[photoptimist]

My prediction is that the K-3 replacement will occur when the combined volume of K-1 + KP + K-70 sales start to slow. To remain financially viable, Ricoh is going to want to keep the camera factory running at 100%, not 90%, but not 110% either. Both under-utilization and over-utilization create extra costs per unit. As long as the current models are selling well, they'll delay the launch.

They probably already have the new body and core electronics done but will work on firmware improvements until the K3-3 production starts and they set a launch date.

[mee]

"We feel that there is a need" isn't one of the phrases they use when they are politely saying no. The difference is subtle, but significant. "That's a nice idea" is the sort of thing they used to say when asked about "un-crippling" the K-mount (and nowadays, they say "no", which means "oh Hell no, stop asking!"). That said, I think it is possible that they were undecided whether the K-1 and KP would cover the needs for a K-mount "flagship" until they actually launched the KP and got feedback from the home market.

Yes.. that is what I'm wondering too. To me, it looks like they made a mini K-1 expecting that to be enough since the K-1 took off so well. Then, once launched, got enough feedback loudly saying the opposite that they started work on an actual K-3 III.

I look at the D7500 from the D7200, see it is a clear downgrade in some ways, then wonder if this just isn't the start of a trend of slowing down on development by defining camera types more uniquely.

I'm not saying we don't get a K-3 III but I'm wondering if Ricoh were testing the waters to see if the KP as a K-3 replacement would stick, then realized it was clearly a 'no' and started/continued development. I mean if you as a company can get away with offering less for more then why wouldn't you? This is essentially the Canikon mantra (esp with Canon) and I can understand it - it is lucrative! And it makes sense for Ricoh Imaging too since they have a limited budget, they wouldn't want to fund large developments if the market told them they didn't have to (that is, if there wasn't a big demand for the pricier r&d'd product).

[frogfoot]

Are you going to tweet the full email chain for transparency?

We didn't communicate by e-mail. He told me that when I brought my broken K-3II to them for repair and we had some discussion with him about KP vs K-3II.

[RonHendriks1966]

My prediction is that the K-3 replacement will occur when the combined volume of K-1 + KP + K-70 sales start to slow. To remain financially viable, Ricoh is going to want to keep the camera factory running at 100%, not 90%, but not 110% either. Both under-utilization and over-utilization create extra costs per unit. As long as the current models are selling well, they'll delay the launch.

We will learn something soon enough when financial figures are presented for the past quarter. This is within 3 weeks.

On another paper, presentation for investors, it looks like they are going to invest in Theta. So maybe the other camera's are less important for the short time coming. On page 15 Theta is named for "business domain growth fields".

https://www.ricoh.com/IR/events/pdf/meeting117_3.pdf

---

Last edited by RonHendriks1966; 07-12-2017 at 08:10 AM.

[anemone]

We will learn something soon enough when financial figures are presented for the past quarter. This is within 3 weeks.

And then we can see if Pentax is doooooooomed.

On another paper, presentation for investors, it looks like they are going to invest in Theta. So maybe the other camera's are less important for the short time coming. On page 15 Theta is named for "business domain growth fields".

https://www.ricoh.com/IR/events/pdf/meeting117_3.pdf

My reading says Theta is consider important factor of internet services and 3D environments and its development has to be pursued to gain some market share. It may be good for Pentax DSLRs too. As actively developing algorithms for theta, there might be some same kind or totally different usage on DSLR environment. Like auto-tune was adapted to music.

I couldn't spot any mention of DSLR markets. I interpret it as a good news. There wasn't any hints to crawl back to core printer business. Even the structural reformation might work for Pentax. If people are rotated and knowledge moves from different parts of expertise, there might be something similar inventions like star tracer with SR.

And yes I'm optimistic and keep buying Pentax.

[Kunzite]

Speaking about how Theta might be good for Pentax DSLRs too...
Ricoh’s “Multi-Imaging Technology” pairs a K-1 with a Theta S spherical panoramic camera

[HillCountryRick]

Thanks Biz-Engineer. Good point on where to purchase. I was leaning towards online, amazon, etc., but will have a visit to the closest shop instead.

[monochrome]

We didn't communicate by e-mail. He told me that when I brought my broken K-3II to them for repair and we had some discussion with him about KP vs K-3II.

Good to know. There's a big hullabaloo over here about meetings with Russians and inside information. My post was humor (I guess it was bad humor).

[THoog]

I mean if you as a company can get away with offering less for more then why wouldn't you?

It doesn't have to be that nefarious. The K-1 must have consumed some of the pool of potential high-end customers. Are there enough left to justify using R&D and production resources on another K-3-type body? Or could they try something else until there ARE enough? There are at least a couple people who feel that "less is more" - I bought a KP, but I would have settled for a K-70, K-3II on closeout, or even a used K-3 rather than buy a new flagship body at what I expect the price to be, given the current state of the yen.

[Pål Jensen]

The K-1 is a different format; it is not APS. I expect the top APS body will provide the tech for the next 645 and FF bodies. There's no way Pentax will replace the K-3 with the KP.
Expect the K-3 replacement to move upmarked.

[THoog]

The K-1 is a different format; it is not APS.

You and I know that, but after the K-1 came out, there were at least a few people on PF questioning whether Pentax still needed to bother with APS-C, now that they had finally made the move to 35mm full frame. If they exist here, they could exist at Ricoh.

[felixenfeu]

Speaking about how Theta might be good for Pentax DSLRs too...
Ricoh’s “Multi-Imaging Technology” pairs a K-1 with a Theta S spherical panoramic camera

That's a very interesting experiment they did there, thanks for sharing !

[mee]

It doesn't have to be that nefarious. The K-1 must have consumed some of the pool of potential high-end customers. Are there enough left to justify using R&D and production resources on another K-3-type body? Or could they try something else until there ARE enough? There are at least a couple people who feel that "less is more" - I bought a KP, but I would have settled for a K-70, K-3II on closeout, or even a used K-3 rather than buy a new flagship body at what I expect the price to be, given the current state of the yen.

Calling this practice 'nefarious' could be considered unnecessarily accusative. I'd rather say it is more typical of corporations globally. The goal is to make money, not burn it. Even for Japanese companies, and their unusual business culture, it would be hard to argue otherwise directly. Profit is important.

With such a lacking modern lens lineup, I don't see Pentax having a large pool of 'high-end' customers for K mount. Once the lenses start to arrive in number, if ever, then I think we'll see more of an immigration to the land of Pentax. Many here, from reading the comments, bought the K-1 to use their suite of old lenses... attracting the same small pool of users is a recipe for stagnation, eventually we lose interest in buying new things or give up the hobby for various reasons.... So one must look outside the Pentax pond for new customers.. which I think the new D-FAs are designed to do.. if they ever launch the suckers. Not that I'm expecting large numbers to move over.. at least Canikon sized numbers of users.

One thing the Pentax community needs to hear and hear often is this: We can't keep living in the past. The past is the past; it is gone. Let it go. There is life now, today, that needs to be lived.

Honestly a D750 class FF body would have been more suited for me, but Pentax didn't offer that, so I got a K-1. It is nice but I can understand the "less is more" feeling. At least when it comes to file size. Originally I was waiting for the K-3 III to release.. but it didn't when I was ready to buy a new camera. They launched the KP instead.

[goldenarrow]

Calling this practice 'nefarious' could be considered unnecessarily accusative. I'd rather say it is more typical of corporations globally. The goal is to make money, not burn it. Even for Japanese companies, and their unusual business culture, it would be hard to argue otherwise directly. Profit is important.

I like the way you worded this. I am personally sick and tired of the Mainstream cultural bias towards making falsely-accusative statements with no negative consequences to those who utter them. We need a more holistic view of things to understand.

For instance, as a personal example, as a K3 user, I actually like many FF lenses because of a more flat surface usable with APS-C sensors (potentially less destructive corrections needed in post-processing). When I first got my K100D Super and then the K200D, I even went to buying cheap used 6x7 lenses and was able to push the sharpening (in certain ways) during post-processing much more than if I only had APS-C lenses. I am *so* glad that Pentax finally came out with the K1. What I don't like is that there are only old fixed focal length lenses based on old designs with lots of aberrations, lack of digital-coping coatings, etc. IMHO, we need to scrap ALL the old FF lenses (including the LTD's) and come out with brand new computer-aided-formulations for digital sensors, and might as well make ALL of them weather resistant (why not, just standardize that practice to bring long term costs down). That is one area that Pentax can still push/influence the whole industry to compete. Profit is important and making lenses that are relevant to the 21st Century would really help. (I met an Olympus user last weekend and he commented that he has heard the Pentax K3 is "a good camera".) So, the reputation seems to be growing among some camera enthusiasts.

Parallel to this, there are probably a couple of APS-C lenses that could be phased out, like, how many people using crop sensor cameras use a 40mm lens? It would be better to have an updated 35mm FF and crop a little as needed. Could not do that before digital all that easily but now a company can consolidate *some* (not all) of the crop sensor lenses to save some money which could then be plowed into the newer lenses. If I were in the market for a 35mm (or even a 30mm), I might get a refreshed FF version (but it does not exist yet!!).

So, bottom line is I would continue to buy APS-C cameras in K-mount as long as they follow-through on a complete revamp of both FF (and to a lesser degree, APS-C) lenses. I *think* the implications of this viewpoint are that Pentax does not need huge numbers of converts from Canikon, but just enough "at the margin" where profits are increased to give the Parent company Ricoh to take notice that something good is happening at Pentax and not to screw it up by meddling, but in fact, empower it a little MORE, so that this potential can be actualized! And we need that actualization NOW or we miss the opportunity in a tangible sense.

This is a different perspective so I can understand if some people would disagree.

[x4rd]

I heard that Ricoh admitted that the K-3 line is over so there will not be K-3 III. In my opinion they are working on a higher-end model with a new designation.