[Kunzite]

Lol, I wonder whether anyone really still believes this endless maskirovka.

"Maskirovka" - Russian military deception. An interesting choice of words, seeing that I'm not Russian, I'm not military and I'm not deceiving.
Deception is the endless pretense about how going mirrorless would necessarily solve Pentax' issues. After years of hard work it might pay off... after some years it might prove necessary. But that's all. Mirrorless is no magical solution, no silver bullet - there is no silver bullet.

Oh, let me give another example: Pentax, Q - yes, they launched a mirrorless system (albeit with an itsy bitsy sensor) right as Hoya was preparing them for sale. How could you possibly guarantee that this, and the Samsung NX example won't be used by the PentaxIsDoomed brigade, in your scenario? How could you possibly guarantee that another MILC line would work better than for Samsung, better than the Q?
Of course you can't. You're just promoting mirrorless, on SLR-related threads.

In the real life, the D FA* 50mm f/1.4 launched to market is commitment. The DA* 11-18mm f/2.8 is commitment. The rest of the D FA* lenses is commitment.
All sorts of long life products show commitment. Even if they're for SLRs.

[mecrox]

"Maskirovka" - Russian military deception. An interesting choice of words, seeing that I'm not Russian, I'm not military and I'm not deceiving.
Deception is the endless pretense about how going mirrorless would necessarily solve Pentax' issues. After years of hard work it might pay off... after some years it might prove necessary. But that's all. Mirrorless is no magical solution, no silver bullet - there is no silver bullet.

Oh, let me give another example: Pentax, Q - yes, they launched a mirrorless system (albeit with an itsy bitsy sensor) right as Hoya was preparing them for sale. How could you possibly guarantee that this, and the Samsung NX example won't be used by the PentaxIsDoomed brigade, in your scenario? How could you possibly guarantee that another MILC line would work better than for Samsung, better than the Q?
Of course you can't. You're just promoting mirrorless, on SLR-related threads.

In the real life, the D FA* 50mm f/1.4 launched to market is commitment. The DA* 11-18mm f/2.8 is commitment. The rest of the D FA* lenses is commitment.
All sorts of long life products show commitment. Even if they're for SLRs.

Lol, I think we all know what you’re up to But don’t worry, I really don’t mind. The irony is that Ricoh already have successful form on mirrorless in the Q and the GR, so the alleged horror at taking this further on APS-C is a really just special pleading, imho.

[Kunzite]

"We all", as in...? The Olympus users club?
The Q might be dead. Last Q product was in 2014... nothing on the roadmap.

And switching APS-C to (mostly???) mirrorless cannot possibly work, because there's no upgrade path to K-mount FF. The MILC would have to be a parallel system, and K-mount APS-C would have to be maintained. Just like Canon is doing.

Last but of utmost importance, the K-3II's replacement we're talking about here will be a K-mount DSLR.

[dafbp]

I never used a MILC, and my main reasons for/against them are: mirror noise/vibrations, battery usage, viewfinder. So far, my preference is DSLR, because of the viewfinder issues, based on what I've read.
But why is it so important to have a small reduction in size (that some say makes the camera unwieldy with large lenses) that you'd have to ditch the K-mount? Why not just keep the mount and go mirrorless?
Any technical reason against that? Isn't it just a matter of maintaining registration distance for a given sensor size?

[Kunzite]

It's not a technical reason, but rather it doesn't make sense to keep a longer registration distance with a MILC. Well, another one-off product like the K-01 is of course possible - perhaps as an unlikely "video oriented" Pentax camera.
But think in perspective: that MILC system would have to be compelling for people other than the current K-mount users. By making a camera with an unnecessarily long registration distance, you make it larger than it has to be (and that means, all your cameras would be larger, with no "really small entry level" option) and your wide angle lenses would have to be SLR/retrofocus designs.
A system is launched to last for decades, and it better not have unnecessary disadvantages.

[dafbp]

It's not a technical reason, but rather it doesn't make sense to keep a longer registration distance with a MILC. Well, another one-off product like the K-01 is of course possible - perhaps as an unlikely "video oriented" Pentax camera.
But think in perspective: that MILC system would have to be compelling for people other than the current K-mount users. By making a camera with an unnecessarily long registration distance, you make it larger than it has to be (and that means, all your cameras would be larger, with no "really small entry level" option) and your wide angle lenses would have to be SLR/retrofocus designs.
A system is launched to last for decades, and it better not have unnecessary disadvantages.

I see. Thanks.


Decisions, decisions... But that's what they're paid big bucks (yens?) for.

[thibs]

Lol, I wonder whether anyone really still believes this endless maskirovka.

But hey don’t take my word for it. Just read Canon’s latest financial report where they say they intend to “maintain sales growth, driven by mirrorless cameras where double-digit sales growth continues”. Follow the money.

The best results clearly now come from a mix of the two types. No one is saying it’s an either/or game so why pretend it is? If Ricoh switched Aps-c to mostly (and eventually all) mirrorless in the near future I doubt it would be thought a big surprise. And it would be seen as going all-in.

IMO this is out of line but what do I know...

[mecrox]

"We all", as in...? The Olympus users club?
The Q might be dead. Last Q product was in 2014... nothing on the roadmap.

And switching APS-C to (mostly???) mirrorless cannot possibly work, because there's no upgrade path to K-mount FF. The MILC would have to be a parallel system, and K-mount APS-C would have to be maintained. Just like Canon is doing.

Last but of utmost importance, the K-3II's replacement we're talking about here will be a K-mount DSLR.

I’m curious how you can be so absolutely certain that mirrorless will play no significant part in Ricoh’s future and that there will be a successor to the K3II in the sense of a similar kind of flagship with all the mod cons? Many might feel that the arrival of the KP and the technological change now moving through the industry make either not quite the racing certainty. For sure Pentax will issue more DSLRs but ruling anything else out sounds a tad radical. The general idea seems to be adapters for mirrorless to bridge any changeover period (Canon and Nikon approach one guesses, to an extent also Sony) between mounts.

Do you have some kind of inside track here which means you just kind of know? Maybe an industry connection of some kind which means you know a bit more than the rest of us? Or this your personal opinion only, just like mine? My view is that mix of forms would be welcome and might, in fact, bring some former users back into the fold.

[reh321]

Oh, let me give another example: Pentax, Q - yes, they launched a mirrorless system (albeit with an itsy bitsy sensor) right as Hoya was preparing them for sale. How could you possibly guarantee that this, and the Samsung NX example won't be used by the PentaxIsDoomed brigade, in your scenario? How could you possibly guarantee that another MILC line would work better than for Samsung, better than the Q?
Of course you can't. You're just promoting mirrorless, on SLR-related threads.

I'm quite certain both the K-01 and the "Q" will be used as examples by those against MILC, never mentioning that neither project was well-managed. They proved that a MILC without an EVF is a lost cause. I doubt Pretax will consider MILC again. If the market tips to MILC, that is just unfortunate.

[totsmuyco]

Ricoh's decision remains unknown. Someone here said that the KP was probably the K-3II replacement. Except that, the reaction of Pentaxians has forced Ricoh for a K-3III or something to its equivalent. I myself have no idea if that is true. I'm also unsure if Ricoh will join the mirrorless APS-C in the future. The introduction of the new DA* 11-18 points to Pentax APS-C retaining the K-mount. But who knows, maybe a revival of a new mirrorless APS-C is on the way. One thing for sure is, Ricoh knows how to keep their leaks covered.

[Kunzite]

I’m curious how you can be so absolutely certain that mirrorless will play no significant part in Ricoh’s future and that there will be a successor to the K3II in the sense of a similar kind of flagship with all the mod cons? Many might feel that the arrival of the KP and the technological change now moving through the industry make either not quite the racing certainty. For sure Pentax will issue more DSLRs but ruling anything else out sounds a tad radical. The general idea seems to be adapters for mirrorless to bridge any changeover period (Canon and Nikon approach one guesses, to an extent also Sony) between mounts.

Don't put words in my mouth!
I simply don't see MILCs as a panacea, nor pushing DSLRs into a niche anytime soon. If (or rather when) Ricoh Imaging will have their large sensor MILC system, it will be a struggle to make it work - no less difficult than with the K-mount.
I'm sick of reading, over and over again, how they should do a MILC this and MILC that and it would just work. Happiness for everybody, free, and no one will leave unsatisfied. And when someone points out to a very serious problem (lack of an upgrade path from APS-C MILC to FF DSLR), it's ignored - and a strawman comes instead.

BTW, you should read last year's interview, you can find some answers there.

I also don't see any reason why we must discuss mirrorless on a topic dedicated to a DSLR camera. It's curious how you folks are always so aggressively pushing this subject... why? You already have your MILCs, why can't you let us be happy with our DSLRs?

[beachgardener]

I also don't see any reason why we must discuss mirrorless on a topic dedicated to a DSLR camera. It's curious how you folks are always so aggressively pushing this subject... why? You already have your MILCs, why can't you let us be happy with our DSLRs?

+1, totally agree, a discussion on DSLR

[MatKus]

I don't get all this discusion.
Why Pentax wouldn't be first to make real hybrid of SLR an MILC?
Just add display, that will be reflected by mirror, when it's up (or semitransparent mirror and display below between sensor and lens), and we have SLR when mirror is down, and MILC with viewfinder, when mirror is up. Sure, it's not as small, as most MILCs, but you can choice if you want what world do you want to use at the moment, what suits you best, and when lens is attached, camera size is not so important any more.

[Dan Rentea]

One thing for sure is, Ricoh knows how to keep their leaks covered.

Their leaks and their marketing. If marketing is not in Ricoh's agenda (maybe due to lack of finances), a few leaks here and then may help them because Imaging Resources, DPReview and cancan media will do some free marketing for them with these leaks.

[JPT]

Today the K-3 II was moved from the current camera list to the discontinued list on the Ricoh Japan website.

Gone! Products | RICOH IMAGING

It's reflected at most retailers as well. I wonder how much of a gap there will be, but a new advanced APS-C camera must be on the way now.