[Mistral75]

200 mm macro is a must develop indeed

I would hold my breath: the FA★ has been a total commercial failure.

[GlassJunkie]

200 mm macro is a must develop indeed

It may only buy me 6" of min focus distance, but I'll happily take another foot of crop distance. Some critters get a bit pesky...

[thibs]

I would hold my breath: the FA★ has been a total commercial failure.

That's been the word on the street for decades, indeed.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

Is a price around 1700 - 2000 $€ OK for an upper APS-C class than K-3 ll line?
Best regards

It would have to exceed the performance of the Nikon D500 in every way, plus have the typical IBIS & other Pentax features that set it apart from the rest of the crowd. Pentax would also have to release lenses to match the AF speed of the body.

The problem here is that Nikon & Canon pretty much own that market & CaNikon users are not going to unload their equipment for a Pentax "pro" body & a lens or 2 & hardly any support. The Pentax user base will probably find it too pricey as well. I'd rather get the D500 or a 7D Mark II instead if I were to spend that kind of money. At least the faster focusing lenses are already there.

If they're aiming for the Nikon D7200/7500, Canon 80D, & Sony A77II market, it will be overpriced even if Pentax can perform magic with the images, particularly high ISO images. Might as well jump to full frame at that point.

[Uluru]

Is a price around 1700 - 2000 $€ OK for an upper APS-C class than K-3 ll line?
Best regards

I think it is fine.
Even Olympus and Fujifilm sell their finer crop and m4/3 bodies at those prices, even higher!
(Btw, who cares what D500 delivers — D500 does not have SR nor pixelshift, so the D500 should be $999.)

I think ~$1700 it is reasonable — BUT, the mind wrecking point for Pentax was its K3 line, which is supposed to be more advanced than the KP, but now sells for less! So, Ricoh should immediately stop releasing K3II or, clearly differentiate that new camera as a separate new premium line, with clear advantages over both K3 family and the KP.

---------- Post added 06-06-2017 at 09:01 AM ----------

It would have to exceed the performance of the Nikon D500 in every way, plus have the typical IBIS & other Pentax features that ...

AF is not the only game in town. For what it is, D500 is ancient boring DSLR with zero innovation, but only with strong engine borrowed from a monster truck. So it is something like a 98 yr old grandpa driving a modified Corolla with twin V8s.
Whatever Pentax comes up with, it has to be spec'd up from the KP and K3II, have innovations of its own, and will be fine.

[Nicolas06]

AF is not the only game in town. For what it is, D500 is ancient boring DSLR with zero innovation, but only with strong engine borrowed from a monster truck. So it is something like a 98 yr old grandpa driving a modified Corolla with twin V8s.
Whatever Pentax comes up with, it has to be spec'd up from the KP and K3II, have innovations of its own, and will be fine.

D500 may be boring but it is better in every aspect than a K3 / K3-II ! The only downside for us is it doesn't take K-mount and at that moment we may want SR because our lenses doesn't have stab. For everything else but pixelshift on stationary subjects with no wind, the D500 is better. Release the D500, make it a bit less efficiant and SR, put a K-mount and you'll be the first to explain how innovative, wonderfull and incredible it is and how Pentax is king.

After all, 10FPS, AF point covering the whole frame, outstanding tracking capabilities, excelent low light performance, AF up to f/8 instead of f/5.6 for great TC support, 4K video... There not much to complain compared to what we have... In term of lenses? There the whole sigma/tamron offering on top on a much larger tele range, that are also snapier to focus...

[Nicolas06]

Lots of people saying that Pentax isn't sports oriented, or something around those lines, and that is why they don't invest in proper AF.
But they launched the 150-450 and the 70-200.
Those don't look like landscape lenses (moonscape maybe), so why would Pentax be making sports lenses if they're not interested in that market?
If that idea of "Pentax not a sports camera maker" is correct, then they're just a carrot for those that want a sporty Pentax, to keep them buying in instead of out.
Hopefully they're just part of a plan that could shut up the naysayers.

The problem is the competition has typically about 5-6 70-200 f/2.8 to choose from: several version from tamron, sigma and the own manufacturer. So you have everything from the old tamron at $600 to the best of the bestt around $2000-3000. You also have f/4 70-200 that are lighter and cheaper or both entry level and high quality 70-300. Again something we don't even have one lens. There also a bunch of 150-600, 200-500, 80-400. There both 300 f/2.8 and f/4 and of courses lenses like 200-400 f/4 or 400 f/2.8 or 800 f/5.6. They also have 2X TC and 1.4TC that officially support AF up to f/8 meaning all lenses can at least support the f/1.4 and AF just fine and the f/4 lenses can use the 2X TCs.

They aren't in the same game. You won't get the pro switch from their fast f/2.8 primes and f/4 zooms with f/5.6. You won't make enthousiast change when you offer more reach and better AF for less money in what they already own.

[dafbp]

The problem is the competition has typically about 5-6 70-200 f/2.8 to choose from: several version from tamron, sigma and the own manufacturer. So you have everything from the old tamron at $600 to the best of the bestt around $2000-3000. You also have f/4 70-200 that are lighter and cheaper or both entry level and high quality 70-300. Again something we don't even have one lens. There also a bunch of 150-600, 200-500, 80-400. There both 300 f/2.8 and f/4 and of courses lenses like 200-400 f/4 or 400 f/2.8 or 800 f/5.6. They also have 2X TC and 1.4TC that officially support AF up to f/8 meaning all lenses can at least support the f/1.4 and AF just fine and the f/4 lenses can use the 2X TCs.

They aren't in the same game. You won't get the pro switch from their fast f/2.8 primes and f/4 zooms with f/5.6. You won't make enthousiast change when you offer more reach and better AF for less money in what they already own.

Thanks for the enlightenment (no sarcasm).
I have little (if any) use for long primes, or long telephotos with small zoom (200-400), so I'm completely unaware of those.
But I see your point about pro need for large apertures, TC and f/8 AF support. The last 2 would be nice to have, but the [150-450 and 70-200] lenses are already too big and heavy for larger apertures.
What I know about are the famous Canon 100-400L, and 70-200 from various brands, which are more common than mushrooms at airshows, and they're in the same category as the 150-450 and 70-200 from Pentax. Meaning: expensive, heavy, high IQ.
That's why I think (read fervently hope) this could be something from Pentax to keep people from going out (maybe they learned something from the FF story) until they release a body that has a competitive AF.
It does seem like a big investment that would go to waste otherwise...
Or maybe it really is just a carrot...


To answer a recent question about price: I still think the KP is overpriced, but I think if they took its best features (definitely not speed, buffer and no Li90) + K3's best + K1's innovations, and added a good AF, then they'd stand a good chance of selling them at that price for more people than just the Pentax owners that are waiting for the K whatever.


Pixel Shift, Astrotracer, IBIS, weathering: those are distinctive, but don't seem to be very publicized.

[Belnan]

Thanks for the enlightenment (no sarcasm).
I have little (if any) use for long primes, or long telephotos with small zoom (200-400), so I'm completely unaware of those.
But I see your point about pro need for large apertures, TC and f/8 AF support. The last 2 would be nice to have, but the [150-450 and 70-200] lenses are already too big and heavy for larger apertures.
What I know about are the famous Canon 100-400L, and 70-200 from various brands, which are more common than mushrooms at airshows, and they're in the same category as the 150-450 and 70-200 from Pentax. Meaning: expensive, heavy, high IQ.
That's why I think (read fervently hope) this could be something from Pentax to keep people from going out (maybe they learned something from the FF story) until they release a body that has a competitive AF.
It does seem like a big investment that would go to waste otherwise...
Or maybe it really is just a carrot...


To answer a recent question about price: I still think the KP is overpriced, but I think if they took its best features (definitely not speed, buffer and no Li90) + K3's best + K1's innovations, and added a good AF, then they'd stand a good chance of selling them at that price for more people than just the Pentax owners that are waiting for the K whatever.


Pixel Shift, Astrotracer, IBIS, weathering: those are distinctive, but don't seem to be very publicized.

You are probably not far off the mark in terms of what they produce. The K-3III will likely take the best of the K-3 the K-P and the K-1 which would be a good camera. However the incrimental upgrades to the autofocus system have tired out many Pentax users who have been chasing the Carrot. The critics dont even really care anymore to be honest. The next couple of Pentax Cameras have to be home runs. It has already been 4 years since the K-3 was released, the K-3II was a minor update and over 2 years ago. Anyway Pentax has had its opertunities and missed them hopefully they can start to get ahead of the game.

[Reed]

I hope they will incorporate into k-3ii successor a viefinder overlay in manner that K-1 have, but with options to choose for example golden ratio etc grids. That would be great feature to have.

[Uluru]

D500 may be boring but it is better in every aspect than a K3 / K3-II ! The only downside for us is it doesn't take K-mount and at that moment we may want SR because our lenses doesn't have stab. For everything else but pixelshift on stationary subjects with no wind, the D500 is better. Release the D500, make it a bit less efficiant and SR, put a K-mount and you'll be the first to explain how innovative, wonderfull and incredible it is and how Pentax is king.

After all, 10FPS, AF point covering the whole frame, outstanding tracking capabilities, excelent low light performance, AF up to f/8 instead of f/5.6 for great TC support, 4K video... There not much to complain compared to what we have... In term of lenses? There the whole sigma/tamron offering on top on a much larger tele range, that are also snapier to focus...

I don't think it's better. Average techie guy may appreciate it, but I do not. D500 is an antithesis of a camera for a human mind – it is what monster truck is to scenic driving. And Nikon's cameras are mostly that to the photography — monsters. They virtually ruin the experience of it, by imposing certain approach to image capture — with sheer number of AF points and FPS, as the de facto norm for photographic experience.

Despite strong mainstream support, many photographers are not buying that. Viewfinder totally covered with AF points, it's like looking to a scene from a prison cell. Some companies make people prisoners of the insane tech leaned on one side of the equation. And the D500 is such a product, delivered by a company that has lost all good ideas — they simply shrank the D5. That is how far their imagination goes, all they are able to do. Dn't ask for more.

It has zero innovation, zero flair on its own. The only different Nikon's digital camera was Nikon Df, but then, it showed they were incapable to finish it; they remember some guys from their team once designed cameras for people, but that was long, long time ago. And the unfinished and unloved Df is as far as their memory reaches back in time. And on the other hand, there is Pentax KP — the camera that DF always wanted to be.

Df and KP show two things — (1) Pentax can make cameras users want to use every day, and (2) they can finalise the thought. Why? Because they always kept weirdly balanced approach to tech, which we find in life — too much emphasis one one side of the coin, ruins everything.

[Reed]

Viewfinder totally covered with AF points, it's like looking to a scene from a prison cell. Some companies make people prisoners of the insane tech leaned on one side of the equation. And the D500 is such a product, delivered by a company that has lost all good ideas — they simply shrank the D5. That is how far their imagination goes, all they are able to do. Dn't ask for more.

What prison cell? That quote only proves you probably never had a chance to use D500 and even probably any recent Nikon "more than entry level camera". All AF points are invisible to user unless you want to display them and how many you want to display. You toggle that by one button and dial turn. It works in the same manner like K-1 viewfinder overlay. Also any overlay different than light meter marks are switchable. Nikon had this feature at least 5 years ago as standard.
Nikon D500 is essentially best workhorse APS-C camera I had ever in my hands. Even that I don't like Nikon products quality, and will never buy one again, quality and ergonomy of use it's top grade on this one. They did step that no one did before-put their top of the line AF module, from bigger sensor, into smaller crop body, no one even imagined about this before.

[sungibr]

I hope they will incorporate into k-3ii successor a viefinder overlay in manner that K-1 have, but with options to choose for example golden ratio etc grids. That would be great feature to have.

The adoption of a overlay in VF is a good way to stay competitive. I would ad option to always display focus points, like Nikon.

I known it would be a "me to" kind of things, but it really helps usabillity with sel-AF. Put a joystick or a touch screen with select focus area option and it will be a camera most people from other brands might consider, thus it will make the brand more appealing and succesfull.

[fsge]

I would hold my breath: the FA★ has been a total commercial failure.

I was not with Pentax at this time and not into macro yet...
This commercial failure somehow explains the rarity of this lens today.
I hope Sigma acquires Pentax at some point so that we have access to the whole range of lenses eventually

[Uluru]

Nikon D500 is essentially best workhorse APS-C camera I had ever in my hands.

That was my point. It is a workhorse, knows no tricks, can't trot, sidestep, prance or roll; only knows how to race between A and B if you point it in the right direction. And that's it. Nikon cameras today are same as Nikon cameras from 2005, 2007, 2010, etc. Most unimaginative cameras in the known universe.