased by his commercial interest.

It happened, deal with it.

PS- things to look for
Posters with less than 10 posts.
Posters with image on the forum, apparently without a service like Photobucket or FLickr where you can see more of their images,
Images that have no EXIF data. Often of commercial quality and that I suspect I've seen in ads on other sites.

Shoot. I've been outed as I think this is only my 6th post. Got suckered into a Cosina back in 1983 because it had a Pentax mount. Then an MZ-7. Finally sprung for a DLSR and refused to pay for a CaNikon because I had a perfectly good kit lens that my K-10D could still use. (that lasted about 3 months before I go some real glass ) Then the natural progression to K-20D, K-7, K-5. always in search of better AF. Who knew I really loved CaNikon (aka "big brother") Anyone want some well loved Limited Primes and DA* lenses?

[normhead]

All you have to do now is make a few posts saying Nikon or Canon is really good Pentax is really bad and everyone should sell their Pentax gear and buy something else and you're in like flint. But if you want better AF, you really have to search beyond Pentax, no one has higher hopes than me for the K-3, so I'm not saying move on just yet, but I've advised lots of folks for whom AF is their big concern to look elsewhere. Personally I refuse to define a system by one feature, but some find they have to do that to get what they want... if the fastest AF is your big thing... you shouldn't be shooting Pentax, you should be shooting something a lot more expensive.

[SimplyCreativePhotography]

All you have to do now is make a few posts saying Nikon or Canon is really good Pentax is really bad and everyone should sell their Pentax gear and buy something else and you're in like flint. But if you want better AF, you really have to search beyond Pentax, no one has higher hopes than me for the K-3, so I'm not saying move on just yet, but I've advised lots of folks for whom AF is their big concern to look elsewhere. Personally I refuse to define a system by one feature, but some find they have to do that to get what they want... if the fastest AF is your big thing... you shouldn't be shooting Pentax, you should be shooting something a lot more expensive.

It's not my big thing, I love my K-5. It would just be nice. (and actually I've always been the type of guy who buys the underdog product) #7 ;-)

[FoTom]

If this is the real deal, and it's THAT big, unless it's got some really neat tricks under the hood, I'm getting a K-5 IIs instead.

[derekkite]

Aren't we talking about a $1300 body? The D800 is $2900, started at $3300. The D600 is $1900. Started iirc $2500, and reduced price possibly due to a replacement 610 coming next week. The K5II has been going for $900 or even less, again good prices due to a possible replacement in a short while.

These are different price classes entirely. If the K5IIs in the same class to be compared to the D800, all I can say is wow.

The comparison to the rumoured K-3 supposedly at $1300 is the D7100 and the Canon 70D both released for the same price. I'm not familiar with the Canon, but the D7100 was a disappointing, almost 'I got ripped off' upgrade for sports and wildlife shooters. Good IQ, very nice AF, but the buffer sucks.

The K-3 with good IQ, an improved AF system, a working movie mode and a decently responsive buffer and live view would be in a very competitive place beside the others in the same class. If the body is then compared to in usefulness, IQ and handling to the D800, which I suspect it will, then how could that be a negative?

[FoTom]

Aren't we talking about a $1300 body? The D800 is $2900, started at $3300. The D600 is $1900. Started iirc $2500, and reduced price possibly due to a replacement 610 coming next week. The K5II has been going for $900 or even less, again good prices due to a possible replacement in a short while.

These are different price classes entirely. If the K5IIs in the same class to be compared to the D800, all I can say is wow.

The comparison to the rumoured K-3 supposedly at $1300 is the D7100 and the Canon 70D both released for the same price. I'm not familiar with the Canon, but the D7100 was a disappointing, almost 'I got ripped off' upgrade for sports and wildlife shooters. Good IQ, very nice AF, but the buffer sucks.

The K-3 with good IQ, an improved AF system, a working movie mode and a decently responsive buffer and live view would be in a very competitive place beside the others in the same class. If the body is then compared to in usefulness, IQ and handling to the D800, which I suspect it will, then how could that be a negative?

It's not a negative in any aspect other than weight and handling. I've seen many Pentax shooters that list as a key characteristic, extreme performance in a small body. If it's a bigger body, it will effectively be a Canikon clone to be able to compete [in AF or whatever].

[aglet]

Looking forward to the new body, and hopefully a FF model soon too.
Love my K-5 IIs but not crazy about the metering. Hopefully the more complex metering system hinted at on the K-3 will provide more consistent and predictable exposures; one area I still prefer on my CaNikons so far.

[LFLee]

The larger prism housing (if it is in fact larger) - could it provide a view finder the size of a FF camera? APSC camera with a VF as large as a FF camera. :P

ahh.... so looking forward to Oct 8th!

[Clavius]

LOL, If I add up each and every K-3 rumor up untill now, then Oct 8th is going to be known as "the big letdown". Rumor has it that the K-3 has:
- Full Frame sensor,
- 40mp through sensor shift,
- a big amount of AF points,
- all cross AF points,
- 5 axis SR,
- both OVF and EVF,
- an FF VF on an APS-C camera, (wait what?)
- and what not...

What if Pentax "only" markets just a very good upgrade to the K-5: A small APS-C DSLR with lots of muscle? That's going to be so boring!

[/sarc]

Seriously, if the K-3 improves as much as the K-5 did from the K-7, then it's going to rock, even without all the extraordinary powers. Ok, it does need some cool feature to set itself apart from the rest, but all the rumors that are currently going are just out of this world.

[repaap]

Wait! no one said about 5 axis SR...did they...oh man that would be cool. I will be soooooo disappointed if this will not be true! :P

It is true thou that if 'original' rumour will be true, it will be really big Jump and I think that Pentax has some nice tricks too. I'm waiting improvements in video mode.

[mecrox]

LOL, If I add up each and every K-3 rumor up untill now, then Oct 8th is going to be known as "the big letdown". Rumor has it that the K-3 has:
- Full Frame sensor,
- 40mp through sensor shift,
- a big amount of AF points,
- all cross AF points,
- 5 axis SR,
- both OVF and EVF,
- an FF VF on an APS-C camera, (wait what?)
- and what not...

What if Pentax "only" markets just a very good upgrade to the K-5: A small APS-C DSLR with lots of muscle? That's going to be so boring!

[/sarc]

Seriously, if the K-3 improves as much as the K-5 did from the K-7, then it's going to rock, even without all the extraordinary powers. Ok, it does need some cool feature to set itself apart from the rest, but all the rumors that are currently going are just out of this world.

I'm not sure a new camera needs any cool feature to set itself apart. It's hard to think of one, for a start, and chances are high that the new feature will soon be seen as a gimmick. For example, there's quite a chance that any 40mp super mode will turn out to be jpeg-only and dependent on the camera remaining perfectly still. This isn't much more than an extension of the present HDR mode on my K5 and how many people use that more than once in a blue moon? I get much better results in that department using Photomatix to blend handheld bracketed shots and it's all from RAW, not jpeg. I would argue that the three features a new camera needs most are a new-generation sensor with electronics to match, improved AF and improved flash. I'm tempted to add two other features to that list: wifi and a good app for mobile which allows tethering via live view; and a fuller catalogue of lenses, particularly replacements for the DA 12-24mm with motor and WR and for the DA* 16-50mm which is substandard at this level, and the introduction of a large tele-zoom for sports/action shooters of the 120-400mm variety. A new and more up-to-date camera would always be welcome, of course, but without action on a wider front it's also a bit of a sucker punch.