[Merts]

The camera is a Ricoh product. How can you love the camera and hate the manufacture to the point of deluding yourself that it is actually a Pentax product?

I can’t tell who is serious and who has their tongue pressed into their cheeks, but the arguments about Pentax cameras not really being Pentax anymore because Ricoh now owns the brand seem ridiculous to me. For most of the life on the brand, Pentax has been just that, a brand. The company making the original Pentax cameras (from 1957) was Asahi Optical.

The company wasn’t renamed to Pentax Corporation until 2002. In mid 2007 Hoya bought the controlling interest in Pentax Corporation and in mid 2008 Pentax Corporation and Hoya merged. At this point, Pentax as a company effectively ceased to exist, but the brand continued. Technically, “Pentax” as a company only existed for 6 years. Prior to 2002 Pentax was a brand name only.

Hoya separated the Pentax camera business from the rest of its operations in 2011 (creating Pentax Imaging Corporation) which was then sold to Ricoh, who continue to develop and market Pentax brand cameras. It’s exactly the same situation as the previous 3 years when Hoya owned the brand, and not really even different to the previous 50 years when Asahi Optical owned it.

As a long time Pentax user, I would be sad if the brand disappeared, but as long as the cameras produced by Ricoh Imaging (or anyone else in the future) continue to be compatible with current K-mount and old K and M mount lenses, I don’t particularly care whether they have Pentax written on them or not.

[bossa]

I can’t tell who is serious and who has their tongue pressed into their cheeks, but the arguments about Pentax cameras not really being Pentax anymore because Ricoh now owns the brand seem ridiculous to me. For most of the life on the brand, Pentax has been just that, a brand. The company making the original Pentax cameras (from 1957) was Asahi Optical.

The company wasn’t renamed to Pentax Corporation until 2002. In mid 2007 Hoya bought the controlling interest in Pentax Corporation and in mid 2008 Pentax Corporation and Hoya merged. At this point, Pentax as a company effectively ceased to exist, but the brand continued. Technically, “Pentax” as a company only existed for 6 years. Prior to 2002 Pentax was a brand name only.

Hoya separated the Pentax camera business from the rest of its operations in 2011 (creating Pentax Imaging Corporation) which was then sold to Ricoh, who continue to develop and market Pentax brand cameras. It’s exactly the same situation as the previous 3 years when Hoya owned the brand, and not really even different to the previous 50 years when Asahi Optical owned it.

As a long time Pentax user, I would be sad if the brand disappeared, but as long as the cameras produced by Ricoh Imaging (or anyone else in the future) continue to be compatible with current K-mount and old K and M mount lenses, I don’t particularly care whether they have Pentax written on them or not.

One would also like the Pentax heritage (philosophy?) to be recognized by any company who owns Pentax at the time. The K7/5/3 cameras seem to represent that heritage very well.

[Merts]

One would also like the Pentax heritage (philosophy?) to be recognized by any company who owns Pentax at the time as well. The K7/5/3 cameras seem to represent that heritage very well.

Agreed.

I have to say that my new K-5 II feels comfortable in my hands. With my old SMC 50 F1.2 attached it feels like I've gone back in time a few decades and rediscovered an old friend!

[ENicolas]

I can’t tell who is serious and who has their tongue pressed into their cheeks, but the arguments about Pentax cameras not really being Pentax anymore because Ricoh now owns the brand seem ridiculous to me. For most of the life on the brand, Pentax has been just that, a brand. The company making the original Pentax cameras (from 1957) was Asahi Optical.

The company wasn’t renamed to Pentax Corporation until 2002. In mid 2007 Hoya bought the controlling interest in Pentax Corporation and in mid 2008 Pentax Corporation and Hoya merged. At this point, Pentax as a company effectively ceased to exist, but the brand continued. Technically, “Pentax” as a company only existed for 6 years. Prior to 2002 Pentax was a brand name only.

Hoya separated the Pentax camera business from the rest of its operations in 2011 (creating Pentax Imaging Corporation) which was then sold to Ricoh, who continue to develop and market Pentax brand cameras. It’s exactly the same situation as the previous 3 years when Hoya owned the brand, and not really even different to the previous 50 years when Asahi Optical owned it.

As a long time Pentax user, I would be sad if the brand disappeared, but as long as the cameras produced by Ricoh Imaging (or anyone else in the future) continue to be compatible with current K-mount and old K and M mount lenses, I don’t particularly care whether they have Pentax written on them or not.

I'm joking obviously - really just taking a shot at the rabid fans, not at Ricoh. When Ricoh first bought the company I was afraid they might just be raiding it for assets to fold into their camera operations. The release of the K-5 clones did nothing to dissuade me from that idea. But the K-3 appears to be a serious new offering, and the fact that Ricoh put their name on it seems to indicate they are not only sticking with the Pentax "philosophy" but they are taking a certain amount of pride in what they are producing. A good omen for the future.

It does appear they are raiding the compact and sports camera segment though - and that was probably very profitable for Pentax. Without it I wonder what the actual market value of the Pentax division becomes, and if Ricoh were to sell it to yet another parent company would only the DSLR (and maybe mirrorless) business be included? As a stand-alone entity Pentax is less valuable without the compact/sports segment of the market.

Anyway, I was looking to jump to the Nikon D610 or the Canon 6D, and along comes the K-3! It has great specs, and I do have two hard cases full of K-mount lenses...so we'll just have to see what it looks like when it's released and the review sites get their hands on them.

[IchabodCrane]

Sorry but that "Ricoh" logo on the back will have to be the first thing to go...need to get some black enamel model paint and a small brush.

I'm glad they are putting the Ricoh name on the back of the K-3. What better way to demonstrate a commitment to a product than to put your real corporate name on it? In essence they are staking their corporate reputation with this camera. Good!

[Dr_who]

I've noticed a few tweaks in typos and such on various pages. Guess we'll have to wait closer to release to see. But even if it is a 23.3. MP camera as a lot of sites are listing it as now that is still pretty impressive. Really looking forward to the official production firmware so we can accurately assess the quality of the camera from ISO noise/focusing/video/ect ect.

[LamyTax]

I've noticed a few tweaks in typos and such on various pages. Guess we'll have to wait closer to release to see. But even if it is a 23.3. MP camera as a lot of sites are listing it as now that is still pretty impressive. Really looking forward to the official production firmware so we can accurately assess the quality of the camera from ISO noise/focusing/video/ect ect.

There's no practical difference between 23.3 and 24MP.

[stevemgap]

Will sharpness be similar to the K5IIs?

[dosdan]

Will sharpness be similar to the K5IIs?

With the higher sensel density, the sensor sharpness should be higher and moire should be less, even without the AA simulated filter enabled. The overall system sharpness will probably depend more on the lens than the sensor.

Dan.

[LamyTax]

Pixel density is pretty much the same of the D800(E) -- if you crop to 1.5.
I'd expect slightly better IQ than what the D800E delivers (pixel based) -- with the right lenses, that is.

[Uluru]

pixel density is pretty much the same of the d800(e) -- if you crop to 1.5.

??

i'd expect slightly better iq than what the d800e delivers (pixel based) -- with the right lenses, that is.

???

[JinDesu]

My understanding was that the pixel density (and pixel size) of the Sony 16MP sensor in the D7000/K-5/k-5II was equal to the D800/D800E. Hence the crop mode on the D800 would equal the same as the k-5.

The k-3 should technically be denser.

[twitch]

Will sharpness be similar to the K5IIs?

Yes because both lack a AA filter

[bossa]

Pixel density of the K-3 is higher than the D800E and so there should be that extra layer of detail (reach) via cropping. I expect that to almost equalize when you then use the equivalent lens/camera combo. On another thread someone was saying that you would need to use the same lens to see the same detail using a K-5 against a D800e, but that then ignores the need for composition - pictures of isolated objects like the moon etc would see no advantage to owning a D800e though.

The following are LR screen grabs.
K-5 & DA*200 @ f/2.8 v D800e & AF-S 300mm F4 @ f/4 (same DOF and handheld so not 100% accurate framing). Notice the DA*200 is not quite as sharp but matches the image qualities when seeing the full frame under these condiditons.



The same again but where the DA*200 is set to f/4. The DOF is no longer matching but the accutance is about the same.



These images are using cameras where the sensors have the same pixel pitch so I would expect a 24MP image to be closer in scale using the equivalent lens but where the same lens was used the 24MP camera would get that extra level of "reach".

The 24MP camera should be better for Macro and telephoto work IMO.

[Ferdinand]

I have a Jap friend who commented that on the Jap forums, there is a guy who claims he knows the Pentax engineers and has been accurate witb k3 info.
This person's comment was a cryptic 'as long as its designated K, it will be aps-c'
Might be true, might be a respin of that A mount rumor that this guy picked up on other forums.....

Jap is a very offensive term for Japanese.