[mee]

What's all the huzzah about? If as Asahi Man says the KP is not a K-3ii replacement then obviously it is a one-off novelty/collectors/anniversary item like the AP. That would explain the styling, naming, features and possibly high price tag. If Ricoh had not scuttled the name/line call it a K-S3 and don't buy it if it doesn't appeal to you.

Same thing happened with the K-S2 - endless squealing about the size, styling, features and specs and not being a worthy replacement of the K-50 even though Ricoh said numerous times it was not a K-50 replacement.

In any case it appears to be a very capable camera and will deliver the high quality images we all associate with Pentax DSLRs. Even the much maligned K-01 and K-S1 deliver image quality that is expected from a Pentax camera.

Ricoh hasn't said anything at this point. And asahiman, as interesting and appreciative I am of his rumors, is not an official employee of Ricoh.

So what are we left with? Ourselves to fill in the blanks...

Image quality is only one aspect of a camera.. if you're buying on IQ alone, then PhaseOne will like to talk with you.

[FantasticMrFox]

Is that USD? If so how many K3 III's do you think they'll sell at 1700 USD? You can pickup a K-1, or D750, or 7DII, or (maybe) D500, or 80D (and have money to spare) among others at that price.

No, I think the K3III will be closer to the 1100-1200 dollar price range itself. And hat is before looking at the hardware (don't have to) because they're not going to leapfrog the other manufacturers in AF performance, video features, or any other place the brand is "lacking."

I think with the K-70 and KP encroaching on the K3 II feature wise, the K3 III will be positioned higher than before. At the same time I do not see how Pentax can improve the K3 II enough to justify a D500 level price. So I think we may be talking about maybe $200 more? The K3 debuted at $1,300 and quickly dropped in price, so an introductory price of $1,500 would still have it way below the D500.

[anu l]

The 5 year old SAFOX X is still being used in the newly released K-70.

The 4 year old SAFOX XI is still being used in the upcoming KP.

And you want the less-than-a-year old SAFOX XII in the K-1 (top-of-the-line DSLR offering from Pentax) to be upgraded by 150%+ within a year and put into the new flagship APS-C body?

well, its very improbable that all of these features will be added in a single upgrade, but if we see 60-70% of these features and have enough differentiation between the KP & K-3 III; that will be much better. (I forgot to add that point in the end).
But that doesn't mean that all this upgrade isn't needed, it surely is - yes, all of it. Pentax needs a body worthy of fighting with D500 & 7D mk III (the same way it needed the K-1 to fight against D750/D810 and 5D series). It's just that Pentax doesn't have the tech yet & will need to follow a steep curve in technology to cover up the lag clearly seen between CaNikon & Pentax.

I've always believed that the "5 year old" SAFOX X was the odd part in K-70. The SAFOX XI (or a new system something near it) was a better and natural choice (compare D5500 & 750D) for such a body but X was deliberately used to "save" the K-3 II.

They haven't done the same with KP and went with SAFOX XI, hence my above mentioned 7D, D500 like feature-set or at least a significant part of it is a requirement for K-3 III & I think Pentax has thought over it and planned accordingly.

[eddie1960]

Ricoh hasn't said anything at this point. And asahiman, as interesting and appreciative I am of his rumors, is not an official employee of Ricoh.

So what are we left with? Ourselves to fill in the blanks...

Image quality is only one aspect of a camera.. if you're buying on IQ alone, then PhaseOne will like to talk with you.

Kenspo said it isn't the replacement
is that clear enough

---

Last edited by eddie1960; 01-25-2017 at 09:04 AM.

[FantasticMrFox]

Lol.. have you seen this? This is DROP even though they delivered K-1 camera that was supposed to be big bang, but FF pentaxians were saturated quickly and now these cameras are on stock everywhere with rather poor selling record when compared to EOS5DIII, EOS5DIV and D810 counterparts. Guess why.

There are so many things wrong with this, I'll have to address them one by one ...

a) Of course the K-1 is selling less numbers than the 5D Mk IV or D810 - Canon and Nikon are way larger than Pentax. That doesn't mean Pentax isn't selling large numbers relative to its size. In addition to that, the K-1 is a relatively expensive full frame camera. It will sell considerably fewer copies than a K-S2 or K70, but Ricoh makes more money off it and the associated lens sales. So it may not have any palpable impact on market share, but still be a financial success for the company. Have you checked Nikon's latest reports? Despite the introduction of the highly acclaimed D500 and D5, their market share has plummeted. And yet their income has increased. Meanwhile Canon's sales were steady recently, but their income decreased by 17%.

b) These numbers represent market share in Japan, as defined by sales through 22 major vendors. Some big vendors aren't factored in, so this is just an approximation. It is possible that Pentax' 2016 market share was inflated due to selling off old stock of cameras at very low prices, so the 2015 and 2017 numbers are a more realistic guess at where Pentax is standing.

c) Market share does not equal success. Ricoh has found a niche and is doing well that way - as stated in their last two annual reports, the camera business is turning a profit, and that profit has been increasing.

Conclusion: you can in no way make conclusions about how well the K-1 is selling from Ricoh Imaging's overall market share.

[Foxbat]

Get a K-3II for actual 949€ including the 50mm/1.8 and sell the 50mm for 50€ and you'll get a far better package for far less money than the KP with a way better build quality.
The difference between the 3-axle and 5-axle SR and this little more of dynamic etc. isn't worth the price difference in real use.

Will there be any proof to your "better build quality" claim?

As for the better deal - I don't need (semi) pro camera, my K-5II taught me that. I use single AF spot, with automatic or spot metering in Super Program mode in single shot mode for the 95% of my shooting.
I'm ready to pay about 1000+/- euros for a body, that will have blend of features from current Pentax cameras - K-3 metering sensor, AF module and Pixel Shift, K-1 IBIS, K-70 improved image processing and also feature things like metal body, weather sealing, smaller size, 100% OVF/EVF, tilty screen, Wi-Fi. How can K-3II, even being as good as it is, help me with filling all those requirements?

[Winder]

We got that image of the Pentax KP with new 24MP Sony sensor and 819200 ISO! - sonyalpharumors sonyalpharumors

[photoptimist]

This KP is a total mess. The build quality is poor entry level but the price is "Pro". The design is poor, this is neither Retro nor K-Style and Pentax did everything to save money at this body.
Who should buy this if you can get a 80D for example for far less money but with a far better AF-System and who should buy this if you can get a FF D610 for the same price-tag ?

Someone who doesn't want pictures that suck in anything less than perfect light would avoid the 80D.

The poor high-ISO performance make the 80D strictly a sunny-day camera. Worse, the 80D lacks a second control dial, lacks IBIS, and is bigger and heavier that the KP.

[eddie1960]

well, its very improbable that all of these features will be added in a single upgrade, but if we see 60-70% of these features and have enough differentiation between the KP & K-3 III; that will be much better. (I forgot to add that point in the end).
But that doesn't mean that all this upgrade isn't needed, it surely is - yes, all of it. Pentax needs a body worthy of fighting with D500 & 7D mk III (the same way it needed the K-1 to fight against D750/D810 and 5D series). It's just that Pentax doesn't have the tech yet & will need to follow a steep curve in technology to cover up the lag clearly seen between CaNikon & Pentax.

I've always believed that the "5 year old" SAFOX X was the odd part in K-70. The SAFOX XI (or a new system something near it) was a better and natural choice (compare D5500 & 750D) for such a body but X was deliberately used to "save" the K-3 II.

They haven't done the same with KP and went with SAFOX XI, hence my above mentioned 7D, D500 like feature-set or at least a significant part of it is a requirement for K-3 III & I think Pentax has thought over it and planned accordingly.

the tech lag isn't going to disappear any time soon, Canon and Nikon both have a lot more R&D funds and a deep pool of product generating those funds. Nikon is having issues taking Canon share . Add in we are generally a cheap lot and expect Pentax to be significantly cheaper than the big two. you can't have it both ways. Canon can afford to take share with a combination of price drops on older product and high demand new product. Canon has 15 body only offerings at BH photo Pentax has 4, Nikon has 14 (4 of them variations on the 5000) , that doesn't take into account the various offerings as kits ort the fact that they both sell boatloads of entry kits bulk displayed everywhere particularly at christmas (my local drugstore was selling two different rebel kits at christmas)

All that said i expect there will be improvements in a number of areas and perhaps an AF that exceeds the K1 , but it wont be D500 or likely even close. it could catch or the long in the tooth 7Dii but it will be eclipsed by 7Diii because canon can just flow better af downward they already have it

[Not a Number]

Image quality is only one aspect of a camera.. if you're buying on IQ alone, then PhaseOne will like to talk with you.

The bottom line is a camera is just a tool for producing images. The point is that regardless how the KP looks it will be a capable camera and will produce results that we come to expect from Pentax cameras.

And when I say image quality I'm not talking about pixel peeping numbers, which I regard as mostly meaningless except to statisticians and mathematicians, so I have no interest in talking to PhaseOne, whoever they are.

[mee]

Kenpro said it isn't the replacement
is that clear enough

Kenpro also said primes in 2016 and how'd that work out? He's not a Ricoh employee and Ricoh, as a company, seems to turn on a dime.So, when, he learned this it was probably true. But things change.

---------- Post added 01-25-17 at 09:22 AM ----------

The bottom line is a camera is just a tool for producing images. The point is that regardless how the KP looks it will be a capable camera and will produce results that we come to expect from Pentax cameras.

And when I say image quality I'm not talking about pixel peeping numbers, which I regard as mostly meaningless except to statisticians and mathematicians, so I have no interest in talking to PhaseOne, whoever they are.

The bottom line is a car is just a tool to get from A to B. Forget if it is uncomfortable, doesn't handle well, breaks down often...

No, there are more aspects to a product than the bottom line.

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

Kenpro also said primes in 2016 and how'd that work out?

I seem to remember him saying zooms last year, primes this year. Of course, I could be mistaken.

[Franc]

Kenpro also said primes in 2016 and how'd that work out? .

I think he said zooms in 2016 en primes in 2017. The K1 is just a year old

[xmeda]

There are so many things wrong with this, I'll have to address them one by one ...

a) Of course the K-1 is selling less numbers than the 5D Mk IV or D810 - Canon and Nikon are way larger than Pentax. That doesn't mean Pentax isn't selling large numbers relative to its size. In addition to that, the K-1 is a relatively expensive full frame camera. It will sell considerably fewer copies than a K-S2 or K70, but Ricoh makes more money off it and the associated lens sales. So it may not have any palpable impact on market share, but still be a financial success for the company. Have you checked Nikon's latest reports? Despite the introduction of the highly acclaimed D500 and D5, their market share has plummeted. And yet their income has increased. Meanwhile Canon's sales were steady recently, but their income decreased by 17%.

b) These numbers represent market share in Japan, as defined by sales through 22 major vendors. Some big vendors aren't factored in, so this is just an approximation. It is possible that Pentax' 2016 market share was inflated due to selling off old stock of cameras at very low prices, so the 2015 and 2017 numbers are a more realistic guess at where Pentax is standing.

c) Market share does not equal success. Ricoh has found a niche and is doing well that way - as stated in their last two annual reports, the camera business is turning a profit, and that profit has been increasing.

Conclusion: you can in no way make conclusions about how well the K-1 is selling from Ricoh Imaging's overall market share.

Considering lenses for K-1

15-30 is being bought from Tamron and then sold to us overpriced = almost zero profit
24-70 is being bought from Tamron and then sold to us overpriced = almost zero profit
70-200/2.8 and 150-450 are being produced in small quantities with significant manual work = probably even negative profit even though they cost those big prices, but development cost and manufacturing cost is huge... anyway these lenses are a must if one wants to sell at least some cameras.


Only lenses that create money are all those mass produced lenses with little glass elements and plastic bodies like 18-55, 50-200, 55-300, 18-135, 16-85, 40/2.8, 35/2.4, 50/1.8, where most of operations are performed by machines in large quantities.


c) Im not doing that. K-1 sales are well described by many sellers. After initial boom like 4-5 months after K-1 was introduced sales went down quite fast and now these bodies are on stock everywhere and Ricoh is starting with sales actions and rebates just to keep them selling at least somehow.

Reality.

[mecrox]

Considering lenses for K-1

15-30 is being bought from Tamron and then sold to us overpriced = almost zero profit
24-70 is being bought from Tamron and then sold to us overpriced = almost zero profit
70-200/2.8 and 150-450 are being produced in small quantities with significant manual work = probably even negative profit even though they cost those big prices, but development cost and manufacturing cost is huge... anyway these lenses are a must if one wants to sell at least some cameras.


Only lenses that create money are all those mass produced lenses with little glass elements and plastic bodies like 18-55, 50-200, 55-300, 18-135, 16-85, 40/2.8, 35/2.4, 50/1.8, where most of operations are performed by machines in large quantities.


c) Im not doing that. K-1 sales are well described by many sellers. After initial boom like 4-5 months after K-1 was introduced sales went down quite fast and now these bodies are on stock everywhere and Ricoh is starting with sales actions and rebates just to keep them selling at least somehow.

Reality.

Come on, that is all nonsense. Designing a lens or any other item inhouse or putting it out of house is a straightforward business case which will have received very careful attention before any decision is made. Besides, you may be surprised at the huge amount of intercompany development and manufacturing which goes on across the whole industry. Think Leica do all their own full-frame stuff? Half of it is down to Panasonic, but they don't like to tell us that. Spoils the mystique. Very nice business for Panasonic, though.

None of us has the remotest idea what Pentax's profit or loss is on any items or even collectively. And nothing is overpriced, a purely subjective assessment. It is priced at what the market will bear in terms of supply and demand. These days companies have extremely sophisticated methods of modelling supply, demand and prices over the lifetime of a product, in order to maximize the overall return, and I am sure Ricoh are no exception. I've seen nothing to suggest that the K1 is anything other than a great success.