[x4rd]

Whatever their reasons, they rejected other brands, and came here, in the current market.

And for that we should be very proud of. Therefore I doesn't change the goal to attract broaden userbase into the K system and Rich made a point that (if implemented correctly) can help achieve this.

[Kunzite]

If the deficiencies on the K-1 are starting to hurt, the question is: which brand?

[Rondec]

I think the point in general is that Pentax isn't Canon or Nikon and certainly isn't Sony. They have targeted the K-1 at a specific niche. It doesn't have to sell millions of camera bodies in order to generate a profit and it seems to have done well overall.

Putting a touch screen on it certainly wouldn't change sales much. I don't even know how many top end full frame cameras have touch screens. Do the 1Dx series or the D5 have it? Certainly the D810 and the A7r II, which to me would be the main competitors to the K-1 don't have one.

With regard to video, I do hope Pentax improves it, but I think it is a feature that actually sells a lot fewer cameras than its proponents think. Most people just look to see the video box is checked and if it is, then they don't look any further. I see very little footage on You Tube that was actually shot with an SLR. With the K-1, they used an older sensor that doesn't do 4K. It kept the price down. If they had put the A7r II sensor in it, the price would probably have been another 1000 higher after they spent the money on R and D to add 4K. That camera probably actually sells less than the K-1 due to the price increase.

It is clear that Pentax has spent money on tracking auto focus and will continue to do so in the future. It is actually usable on cameras like the K-1 and K3 II. Can it be better? Sure, but at least there is progress.

In the end, as I said at the outset, the K-1 adds a lot to the Pentax line up and has sold (in numbers) what Pentax wanted it to sell -- without price drops. They aren't bleeding money like Panasonic and Nikon. They have money in the coffers to continue improving cameras and releasing new items. And that's what we want right now.

[bxf]

Try using your nose?

Not long enough.

But you've given me an idea that could work for some shots...

[bxf]

Have a look at what you pay for a Leica D-Lux ... it's actually a Panasonic with the badge replaced! About a 100 percent markup

When the Leica Digilux 2 and Panasonic DMC LC-1 were released, the US price for the former was $1,800, and the Pana version was about $300 less. That is nowhere near 100% difference.

When some sensors on these cameras started to completely die years later, after the warranty period, Leica replaced them free of charge. No idea if Panasonic did the same, but my guess is no. In this case, the extra $300 (assuming you paid full retail) was definitely worth it.

I'm not disputing the fact that one is paying for the badge, but sometimes one gets some extras that go along with that badge.

Edit: I decided to check about Panasonic's policy regarding these sensor failures, and I found this: "Panasonic's support has been somewhat uneven, and there are reports of them charging in whole or in part for sensor failures. Leica,....different story".

[mecrox]

I think the point in general is that Pentax isn't Canon or Nikon and certainly isn't Sony. They have targeted the K-1 at a specific niche. It doesn't have to sell millions of camera bodies in order to generate a profit and it seems to have done well overall.

Putting a touch screen on it certainly wouldn't change sales much. I don't even know how many top end full frame cameras have touch screens. Do the 1Dx series or the D5 have it? Certainly the D810 and the A7r II, which to me would be the main competitors to the K-1 don't have one.

With regard to video, I do hope Pentax improves it, but I think it is a feature that actually sells a lot fewer cameras than its proponents think. Most people just look to see the video box is checked and if it is, then they don't look any further. I see very little footage on You Tube that was actually shot with an SLR. With the K-1, they used an older sensor that doesn't do 4K. It kept the price down. If they had put the A7r II sensor in it, the price would probably have been another 1000 higher after they spent the money on R and D to add 4K. That camera probably actually sells less than the K-1 due to the price increase.

It is clear that Pentax has spent money on tracking auto focus and will continue to do so in the future. It is actually usable on cameras like the K-1 and K3 II. Can it be better? Sure, but at least there is progress.

In the end, as I said at the outset, the K-1 adds a lot to the Pentax line up and has sold (in numbers) what Pentax wanted it to sell -- without price drops. They aren't bleeding money like Panasonic and Nikon. They have money in the coffers to continue improving cameras and releasing new items. And that's what we want right now.

The unknown about the K1 is whether sales continued or dropped off a cliff once the pent-up demand from the Pentax user base was met. This would equally apply to any subsequent FF camera Pentax may produce. I would guess that most Pentax users who bought a K1 will not be minded to buy a successor for a number of years. There's not a huge amount a successor could offer, as a genuine upgrade, until the K1 is so long in the tooth it really is time to replace it. Unless K1 sales have continued at a reasonable rate, which suggests a good take-up from users new to the brand, producing a new FF camera in the next couple of years could be difficult for Pentax because a fair proportion of the possible market won't be buying. FF is still quite minority pursuit, simply on cost grounds. Ergo, it's probably that touch screens, uprated AF and all the rest will appear first on APS-C for which there is simply a larger market.

[Rondec]

The unknown about the K1 is whether sales continued or dropped off a cliff once the pent-up demand from the Pentax user base was met. This would equally apply to any subsequent FF camera Pentax may produce. I would guess that most Pentax users who bought a K1 will not be minded to buy a successor for a number of years. There's not a huge amount a successor could offer, as a genuine upgrade, until the K1 is so long in the tooth it really is time to replace it. Unless K1 sales have continued at a reasonable rate, which suggests a good take-up from users new to the brand, producing a new FF camera in the next couple of years could be difficult for Pentax because a fair proportion of the possible market won't be buying. FF is still quite minority pursuit, simply on cost grounds. Ergo, it's probably that touch screens, uprated AF and all the rest will appear first on APS-C for which there is simply a larger market.

The best judge is the price. Typically Pentax cameras are priced high initially followed by discounts as demand drops. We have already seen that with the K-P to a certain extent, but not at all with the K-1. Certainly if Pentax wanted to move more units, they would be having some specials on it.

But as you say, the sales could be awful and the higher ups are getting ready to shutter the whole operation.

There are plenty of features a K-1 successor can (and probably will) offer. Probably the biggest question has more to do with glass and when it is coming, than a K-1 successor though.

[clackers]

When the Leica Digilux 2 and Panasonic DMC LC-1 were released, the US price for the former was $1,800, and the Pana version was about $300 less. That is nowhere near 100% difference.

Have a look at prices here, Bxf ... it's closer to 100 percent than what you say:

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 Digital Camera (Black) DMC-LX100K B&H

Leica D-LUX (Typ 109) Digital Camera Explorer Kit (Black) 18123

Now, personally, I'd love a Leica M and a couple of select lenses ... but let's not pretend the markup isn't enormous!

Pricey niche is a perfectly valid strategy that's worked for them recently, but not for Hasselblad, let's hope it does for Pentax.

[bxf]

Have a look at prices here, Bxf ... it's closer to 100 percent than what you say

Fair enough, can't argue with that. My example was correct in its day nevertheless.

[dafbp]

Remove all the knobs, dials, switches, and buttons from the camera body. Let the camera decide when it want's to take a photograph.

That's funny. The camera would just direct you to a position where it could take the perfect picture, and then we could all be great photographers, at the expense of some leg work.
We could buy 1 camera and never need another with better DR, AF, etc.

Reminds me of the bomb that becomes self aware in Darkstar.

[Kunzite]

Leg work?
That's what drones are for. Imagine autonomous drones taking pictures on their own, posting them on Facebook... Perhaps our reason of existence is to build automated machines

[Rondec]

I just like the idea of a camera that automatically deletes images that don't measure up based on its algorithms. I might come home from a vacation with only two photos. It certainly would make sorting them a whole lot easier.

[Kunzite]

Such an algorithm might have deleted all of Henry Cartier-Bresson's photos

[bilybianca]

Such an algorithm might have deleted all of Henry Cartier-Bresson's photos

His photos are junk anyway. Not video. Not even colour...

Kjell

[DrBop]

His photos are junk anyway. Not video. Not even colour...

Kjell

Yeah. Probably wouldn't attract much of a following on Instagram.

If he released his How-to video series, would anyone buy it?