[mee]

ILC sales across the board are down, see the CIPA numbers for example.

Assuming the research, design and tooling costs are the same, or even increasing for each model, then to recoup these on lower camera production and sale numbers the price needs to rise.

Look at the prices of the Sonys and Fuji's now. Also what Nikon is trying to push their users to FF. Higher price, lower numbers but still recover costs and make a profit.

End of line sale cameras - of course this is a different story.

The question that comes to my mind, with your statements, is this going to work for a small player such as Pentax? Won't people just look at the price and weigh their options elsewhere? One of the bigger aspects of Pentax has been their features vs cost.

If this is now changing, and Pentax prices are going to rise across the board, then it seems like that would hurt Pentax more than a larger player such as Canon or even Sony.

[HopelessTogger]

ILC sales across the board are down, see the CIPA numbers for example.

Assuming the research, design and tooling costs are the same, or even increasing for each model, then to recoup these on lower camera production and sale numbers the price needs to rise.

Look at the prices of the Sonys and Fuji's now. Also what Nikon is trying to push their users to FF. Higher price, lower numbers but still recover costs and make a profit.

End of line sale cameras - of course this is a different story.

I agree, the market's polarizing fast. ILC's to be a rich man's pastime.

[gm4life]

Petapixel:

"Less than a day after photos and specs leaked onto the Web, Ricoh has officially announced its new Pentax KP DSLR. It’s a compact and weatherproof high-end successor to the K-3 that Ricoh says is perfect for outdoor photographers."

Interesting... Does anyone know for sure if it is the top end crop model or if it just a stop gap for a year till they get one ready? Hmmm... Either way it still has the specs to be a very competent camera. Not D500 good, but a decent upper mid range product.

[RobA_Oz]

I agree, the market's polarizing fast. ILC's to be a rich man's pastime.

What initial prices did the K20D and K-5 appear with? It's probably more accurate to say that the decade or so that we've had of new model pricing coming down, has now ended. In real terms, the prices of modern DSLRs match those of film SLRs, at launch, fairly closely, in real terms.

[reh321]

£600-£700 body only. Mind you the £ has fallen hard recently so this could be the new normal.

I have no idea what a pound is worth.

I've been over at B&H looking at prices.

If you look at the Canon line, the mid-point of bodies-only is roughly $1500.
If you look at the Nikon line, the mid-point of bodies-only is roughly $1500.

So even the introductory price of the KP is below the bodies-only mid-point for both Canon and Nikon - I don't see how anyone can complain that this is above mid-level!! The average Pentaxian seems to want Pentax to give their cameras away; I would like that too, but I'm having trouble coming up with a business plan like that which would keep them in business to repeat the process when that camera wears out.

[NZ_Ross]

The question that comes to my mind, with your statements, is this going to work for a small player such as Pentax? Won't people just look at the price and weigh their options elsewhere? One of the bigger aspects of Pentax has been their features vs cost.

If this is now changing, and Pentax prices are going to rise across the board, then it seems like that would hurt Pentax more than a larger player such as Canon or even Sony.

I don't think anyone knows the answer to that, the camera companies included. There are a range of questions to be answered:

1. Where is the bottom of the market in terms of sales numbers?
2. How do you sell new cameras when most enthusiasts have 'good enough' cameras already - my case my K3 is good enough, why change?
3. What pricing structure is right to get people to buy?
4. Who is your market - soccer mums (use phone cameras), enthusiasts, professionals?

I don't think there are any answers to this, for any of the camera companies. Samsung would be an example - nice, well featured cameras, but couldn't sell enough of them.

There is always lots of marketing hype around certain brands/cameras and with website reviewer boosters. In the end though if you can't make a profit selling cameras then you will be out of business sooner or later.

Camera makers attached to larger imaging concerns - Canon, Ricoh, Sony, Fuji probably have a much better chance of long term survival than the others - as there are cross company advantages in research, development, patents etc. Also deeper pockets to fund the capital to get cameras to market.

We are in very tough times for camera companies - in shrinking markets the direction is typically to quality, mass numbers (although camera phones have knocked that option out), brand or niches.

Pentax have quality, brand and niche in their favour, plus a deep pocketed business imagining owner.

I remain happy they are producing quality new cameras, that are reasonably well featured, at reasonable prices.

In a very tough business environment Ricoh seem to be executing a logical, reasonable and sensible business strategy well.

[mee]

I have no idea what a pound is worth.

I've been over at B&H looking at prices.

If you look at the Canon line, the mid-point of bodies-only is roughly $1500.
If you look at the Nikon line, the mid-point of bodies-only is roughly $1500.

So even the introductory price of the KP is below the bodies-only mid-point for both Canon and Nikon - I don't see how anyone can complain that this is above mid-level!! The average Pentaxian seems to want Pentax to give their cameras away; I would like that too, but I'm having trouble coming up with a business plan like that which would keep them in business to repeat the process when that camera wears out.

What are you referring to as the mid-point body for Canon and Nikon?

The higher end, general purpose D7200 is around 1k USD.
The higher end, general purpose 80D is 1100 USD.

Both are more camera than you're getting with a KP for the same (or less) money.

[reh321]

What are you referring to as the mid-point body for Canon and Nikon?

HopelessTogger provided a definition based on price, so
I listed all their cameras by price and counted halfway down the list.

[HopelessTogger]

What initial prices did the K20D and K-5 appear with? It's probably more accurate to say that the decade or so that we've had of new model pricing coming down, has now ended. In real terms, the prices of modern DSLRs match those of film SLRs, at launch, fairly closely, in real terms.

I think Pentax is going to struggle with this thing regardless. Nothing stands out for me as a Pentaxian, especially the shape if this is a K-3 replacement. The ergonomics of the K-series is near perfect, why change it? Same old AF system, same old flash sync speed and 1/6000's max shutter (in OVF) although 1/24000th is impressive but only in live view. Poor buffer capacity. No doubt the video capabIilties haven't advanced either. No 4K. We all know ridiculous ISO numbers are just that, so it ain't a selling point.

If this is what Pentax is turning out at this price point, somethings wrong. Even the A6500 wasn't this price at launch and I near choked at that.

Critical areas are not being addressed. AF (tracking, points/spread) and video. This is not catching up. The KP looks like a parts bin special.

My final comment on this subject because I don't want to offend anyone. KP a definite ??? from me.

[vinceloc]

If the JPEG engine has been improved to compete with Fujifilm's X series MILCs, then it might be worth it....

[FantasticMrFox]

Interesting... Does anyone know for sure if it is the top end crop model or if it just a stop gap for a year till they get one ready? Hmmm... Either way it still has the specs to be a very competent camera. Not D500 good, but a decent upper mid range product.

No, Ricoh has stated by now that the KP is no K3 replacement. We are just arguing about who was at fault of creating all this confusion

[mee]

I don't think anyone knows the answer to that, the camera companies included. There are a range of questions to be answered:

1. Where is the bottom of the market in terms of sales numbers?
2. How do you sell new cameras when most enthusiasts have 'good enough' cameras already - my my case my K3 is good enough, why change?
3. What pricing structure is right to get people to buy?
4. Who is your market - soccer mums (use phone cameras), enthusiasts, professionals?

I don't think there are any answers to this, for any of the camera companies. Samsung would be an example - nice, well featured cameras, but couldn't sell enough of them.

There is always lots of marketing hype around certain brands/cameras and with website reviewer boosters. In the end though if you can't make a profit selling cameras then you will be out of business sooner or later.

Camera makers attached to larger imaging concerns - Canon, Ricoh, Sony, Fuji probably have a much better chance of long term survival than the others - as there are cross company advantages in research, development, patents etc. Also deeper pockets to fund the capital to get cameras to market.

We are in very tough times for camera companies - in shrinking markets the direction is typically to quality, mass numbers (although camera phones have knocked that option out), brand or niches.

Pentax have quality, brand and niche in their favour, plus a deep pocketed business imagining owner.

I remain happy they are producing quality new cameras, that are reasonably well featured, at reasonable prices.

In a very tough business environment Ricoh seem to be executing a logical, reasonable and sensible business strategy well.

All interesting points. You are probably right on there being no answer just yet.. which is why we end up with cameras such as KP.

I think the KP was both an anniversary design as well as a feeler for the future.. both in design and in pricing. I suspect it will flop. Not that I want it to flop (more Pentaxians, the better for us all). But that the market is largely filled with consumers that are after defined, technologically-advanced systems.

Fuji has the mirrorless retro design and a long lineup of bodies and lenses in this system.
Sony has the mirrorless non-retro design and a growing lineup of bodies and lenses in this system (plus support to use Canon EF mount lenses with an adapter)
Canon and Nikon both have the DSLR non-retro design systems with deep lineage.

Pentax has a long K-mount DSLR lineage but without the demand (Canon and Nikon own that). They have, and seem to continue, to brand based on outdoors/weather resistant type cameras. But without the broad features of the other systems, I don't see them gaining ground.

This KP seems to be trying to tap into that retro market, but they lack the vision. Or, at least, providing that vision to the would-be buyer that (as example) Fuji has been able to provide. Ricoh throws a retro shaped camera onto their website and says here you go. haha

Not, "we're dedicated to this type of camera." Just.. "here is a (K-70/K-3 blend) DSLR in a shell that looks trendy and cool." It isn't a GNX. It is a Fiero, designed to look like a classic Ferrari.

I'm beginning to wonder does Ricoh ever get to the point where they decide it is more effort for small peanuts to be in this market, and redirect their resources to other industry outside of consumer DSLR and ILCs? It isn't all doom, but I do wonder what is the plan? Because Ricoh seem to be all over the place with Pentax. I give them points for trying to innovate, but it seems a bit watered down to me. As if they aren't really wanting to dedicate the resources to really growing, slowly riding the line, eeking out profitability but not risking more to potentially gain (or lose) more. What kind of 'life' is that?

Ricoh probably keeps a tight financial leash on Ricoh Imaging though... it is a tough market.

[normhead]

We all know ridiculous ISO numbers are just that, so it ain't a selling poin

Well, actually we don't know what that means. IN every camera that has gone into ridiculous high ISO numbers before, there has been a noticeable increase in high ISO performance. The 645z had ridiculous numbers but real world, you could get clean 6400 ISO images from it . DIto the K-1, ridiculous high numbers but you can get clean images to 3200. IN your haste to declare the camera a disaster you've overlooked some things. APS-c with Prime IV and second with the accelerator unit. If the image quality turns out to be as good as it could , this could be a huge improvement over a K-3.

I think Pentax is going to struggle with this thing regardless. Nothing stands out for me as a Pentaxian,

Yawn. I wonder what the temperature in London is right now? Not every camera is made for you, and it can still be successful even if it isn't.

Hope the KP doesn't test well. If it goes beyond the DxO mark of 87 currently held by the D7200 a lot of folks are going to look like fools. The K-5 was at 82. It's not like they have to improve much in IQ and performance to get to the top of APS-c.


Me, I like to keep my mouth shut until I see the numbers, and the test images from a few sites. I won't go declaring it a bust, especially since if DR and high ISO are top notch, Tess and folks like her won't care about all the crap you guys are whining about.

The market for the Kp is folks like my Tess. She's happy with her K-5, but it's not going to last forever. She's happy with the AF. I'm sure she'd enjoy K-5 high ISO noise behaviour and dynamic range with a 24 MP camera, She's never shot a video and doesn't care to start. People like her buy cameras. That is an irrefutable fact.

All you imagined hot shots preaching gloom and doom.... it makes me shake my head.
You don't see how this camera can sell. That's on you. Your imagination is extremely limited. A bit of life experience would no doubt help. Instead of seeing what the camera doesn't have, look at what it has. Then you'll understand who would buy it.

Someone concerned with APS-c image quality and high ISO functions. Look at the Nikon D500 we all seem to think is the top of the line for AF. They have a frame rate of 10 FPS, but they had to go with a 20 MP sensor to get it. And the ISO is less than average.So in other words, they traded IQ for speed. It has a pro tracking system, but that doesn't make a captured image any better. IN fact unless you have rigorous AF demands, it doesn't help at all. If you're just composing and snapping a landscape, you're better off with a KP, and there are a lot of people who actually compose before they shoot. DxO rates the D500 as a sensor 2 points higher than a K-5. Is that really what you want?

I get really tired of folks, like the above who simply mis-represent the truth, and ignore the obvious, and simply don't have the intellectual ability to see that there are other circumstances than their own. Try and keep an open mind about things.

Just because some one somewhere thinks the camera won't sell, doesn't make it true. Just because you own some model of Pentax camera doesn't make you a genius, or give you predictive powers. The simple fact is, even the improvement of Prime IV plus the accelerator unit, may make the camera interesting to some. Especially those concerned with the end product, (the image for those of you who don't seem to understand what it is) not the frills that help you get there.

[mee]

HopelessTogger provided a definition based on price, so
I listed all their cameras by price and counted halfway down the list.

Both Nikon and Canon offer more camera types at different price ranges though. So that comparison doesn't work.

A better comparison is mapping features and price together. Then you see the K-3 II more resembles the D7200 and the 70D/80D.

[reh321]

I think Pentax is going to struggle with this thing regardless. Nothing stands out for me as a Pentaxian, especially the shape if this is a K-3 replacement. The ergonomics of the K-series is near perfect, why change it? Same old AF system, same old flash sync speed and 1/6000's max shutter (in OVF) although 1/24000th is impressive but only in live view. Poor buffer capacity. No doubt the video capabIilties haven't advanced either. No 4K. We all know ridiculous ISO numbers are just that, so it ain't a selling point.

If this is what Pentax is turning out at this price point, somethings wrong. Even the A6500 wasn't this price at launch and I near choked at that.

Critical areas are not being addressed. AF (tracking, points/spread) and video. This is not catching up. The KP looks like a parts bin special.

My final comment on this subject because I don't want to offend anyone. KP a definite ??? from me.

It is so Pentaxian to be so negative.

All these negative words about a camera none of us has ever touched.

None of us knows anything about its ergonomics, because none of us has held it.

None of us knows anything about its AF, which Pentax says has improved software, because none of us has ever taken a picture of a moving subject with it.

None of us knows anything about its abilities at high ISO, because none of us has ever taken a picture under dark conditions with it {and those who have used newer cameras know that each generation handles higher ISO values better, so we cannot use old experience to reasonably evaluate a new system}

So far comments in the press have been generally positive; the most negative comments I've seen have been from people who claim to be Pentaxians.