[Steve.Ledger]

I don't know about that screen. It looks a bit cramped and doesn't look like a touch screen.

I hope it isn't a touch screen, I really do.

---------- Post added 02-07-15 at 06:09 AM ----------

It will be named KS-2 yes.

Really? I thought it was K-S2 printed on the camera

[mrNewt]

I blame those rowdy Canadians!

I've also added an image for Parallax to enjoy

[Mistral75]

(...)

It will be named KS-2 yes.

KS-2? Are you sure?



Sears KS-2 (Ricoh XR-7): produced by Ricoh Corporation, Japan for Sears

[RGlasel]

Not sure where you get your facts, but there are quite a few serious/professional photographers that have went mirrorless or tend to prefer mirrorless more and more.
In the end every single camera can be a fashion statement and a point for bragging rights. True photographers or professionals will do the job with whatever they have and most of them will usually tend to prefer the lighther, smaller gear possible.

No facts, just my opinion. On the very few occasions where I've hit the shutter button so often I've worried about the state of my batteries, I've noticed that smaller isn't better. It's easier to hold a bigger, well-balanced camera. I even noticed that with a Super Program with and without a power winder. I also find the optical viewfinder much less trouble, because I trust what I see more. So, in my opinion, the smaller size of a mirrorless camera isn't an advantage if I'm going to be taking lots of pictures. In terms of the quality of images that MILCs are capable of producing, there should be no difference. However, if I'm just going to carry it around, a stylish, more compact camera would probably look better.

[mrNewt]

No facts, just my opinion. On the very few occasions where I've hit the shutter button so often I've worried about the state of my batteries, I've noticed that smaller isn't better. It's easier to hold a bigger, well-balanced camera. I even noticed that with a Super Program with and without a power winder. I also find the optical viewfinder much less trouble, because I trust what I see more. So, in my opinion, the smaller size of a mirrorless camera isn't an advantage if I'm going to be taking lots of pictures. In terms of the quality of images that MILCs are capable of producing, there should be no difference. However, if I'm just going to carry it around, a stylish, more compact camera would probably look better.

Fair enough!

[kadajawi]

Do we know the K-S2 isn't the K-50 replacement? It can be even though they may sell both side-by-side for a finite time. If we look at the K-50 and the plethora of colors it's available in, that mid-range offering starts to look more and more like the "something different" category Ricoh explained the "S" line represents. K-50 in colors is already quite visually different than the Rebel and D3xxx/D5xxx lineups. The K-S2 might just be the next logical progression of their thinking.

Hmm... possible. But the way they have said it (or so I imagine) anything goes in the S line. So using that for the midrange models is a bit... weird. I was thinking S is special for Pentax... otherwise any Pentax could be called that, if you take other brands as a reference point.


You are more optimistic than I am, monochrome, but I am heading that direction. Still, it would be nice for Pentax to have a) brand recognition (I'm thinking ads and other things that aim to build awareness of the brand and of it's long history) and b) to have cameras in store and salesmen nudging potential buyers into trying them.


Better AF sounds like a given, since Pentax does have that tech, and how would they profit from limiting this camera? Not having a display on top is enough for me to not be interested in buying it.


@Steve: Why not a touchscreen? It can be useful at times... but all functions should also be accessible through buttons.


@RGlasel: Who says mirrorless can't be reasonably sized and well balanced? Just look at cameras like the GH4 or the NX1. Relatively compact, but not excessively so. However the overall package can be more compact and lighter. What you see in an OVF has no relation to what you'll get, while EVFs give you a much more accurate view of what you'll be getting... plus a bit wiggle room (think <100% OVFs... what it showed was guaranteed to end up on the photo, and you'd get a bit more). And don't forget the tech is improving. My HTC from 6 years ago had a 480x320 screen, and that was as good as it got. My Xiaomi from 1-2 years ago has a 1920x1080 screen. Before that I had a Samsung with a 1280x720 screen with a big dynamic range, inky blacks, ... and there are much better screens out there already. The lag has been reduced to something like 5 ms for the Samsung NX1, so that's also getting really close to an OVF. Plus for APS-C sized cameras there is simply a limit on size and brightness, and we have reached that (unless fancy mirror tech makes way into the camera, that can adjust the transparency). EVFs can be bigger, brighter at low light (depending on the sensor), have different aids to judge focus, exposure etc., ... Don't count the tech out on the basis of what we have had so far.

[Parallax]

I've also added an image for Parallax to enjoy

LOL

[Dr_who]

KS-2? Are you sure?



Sears KS-2 (Ricoh XR-7): produced by Ricoh Corporation, Japan for Sears

To be fair the one sold to sear is KS-2 not K-S2....

[monochrome]

Still, it would be nice for Pentax to have a) brand recognition (I'm thinking ads and other things that aim to build awareness of the brand

I believe they do that in Japan. There are better uses of money at this time in Americas.

and of it's long history) and b) to have cameras in store and salesmen nudging potential buyers into trying them.

Think they haven't tried?

Easy to say - not so easy to do in Americas. These days, the nature of the high-volume, low-margin Dealer Agreements here is the manufacturer effectively finances the entire sale, from warehouse to consumer shopping bag. Essentially all the B&M store owner does is turn on the lights.

Ricoh might as well just lease space in the stores the way Ralph Lauren does. High Margin, Low Volume, no advertising is Ricoh's pricing model. US B&M retailers - for the most part - aren't biting. Canon and Nikon have erected ridiculously effective economic barriers to entry. It oughta be a crime.

[Mistral75]

To be fair the one sold to sear is KS-2 not K-S2....

That's exactly my point .

[reh321]

Ricoh might as well just lease space in the stores the way Ralph Lauren does. High Margin, Low Volume, no advertising is Ricoh's pricing model. US B&M retailers - for the most part - aren't biting. Canon and Nikon have erected ridiculously effective economic barriers to entry. It oughta be a crime.

To Ricoh's credit, I did see a white Pentax K-50 at a local Super Target - and it really stood out in a sea of black Canikon.

[monochrome]

To Ricoh's credit, I did see a white Pentax K-50 at a local Super Target - and it really stood out in a sea of black Canikon.

No question Jim and Brian are doing better but man what they have to go through to convince people this isn't the same old Hoya BS.

The camera specialty stores are REALLY tough.

[IchabodCrane]

....

@RGlasel: Who says mirrorless can't be reasonably sized and well balanced? Just look at cameras like the GH4 or the NX1. Relatively compact, but not excessively so. However the overall package can be more compact and lighter. What you see in an OVF has no relation to what you'll get, while EVFs give you a much more accurate view of what you'll be getting... plus a bit wiggle room (think <100% OVFs... what it showed was guaranteed to end up on the photo, and you'd get a bit more). And don't forget the tech is improving. My HTC from 6 years ago had a 480x320 screen, and that was as good as it got. My Xiaomi from 1-2 years ago has a 1920x1080 screen. Before that I had a Samsung with a 1280x720 screen with a big dynamic range, inky blacks, ... and there are much better screens out there already. The lag has been reduced to something like 5 ms for the Samsung NX1, so that's also getting really close to an OVF. Plus for APS-C sized cameras there is simply a limit on size and brightness, and we have reached that (unless fancy mirror tech makes way into the camera, that can adjust the transparency). EVFs can be bigger, brighter at low light (depending on the sensor), have different aids to judge focus, exposure etc., ... Don't count the tech out on the basis of what we have had so far.

Agree about the ergonomics of MILCs. There's nothing that keeps them from being designed very well. About the EVF... the best ones still only display 1 to 2 MP which equates to a very modestly sized 1080P monitor (actually, about 84% width of a 1080P monitor). Compare that to 16 to 36 MP being recorded by the sensor and you quickly realize that you're not really seeing what you're getting. From a compositional standpoint, yes, absolutely it's good. Dynamic range of a sensor is around 13 EV, most of which is viewable through an OVF. Displayable dynamic range of an EVF? Significantly less than the 13 EVs the sensor can record.

I'm not against EVFs, either. One of my cameras has one.

[gaweidert]

I have found the K-S1 to be a camera that has intrigued since it was announced. I have been impressed with the photos that have been posted on this site. If the K-S2 has the same sensor and added features it will be a very solid and capable camera.

As to what it "replaces" I don't really care. Each model should stand on it's own merits. I will stick with Pentax for a two very simple reasons. They make quality cameras, and I have a lot of legacy glass. I have been using Pentax and K mount glass for over 40 years and some of that glass still hits home runs on my digital cameras today. My SMC screw mount 55mm f1.8 lens is still a favorite of mine. I can't wait to give it a go on the FF Pentax later this year.

I do think that this year we are going to see the fruits of Ricoh's ownership of the Pentax camera line. As someone who has shot thousands of transparencies on my two Ricoh XRM cameras I have no issue with them owing Pentax. They have experience in the business and a history of making some pretty good cameras themselves. So in reference to a certain thread on the K3 forum, bring on the hociR! I fear it not!

[THoog]

The camera specialty stores are REALLY tough.

I picture them as a DPR review on steroids: "Yeah, the K-3 is the best APS-C ever, BUT it's APS-C". "Yeah, it has WR, IBIS, great battery life and ergonomics, and a near-silent shutter, BUT there aren't any f/1.2 primes for it." "Yeah, the Ricoh Booth was showing the new 645Z, BUT people weren't lined up like they were for the Nikon D750." (The negative always comes last.)