[biz-engineer]

Some how it doesn't look that different then thè da*60-250mm lens to me.

Good point, indeed the 60-250 collar is positioned almost at the same place and the collar on the 70-200.

---------- Post added 18-12-15 at 02:10 ----------

Too much time off the FF market, and there you go ...

The Nikon version is released and available for purchase :-)

[monochrome]

Good point, indeed the 60-250 collar is positioned almost at the same place and the collar on the 70-200.

The K-1 body and grip are different from the K-3 body and grip. Don't assume the barrel design of the 60~250 transfers to the 70~200 on K-1.

[VoiceOfReason]

There isn't on de 150-450 apparently.

The 150-450 is heavy, but has screw holes for you to put your tripod mount in 2 spots. The tripod food doubles great as a handle too.

[kenspo]

I have a question for the ambassador that maybe can read this.. You can sell the gear provided by Ricoh? I would think that the contract say "no" on any circunstances, but i dont have a contract with Ricoh or any other manufacturer, or say that after all test have been done you can dispose the equipment whatever form you want?

No. Wo can't sell it. But we can buy it our selfs very cheap if we want too if/when we end the contract.

[redpit]

No. Wo can't sell it. But we can buy it our selfs very cheap if we want too if/when we end the contract.

Kenspo since we found you after a long time, I would like to ask you how the Christmas season is going for you this year? I have heard that Santa Claus is starting his journey form the Scandinavian countries Have you seen any signs of him?

By the way I wish you and your family Merry Christmas!

[RonHendriks1966]

The problem with this is that there are no photographers within the Ricoh Imaging business at the time and for some years now. So problems in the field only come to the surface at a point very late. Way after the designing and just week's before the sale release. I don't think at Ricoh they even know they have this problem in their team.

[redpit]

The problem with this is that there are no photographers within the Ricoh Imaging business at the time and for some years now. So problems in the field only come to the surface at a point very late. Way after the designing and just week's before the sale release. I don't think at Ricoh they even know they have this problem in their team.

I'm not sure you are right on this my friend because I've read in Pentax officers interviews that the personnel involved with R&D and lens designing are photographers themselves. You don't have to be an expert to discover a problem that has to do with ergonomics. Pentax ergonomics are superb up to now. Don't forget that other major brands that have armies of professional photographers have released defected products again and again in the recent past. So, I think that since Pentax-Ricoh is a smaller company it does things different and with different time schedules.

At the end what matters is the quality/price ratio. If it remains high I have no other issue with Pentax even if I have to wait a bit more...

[biz-engineer]

The problem with this is that there are no photographers within the Ricoh Imaging business at the time and for some years now. So problems in the field only come to the surface at a point very late. Way after the designing and just week's before the sale release. I don't think at Ricoh they even know they have this problem in their team.

Well, usually, unless we are unprofessional, we don't wait until a product launch to market to test it. Lens prototypes can be sent for evaluation way before production start takes place. If the lens housing is really the reason of postponement, it's tells me that Ricoh are really unprofessional. To me, it's a mega joke, and I am really sorry for the Pentaxians who are accepting/excusing this (today the industry is not working with methods of 70 years ago...). Do you this this at Canon?

[rawr]

You don't have to be an expert to discover a problem that has to do with ergonomics.

Well, aside from the 70-200 issue, two prominent and recent issues related to Pentax poor design decisions include:

- the K-30 problem with the 'brow' or forward protrusion of the pentaprism/flash hump (with the Pentax logo on it) over the lens mount (pic related), meaning that some lenses (a few tilt-shift designs, IIRC) could not be mounted properly on the K-30. Hence the very short lifespan of the K-30 design, attractive as it was;



- the current problem with the K-3 II (and to a lesser extent the K-3) where the flash hot shoe sits very low and tight against the upwards-sloping K-3 II pentaprism hump, preventing some third-party flashes (eg some Yongnuo's) from mounting properly on the K-3II hotshoe.

Luckily, the last problem seems to have been fixed in the K-1 (pic related), where the flash hotshoe has now been elevated a bit and has more room in front of it.



Many of these issues could have been picked up before production began if there had been a test program that subjected the cameras to the very varied user environments that are part of the real world.

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

Well, aside from the 70-200 issue, two prominent and recent issues related to Pentax poor design decisions include:

- the K-30 problem with the 'brow' or forward protrusion of the pentaprism/flash hump (with the Pentax logo on it) over the lens mount (pic related), meaning that some lenses (a few tilt-shift designs, IIRC) could not be mounted properly on the K-30. Hence the very short lifespan of the K-30 design, attractive as it was;

It's not a design fault if some third party stuff won't fit properly on a camera. How many people with a K-30 had a tilt-shift lens, I wonder. IIRC some Nikon cameras couldn't mount the tilt/shift lenses they made because of the pentaprism housing.

[awaldram]

It's not a design fault if some third party stuff won't fit properly on a camera. How many people with a K-30 had a tilt-shift lens, I wonder. IIRC some Nikon cameras couldn't mount the tilt/shift lenses they made because of the pentaprism housing.

exactly 3rd party product being incompatible is a plus feature for the OEM manufacturer - Caveat Emptor

I'm sure all OEMs would do it both Canon and Nikon have changed their mount protocols to stop all Sigma lens working in the past.
And Pentax adding GPS data to flash protocol broke most non field up-gradable 3rd party flashes.

[D1N0]

Youngnuo could have designed their flashes more future proof... I think the K-30 was just to wild for ricoh...

[baldeagle21b]

Well, aside from the 70-200 issue, two prominent and recent issues related to Pentax poor design decisions include:

- the K-30 problem with the 'brow' or forward protrusion of the pentaprism/flash hump (with the Pentax logo on it) over the lens mount (pic related), meaning that some lenses (a few tilt-shift designs, IIRC) could not be mounted properly on the K-30. Hence the very short lifespan of the K-30 design, attractive as it was;



- the current problem with the K-3 II (and to a lesser extent the K-3) where the flash hot shoe sits very low and tight against the upwards-sloping K-3 II pentaprism hump, preventing some third-party flashes (eg some Yongnuo's) from mounting properly on the K-3II hotshoe.

Luckily, the last problem seems to have been fixed in the K-1 (pic related), where the flash hotshoe has now been elevated a bit and has more room in front of it.



Many of these issues could have been picked up before production began if there had been a test program that subjected the cameras to the very varied user environments that are part of the real world.

Pentax bears responsibility for proper operation of Yongnuo flashes? That's hilarious, man. Thanks for the laugh.

[Kunzite]

Well, usually, unless we are unprofessional, we don't wait until a product launch to market to test it. Lens prototypes can be sent for evaluation way before production start takes place. If the lens housing is really the reason of postponement, it's tells me that Ricoh are really unprofessional. To me, it's a mega joke, and I am really sorry for the Pentaxians who are accepting/excusing this (today the industry is not working with methods of 70 years ago...). Do you this this at Canon?

This is an unprofessional attitude
Things happen. Some of them are discovered early on, but no matter how much effort you put in there's no such thing as a "bug-free" product.

I live in the software world where such issues are more evident; it's the same everywhere. The professional attitude is to accept that bugs happens, and do your best:
a. to discover them early on (as much as possible)
b. to do your best fixing them, given the resources available

[bertwert]

When you shoot in Portrait mode on the tripod with the grip of the camera DOWN rather than up*

Who does this... ?