[RobA_Oz]

Swivel-Tilt screen and wi-fi were thought to be gimmicky and useless before the "unnamed" camera was shown at CES. Now they are useful additions.
Once Pentax puts a touchscreen on a camera, all these arguments against it will magically vanish.

I've no argument against any form of interface, provided it provides a nett benefit to the user. One of the main (but ultimately futile) arguments against the original iPhone was that it lacked a real keyboard - it was even mooted by experts that it would fail because of that. I use a touchscreen on my tablet and phone because of the efficient and flexible use of space, but I don't use it on my desktop because it doesn't provide any perceptible benefit to the way I work, and it's awkward. Putting a touchscreen on a Pentax camera could provide some definite benefits, too.

However, one of the joys of using Pentax equipment is the tactile experience they provide, and the dials and buttons are part of that. That sensual experience is the main reason I like a manual gearshift in my cars, in spite of the fact that automated controls can do things quicker, safer and with greater economy. Dedicated controls also force you to think a bit harder about what you're doing, which in the case of a camera can slow you down, which is not beneficial to sports photography, but is beneficial to macro and landscape photography.

So, retaining some dedicated controls provides a good overall experience of the process of taking photos, and helps the creative element of the process. My advice, were it to be heeded, would be to carefully think about which dedicated dials and buttons you leave and which you build in to the touch interface.

[aleonx3]

Oh cool, yea just saw the post... Hmm camera looks cheap-ish. lol Unfortunately as you said probably not gonna be available on higher-end models. Very unfortunate, in fact. Sadly the only thing that's keeping me from switching is my unwillingness to part with my primes (and the headache of building another system from scratch). I really hope that the next higher-end camera from Pentax would check more of these boxes that other manufacturers already have checked - whether any individual users need a specific feature is immaterial - at the k-3 price point and target users, in *2015*, such things as articulating back IMO should be standard feature...

Do you really need a high-end pro model to shoot photos for children in a family? Good for you, but few people do...

[derekkite]

Swivel-Tilt screen and wi-fi were thought to be gimmicky and useless before the "unnamed" camera was shown at CES. Now they are useful additions.
Once Pentax puts a touchscreen on a camera, all these arguments against it will magically vanish.

I use wifi, and could use a swivel screen, although I wouldn't choose a body based on that. I have a touch screen camera, and despise it. I would have a body with a touch screen only on one condition; that it took two button presses to activate it.

[Kharan]

To use a touchscreen effectively, you have to hold the camera with your left hand by the lens or mount, which, if you're shooting with anything but light lenses is what you should be doing anyway. Yes, it's not going to be very helpful when shooting wildlife or sports, but it's a tremendous asset when using things like TTL off-camera flash, shooting video or doing critical focus with LV (nothing new or unsaid here). Nope, it does not work well with your right hand on the grip, but that's not the point, either. In fact, I find that the greatest experience is achieved with both physical dials and a touchscreen, which is why I'm very interested in a possible Pentax implementation: my SL1 has the screen, but one lousy located dial, and my K-30 has the dials, but a 'dumb' screen.
The point about gloved shooting is hard to take seriously, as anything but the best controls will give one trouble as such. Things like the AF/MF lever on my camera give me enough trouble to adjust with gloves on, not to mention the D-Pad. A touchscreen might not help there, but it certainly won't hinder anything either.
To Yassarian: I'm very sure that the K-3 model update shall have a tilting screen (but not flipping): the 645Z has it, the D750 has it, the D7200 will have it, and now this unnamed camera shall have the flipping screen for video, taking care of that

[ogunturkay]

I personally prefer physical buttons, but a touch screen would not prevent me from purchasing a new Pentax, especially if it could be switched off. I have trouble accidentally pressing the color balance of the 4-way with my right thumb, much less having a screen that might react to my nobly dimensioned nose.

+1 Me too. I want a lock-switch for all function buttons.

[Yassarian]

Do you really need a high-end pro model to shoot photos for children in a family? Good for you, but few people do...

Well, to be fair, unless you are getting paid to do this stuff, you don't "need" a high-end anything. A cell phone will do just fine. But I'm assuming we are here discussing about cameras, because we are enthusiasts and enjoy photography, so no, I don't need it, and probably most of the ppl here in this forum doesn't need anything more than a pns. The whole discussion is moot. Why do ppl buy Mercedes and Bimmers when a Civic is a perfectly logical car for their need?

Anyway I like a nicely made camera so I picked the k-5, plus, for the price it's quite good.

P.S. - there are plenty of pros who specializes in weddings and family/baby photos, who use "high-end pro models", so I don't really understand the confusion - kids move fast and erratically, in-door natural lights sometimes aren't great, it does demand a bit more on your gear. Believe it or not...

[cali92rs]

Ok, i stand corrected, i guess it was a vocal minority that calls everything other manufacturers do "hype".

[jatrax]

Completely do not get where some of the comments are coming from in against having a touch screen display...

What you are missing is that one of the regularly repeated threads here is someone suggesting that Pentax should make a camera with no rear screen, no video, no auto modes etc. Essentially a film camera from 1970 with a sensor in it. They would generally prefer no autofocus either but grudgingly admit that auto focus might be OK if not over done.

So with that sentiment prevalent is it any wonder that tossing the word 'touch screen' into the water has had the same effect as tossing bloody meat into shark infested waters? </sarc> </semi-joking>

Personally I am going to wait and see. And give Pentax engineers (the ones that consistently bring a photographers camera to the table) the benefit of the doubt and say that if they do use a touch screen it will compliment or improve the existing user interface rather than replace or destroy the existing one. Right now I would likely be in the anti-touch screen camp, because for me I just do not see any benefit. But a year ago I loudly stated that articulating screens were for wimps. But after neck surgery I have changed my mind and would gladly welcome an articulating screen on my next body. (Camera body that is, my other body is also wearing out so maybe I can add an articulating neck to that one

[Yassarian]

Yea that mentality I don't understand. There *IS* a perfectly usable manual mode. Don't like auto focus, you don't have to use it... Here is the thing - having touch screen/articulated screen really doesn't need to impact ANYTHING else.

Why not just take the perfectly good k-3 with all it's nice buttons that everyone is used to - then DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING, just make the screen articulated, and make it touch screen? So if you like your buttons, there you go - but if you prefer to use touch screen for when it's convenient - there you have it. BOOM best of both worlds!

Now if the issue is, the genius Pentax engineers can't figure out how to do this firmware or keep the cost under control whereas EVERY other camera maker could - then, yes Pentax indeed is DOOMED.

Of course there are probably engineering challenges involved, etc etc - that's why they are getting paid the big bucks to figure out - and if they can't whereas everyone else could? then... Pentax is DOO...

What you are missing is that one of the regularly repeated threads here is someone suggesting that Pentax should make a camera with no rear screen, no video, no auto modes etc. Essentially a film camera from 1970 with a sensor in it. They would generally prefer no autofocus either but grudgingly admit that auto focus might be OK if not over done.

So with that sentiment prevalent is it any wonder that tossing the word 'touch screen' into the water has had the same effect as tossing bloody meat into shark infested waters? </sarc> </semi-joking>

Personally I am going to wait and see. And give Pentax engineers (the ones that consistently bring a photographers camera to the table) the benefit of the doubt and say that if they do use a touch screen it will compliment or improve the existing user interface rather than replace or destroy the existing one. Right now I would likely be in the anti-touch screen camp, because for me I just do not see any benefit. But a year ago I loudly stated that articulating screens were for wimps. But after neck surgery I have changed my mind and would gladly welcome an articulating screen on my next body. (Camera body that is, my other body is also wearing out so maybe I can add an articulating neck to that one

[beachgardener]

suggesting that Pentax should make a camera with no rear screen, no video, no auto modes etc. Essentially a film camera from 1970 with a sensor in it.

Leica recently brought out a camera just like that if my memory serves me correctly

[boriscleto]

Leica recently brought out a camera just like that if my memory serves me correctly

And if Ricoh were to release such a camera it would cost just as much.

[beachgardener]

maybe not quite as much, but Limited Edition it would be.

[johnmflores]

What you are missing is that one of the regularly repeated threads here is someone suggesting that Pentax should make a camera with no rear screen, no video, no auto modes etc. Essentially a film camera from 1970 with a sensor in it. They would generally prefer no autofocus either but grudgingly admit that auto focus might be OK if not over done.

I just mounted a Super Tak 50/1.4 to my K-01. Pretty close.

[Kunzite]

What you are missing is that one of the regularly repeated threads here is someone suggesting that Pentax should make a camera with no rear screen, no video, no auto modes etc. Essentially a film camera from 1970 with a sensor in it. They would generally prefer no autofocus either but grudgingly admit that auto focus might be OK if not over done.

So with that sentiment prevalent is it any wonder that tossing the word 'touch screen' into the water has had the same effect as tossing bloody meat into shark infested waters? </sarc> </semi-joking>

And it so happens that people who don't see touch screens as being so amazing, also believe that a feature stripped camera won't work - it would be too niche, too expensive.
Nth attempt to make us appear Luddites failed

[Clavius]

For me, the reason why I picked Pentax 5 years ago as my system is the compactness and the quality of lens. 5 years ago mirrorless cameras were immature at best. Now 5 years later, these 2 things Pentax has that was once unique, is no longer unique. In fact their dSLR bodys, from a feature list perspective, is not really competitive imo. And anyone looking for a compact system? Well, there's the Fuji system, there's the Sony system, and there's all kinds of nice m43 cameras now.

Pentax needs to be able to check off all these checkboxes that other guys already checked years ago in order to stay competitive. They are not gonna attract new customers this way and no amount of rationalization is gonna help.

I agree! I chose Pentax about 7 years ago. And for a while they were truly ahead. WR was unique, so was SR and small form factor and very good affordability. It seemed to me it was a company that put vastly more resource into R&D then in marketing. Letting good products sell themselves. Clearly, they concluded that strategy was not working and moved some things around there. But I think it was a very good strategy for a tiny camera brand to survive. Heck, back then, it was the only time I ever saw Pentax in the stores, right next to Canon, Nikon and Olympus.

But is checking off the boxes that the other manufacturers already have enough? It seems then they're bound to lagging behind. They can also skip some boxes if they can find something to be unique in again.