[GeneV]

"Lots" of folks? I read more people saying they don't use it, than the one or two saying "Good riddance". But that's the Internet effect for you. I'm in the 'don't care' category, since I last used the pop-up flash about three bodies ago, but I acknowledge I'm speaking for myself. I don't really believe Ricoh marketing didn't do their homework and discover that most users don't care much about the pop-up flash.

I travel a fair bit, and I know I'll find the GPS unit more useful as an on-board feature than the flash. However, I'll repeat what I said elsewhere - LEDs will eventually replace built-in flash units and I'm a little surprised that hasn't happened yet. Maybe we'll see a tiny hotshoe accessory first.

The "success" of the Mark Newson K01 (whatever any of us thinks of the camera) tends to cast some doubt on Ricoh's marketing homework. I get why say, the EVF on a Sony is worth more than a pop-up flash; I would get why an LED would make sense. My point before is that if people really felt the GPS was a good trade-off, the GPS units would be flying off the shelf, and I wonder if this is really the case.

[jaad75]

You need fast responsive lenses to "see" its performance no?

I don't think lenses are that slow as the most seem to think. And some of screwdriven lenses are extremely quick.

With Continuous AF (AF.C), tracking of subjects that move toward the depth direction is improved. The synergy with the PENTAX Real-time Scene Analysis System makes AF shooting of moving objects smooth and easy.

[ChristianRock]

This is not just that even thought the thread is 5MP enough clearly has some discussion of the necessity of so much resolution.

That thread was started by a (very good) portrait and sports photographer. In that context, too much detail can be a bad thing.

This is more of what a feature is really giving you.

Could it be a case of you not understanding the proper use of the feature?

When you add more MP, you get the added resolution all the time if your lenses are good enough and you shutter speed is fast enough.

I think this feature proves again, that because of the Bayer filter, you do *not* get the full resolution of the lens unless you get around the Bayer limitations. Sigma went at it one way with Foveon, Pentax is doing it in a different way.

The super resolution thing is limited to some case, in particular using a tripod on still subjects. It is not at all the same effect as if the sensor was improved and could provide 36MP will keeping the same DR and noise levels. Even in this last case many would consider this as unecessary.

Well, I don't see a sensor like what you are describing available today. Probably won't be for a few years. Even so - I think what we are seeing is actually *better* than what could be accomplished with a 36MP Bayer sensor, but that's just me guessing. 36MP is only 50% more resolution than 24MP, obviously, and what we see with the new pixel shift seems more dramatic than that. But that's just my observation. I'm sure there will be comparisons with the D810 in the future, so we'll know.

What Pentax is doing is, getting the best of what they got. It's what some of us love Pentax for doing.

The SR is a bit improved, I'd say let see. They claim more stop but the actual number of stop claimed was always amphatised anyway. Most reviewers testing the feature on older models tend to say it more 2stop than 3.5. So maybe now it is 2.5 stop you can use 1/50 instead of 1/75 with your 200mm. Ok.

Source please? I think this is false information that you are presenting. I've never seen this in any reliable test made, ever.

As someone said earlier, what is your intention here? All you seem to do is try to desqualify Pentax, possibly with misinformation. It makes one wonder.

[Stavri]

Screw-drive lenses is ALL i own. So far the confirmed AF improvement has ONLY been noticed on the new D-FA premium zooms, let's hopep that screw-drives get the benefit too.

[GeneV]

Well for starter that's more information for google, facebook or flickr to sell to advertisers. Getting GPS coordinate automatically from exif is a far better way to spy on somebody than trying to do image recognition to try to see if it match a well known location.

Otherwise, it help for identity theft to. That funny because i changed work and we add a presentation on Internet security and they spoke of the need to minimze your presence online... Something that make me think that for my flickr and PentaxForum account I should have more an avartar name than my real name.

But yes for a few cases that can be quite usefull... Where this photo was actually taken? The GPS would give the info. And the astro photo case. This last one is sure the most interresting one but is limited to thoses interrested by this kind of pictures.

Yes. I have found that my phone is the handiest way to keep track of location, if I am interested in that being known.

[jaad75]

The SR is a bit improved, I'd say let see. They claim more stop but the actual number of stop claimed was always amphatised anyway. Most reviewers testing the feature on older models tend to say it more 2stop than 3.5. So maybe now it is 2.5 stop you can use 1/50 instead of 1/75 with your 200mm. Ok.

The K-3 SR is tested to be ~3.5 EV, so it's exactly what is claimed. Now they claim 4.5 EV by CIPA standards, so it should be close to that in real shooting situation.

[monochrome]

The "success" of the Mark Newson K01 (whatever any of us thinks of the camera) tends to cast some doubt on Ricoh's marketing homework. I get why say, the EVF on a Sony is worth more than a pop-up flash; I would get why an LED would make sense. My point before is that if people really felt the GPS was a good trade-off, the GPS units would be flying off the shelf, and I wonder if this is really the case.

It isn't a simple as
Ricoh making an ill-advised decision. It was likely a very well-informed decision.

I wrote elsewhere: The uses for which Pixel Shifting technology is most effective (Macro, Product, Architecture, Landscape, some Nature, Birding, ) also lend themselves in many cases to on-board GPS and/or don't lend themselves to on-board flash - or only ambient light. In most cases external flash, studio constant lighting or ring flash is used for the favored styles.

I suspect this particular camera is purpose-designed with a different set of internal features than those in the more generalist K-3. I suspect this will not be the only Pentax body released minus OBF - but I also suspect there will be other flagship bodies released WITH OBF instead of something else.

It might just be this is a specialist camera but many users expected a generalist camera. It's a market tactic, not a strategic decision.

[jaad75]

So far the confirmed AF improvement has ONLY been noticed on the new D-FA premium zooms

Who confirmed what with the K-3II? DFA zooms are fast with the original K-3, I haven't seen any reports about the II.

[IchabodCrane]

Screw-drive lenses is ALL i own. So far the confirmed AF improvement has ONLY been noticed on the new D-FA premium zooms, let's hopep that screw-drives get the benefit too.

Can we wait until they actually ship the K-3.2 and the new lenses before we declare anything about the AF speed?

[Matthew Saville]

It isn't a simple as
Ricoh making an ill-advised decision. It was likely a very well-informed decision.

I wrote elsewhere: The uses for which Pixel Shifting technology is most effective (Macro, Product, Architecture, Landscape, some Nature, Birding, ) also lend themselves in many cases to on-board GPS and/or don't lend themselves to on-board flash - or only ambient light. In most cases external flash, studio constant lighting or ring flash is used for the favored styles.

I suspect this particular camera is purpose-designed with a different set of internal features than those in the more generalist K-3. I suspect this will not be the only Pentax body released minus OBF - but I also suspect there will be other flagship bodies released WITH OBF instead of something else.

It might just be this is a specialist camera but many users expected a generalist camera. It's a market tactic, not a strategic decision.

Agreed.

And by the way, be glad you're not a Nikon D5500 potential buyer! While the K-3 II is a carefully considered trade-off, Nikon is over there flat-out subtracting features from their cameras. The GPS was present in the D5300, and now it's gone from the D5500 for no reason.

Every camera company makes tough decisions that will disappoint some, but please others. And we can't expect to be in the crowd of pleased folks every single time such a decision has been made.

Personally, I suspect they did determine that it was a "majority rules" situation--more people wanted built-in GPS than a pop-up flash.

[mee]

The K-3 SR is tested to be ~3.5 EV, so it's exactly what is claimed. Now they claim 4.5 EV by CIPA standards, so it should be close to that in real shooting situation.

In theory, doesn't this mean one should be able to slow down the shutter speed a bit with the improved SR?

[jaad75]

In theory, doesn't this mean one should be able to slow down the shutter speed a bit with the improved SR?

That's exactly what it means - one should be able to slow down the shutter speed twice, compared to the K-3.

[monochrome]

[...] Personally, I suspect they did determine that it was a "majority rules" situation--more people wanted built-in GPS than a pop-up flash.

It seems to me this camera is just optimized for a different market segment than most generalist offerings such as the K-series digitals.

I believe the driving was factor was the decision to demonstrate Pixel Shifting in the release. Having made that decision, it seems logical the camera was optimized for the uses to which Pixel Shifting is best-suited.

Those seem to be: Macro, Product, Architecture, some Landscape, some Nature - none of which is likely to use OBF but many of which are natural users of GPS location tagging.

Once they decided to optimize the camera by replacing OBF with GPS it is a simple step to add Birding, any Landscape and any other user deomgraphic to the targeting tactics.

I don't believe Ricooh is taking something away from the loyal user base. They're just releasing a specialized camera body in a '-II' designation - in large measure (perhaps entirely) to demonstrate a major new technology.

It seems to me 'continuation' releases have often been more narrowly optimized than primary releases.

[Matthew Saville]

In theory, doesn't this mean one should be able to slow down the shutter speed a bit with the improved SR?

Or, as is more often the case for me as a wedding / event photographer, it means I can "shoot sloppy" at the same shutter speeds. Even with stabilization, I usually have to keep my shutter speeds quite high if I'm really shooting run-and-gun style in active situations.

In other words, at 50mm I might still not drop below 1/50 or even 1/100 sec, for subject blur reasons, but at least I won't have to worry too much about being rock-steady.

---------- Post added 04-24-15 at 03:43 PM ----------

It seems to me this camera is just optimized for a different market segment than most generalist offerings such as the K-series digitals.

I believe the driving was factor was the decision to demonstrate Pixel Shifting in the release. Having made that decision, it seems logical the camera was optimized for the uses to which Pixel Shifting is best-suited.

Those seem to be: Macro, Product, Architecture, some Landscape, some Nature - none of which is likely to use OBF but many of which are natural users of GPS location tagging.

Once they decided to optimize the camera by replacing OBF with GPS it is a simple step to add Birding, any Landscape and any other user deomgraphic to the targeting tactics.

I don't believe Ricooh is taking something away from the loyal user base. They're just releasing a specialized camera body in a '-II' designation - in large measure (perhaps entirely) to demonstrate a major new technology.

It seems to me 'continuation' releases have often been more narrowly optimized than primary releases.

Yeah, you said it better than I could...

[mee]

That's exactly what it means - one should be able to slow down the shutter speed twice, compared to the K-3.

Or, as is more often the case for me as a wedding / event photographer, it means I can "shoot sloppy" at the same shutter speeds. Even with stabilization, I usually have to keep my shutter speeds quite high if I'm really shooting run-and-gun style in active situations.

In other words, at 50mm I might still not drop below 1/50 or even 1/100 sec, for subject blur reasons, but at least I won't have to worry too much about being rock-steady.

That seems reason enough to upgrade to this body. Will have to think about this some..

In effect, they've given us the extra stop or so of ISO (using generic FF sensor) by switching it up on us on the shutter speed.. but same outcome... in an APS-C body.

that's neat!!!

It can only mean the FF body will do splendidly well with low light situations.