[Pål Jensen]

Make no mistake - in the not-too-distant future virtually all large-sensor cameras will be mirrorless and OVFs will be a relic. .

This IS a mistake. There's no such trend. The camera market is diversifying due to the inherent freedom of design sensors, as oposed to film, give the designers. Optical viewfinder is a feature appreciated by most serious photographers.
It is no coincidence that the successful(?) mirrorless companies are those who failed, or even didn't try, to penetrate the DSLR marked. The DSLR market is far more stable and has a far more loyal user group than other camera systems that are more prone to market whims and short lived trends; you can sell a million cameras but it won't help much in the future if the new customers aren't loyal. This why Pentax exist now at all - the millions of K-mount lenses.

[Rondec]

People often focus on new camera sales, but I think it would be a lot more interesting to know what current photographers are using for shooting and what they would replace their gear with when they decide to buy their next camera -- that is more sorting between SLRs in use and mirrorless in use. I know a professional photographer who still uses a D700. Sure, it is old, but it gets the job done for her and she is happy. When it finally breaks or she decides she needs something new, she'll get an SLR. In the meantime, she hasn't "counted" towards statistics for many years.

My guess is that SLRs in use far out number mirrorless ILCs in use.

People who upgrade every time a new camera body is released are much more like to be hobby-ist photographers than professionals. Pros just use what gets the job done and buy new only when there is a need. When your photography pays the bills, you aren't as quick to drop a bunch of money on an unneeded expense.

[D1N0]

For Fujifilm going mirrorless was a no brainer. They didn't have a legacy to support. They dropped slr's in the mid eighties before the advent of AF. They dabbled a bit with F-mount camera's but that wasn't a real serious effort. Of the traditional camera companies only Olympus went mirrorless (not counting Sony) and it nearly killed them. Canon only got more serious about it recently. Pentax and Nikon tried out small sensor system that wouldn't bite their DSLR sales. Panasonic came from a video background. Leica ofcourse was already a mirrorless company. Their R9 SLR with optional digital module wasn't a success so they discontinued the R line.

[photoptimist]

can anybody explain this to me??
Pentax DSLR
Why would the K3ii be cheaper than a k5iis?

It's probably a matter of relative supply & demand. There's probably almost no new K-5s in stock but there's still a trickle of people that really want that specific camera and will pay a premium. Even if K-3 demand is higher than K-5 demand, there may be plenty K-3's still in inventory.

I've seen this happen with computer mice. My wife's old Logitech mouse died. That exact model of mouse is still available on Amazon but at TWICE the original retail price and about 50% higher than newer Logitech models of similar or better functionality.

[Kunzite]

I'd guess they couldn't be bothered to update the K-5IIs' price. It might not even be in stock, or actually available.

[mee]

Mee, you're mistaken about this. OTOH I've made a mistake myself, in the initial post but corrected in a following post: it's "roadmaps are not meant to keep us up to date". Is that the reason for your creative interpretation?

I never said, on this forum or elsewhere, that the roadmap is untruthful in any way; on the contrary, I'm expecting those lenses.
I never accused Ricoh of lying; on the contrary, I take issue with such empty accusations (because lying is a serious matter, and so are accusations about lying). I hate when people tries to put such nasty words in my mouth. And, generally, when they insist I meant the exact opposite of what I'm writing.
"Extra wording" was included even in my initial response to Rondec. My position was always consistent, and in direct contradiction with your interpretation. I told you, it's your interpretation that's wrong.
Last but not least, "roadmaps are not meant to keep us up to date" is not the same thing as "roadmaps are meant to trick us". It simply means they're published with a different scope (which scope was mentioned in the initial response to Rondec).

In any case, you either accept this or you'll never will, so I'm done here.

The issue here isn't what you meant it is what you said. I can't go into your mind to get what you meant, I can only know/read what you said. And the two were initially very different and opposite. That was the point I was making - be careful in your wording, especially if you're going to make large, blanket statements.

As I already mentioned in an earlier post, I know what you mean now, as you unraveled it a bit more with more wording. So no worries.

[cfraz]

Ricoh had an opportunity to begin again when they acquired Pentax in 2011. That was the moment when they could have wiped the slate and started out on new-generation mirrorless cameras with new-generation, automated production lines to make them on.

I should think buying Pentax was the defining moment Ricoh signaled they were NOT going MILC. Why spend a billion yen on brand, production facilities, expertise, and goods just to abandon virtually all of it and start over with something completely different?

[Kunzite]

...

In any case, you either accept this or you'll never will, so I'm done here.

[mee]

It's probably a matter of relative supply & demand. There's probably almost no new K-5s in stock but there's still a trickle of people that really want that specific camera and will pay a premium. Even if K-3 demand is higher than K-5 demand, there may be plenty K-3's still in inventory.

I've seen this happen with computer mice. My wife's old Logitech mouse died. That exact model of mouse is still available on Amazon but at TWICE the original retail price and about 50% higher than newer Logitech models of similar or better functionality.

I see this happens often, there are a number of users that find a product and then want to just stick with it. Some company/person will buy up the old stock and then raise the price through the roof as they know there are a number of users that only want THAT product. The other issue, with computer hardware, is there are a number of people that will need specific old technology (CPU, motherboard, memory) to keep their old system running, so they will pay through the nose for that gear versus just buying a new system. A case of Supply/Demand on the far end of the product lifecycle. Due to this, I've found it makes more sense to continually upgrade than keep the old system going at times.

[Rondec]

I should think buying Pentax was the defining moment Ricoh signaled they were NOT going MILC. Why spend a billion yen on brand, production facilities, expertise, and goods just to abandon virtually all of it and start over with something completely different?

Exactly. Ricoh bought a k mount and 645 lens portfolio and SLR know-how. Pentax didn't have a history of high tech cameras with EVFs or mirrorless ILC tech. Why buy Pentax purely to blow it up and release a completely different lens mount?

[mee]

Exactly. Ricoh bought a k mount and 645 lens portfolio and SLR know-how. Pentax didn't have a history of high tech cameras with EVFs or mirrorless ILC tech. Why buy Pentax purely to blow it up and release a completely different lens mount?

Further, why then dedicate R&D on a full frame K mount body and associated high quality D-FA in K mount if they were interested in mirrorless on a new mount? They've given us a number of clues that mirrorless on a new mount isn't a serious consideration for them.

Actually, I'd go even further and say with the dedication to DSLRs and Pentaprism OVFs on them, they've also given us another clue: If DSLRs are going to become a niche, Ricoh want to attract those buyers to Pentax.

[mecrox]

I should think buying Pentax was the defining moment Ricoh signaled they were NOT going MILC. Why spend a billion yen on brand, production facilities, expertise, and goods just to abandon virtually all of it and start over with something completely different?

Most of what Rioch bought was a brand name with venerable roots above all in Japan, imho. And they bought it for peanuts in the greater scheme. Nor did they have to suddenly stop producing DSLRs, far from it. I am sure they would not have.There would have been no reason to. But if they had started back then on a credible mirrorless system to provide for the future instead of dickering about with the K-01 and the Q they could have had a capable one by now several generations in and with a lens catalogue built out. Instead, as I said earlier, Fuji have moved in to occupy that space together with Sony and co. Fuji have just compounded their depredations by moving into the Pentax 645's space as well and more or less threatening to knock it out. Have they been targeting Pentax? Does look a bit like it. One way and another, it's too late now. Back to the thread, I think it is safe to say the next major camera in the Pentax stable will be a DSLR.

[Kunzite]

Most of what Rioch bought was a brand name with venerable roots above all in Japan, imho.

A brand name, yes. And fixed assets, including a few factories. And trained personnel, including engineers capable of designing competitive cameras and lenses. And distribution networks and subsidiaries.
And a significant installed user base.

If they started back then, perhaps they'd have a MILC system almost ready to be launched, by now And no K-1, no D FA* 70-200, no D FA 150-450, no DFA* primes on the roadmap.

[mee]

Most of what Rioch bought was a brand name with venerable roots above all in Japan, imho. And they bought it for peanuts in the greater scheme. Nor did they have to suddenly stop producing DSLRs, far from it. I am sure they would not have.There would have been no reason to. But if they had started back then on a credible mirrorless system to provide for the future instead of dickering about with the K-01 and the Q they could have had a capable one by now several generations in and with a lens catalogue built out. Instead, as I said earlier, Fuji have moved in to occupy that space together with Sony and co. Fuji have just compounded their depredations by moving into the Pentax 645's space as well and more or less threatening to knock it out. Have they been targeting Pentax? Does look a bit like it. One way and another, it's too late now. Back to the thread, I think it is safe to say the next major camera in the Pentax stable will be a DSLR.

Yes another good point. They bought for cheap, I suspect because it was a small financial risk in case it flopped. But that also means they probably saw Pentax's attributes and decided they were going to market that... since it is already developed. They just have keep it updated.. a lot cheaper than cleaning the slate and starting from the ground up on a brand new system.

Yet Pentax's unique attributes (namely weathersealing and IBIS) aren't so unique anymore in cameras. However, in a DSLR they are still the only brand that have both strong weathersealing and IBIS. So they and the market are seemingly working together to build their niche..

[photoptimist]

Yes another good point. They bought for cheap, I suspect because it was a small financial risk in case it flopped. But that also means they probably saw Pentax's attributes and decided they were going to market that... since it is already developed. They just have keep it updated.. a lot cheaper than cleaning the slate and starting from the ground up on a brand new system.

Yet Pentax's unique attributes (namely weathersealing and IBIS) aren't so unique anymore in cameras. However, in a DSLR they are still the only brand that have both strong weathersealing and IBIS. So they and the market are seemingly working together to build their niche..

Exactly! And Pentax's unique attributes for mirrorless are non-existant.

Launching a new system is expensive and risky. It was risky several years ago (failure due to immature mirrorless technologies) and it's just as risky now (going head-to-head with well-established, deeper-pocketed mirrorless rivals) In contrast, updating the current system is inexpensive and profitable. K-mount may not be a goose that lays golden eggs but it does lay a steady stream of regular eggs and there's enough omelette-eaters to make it a nice business.

What's interesting to me is that a DSLR can operate in mirrorless mode, but a mirrorless camera can't operate in DSLR mode. Mirrorless is simply the less capable, less versatile architecture. That's not to say mirrorless can't be very popular for many good reasons. But there will always be some percent of the market that wants more or can't stand EVFs.