Originally posted by mee ...I think DPR was correct when they initially reported the KP was the K-3 II successor. They supposedly got that news from Ricoh reps. I think Pentax tried to go a different route with a 'premium' type legacy inspired body and were met with a backlash. After that it was 'discovered' there was a lost-in-translation on the product release announcement and it was now NOT the K-3 II successor. haha I don't think so!
That is, my suspicion is it isnt taking long but they started on an actual K-3 II type successor when the KP was launched and it was met with rather large resistance. That is, if they actually are working one.. Ricoh reps have been known to appease interviewers with responses that cater to their interviewees requests. The way I see it if the product isn't released, it doesn't exist. ...
Mee and Twilhelm, I agree completely.
I'm not surprised by any delay here. Pentax is not a behemoth, with tons of resources to throw at the wall. The K1 is a solid DSLR that should serve well for a large percentage of users who would be in the market for a K3 III+ class APS-C SLR camera.
Pentax must be scratching their head, watching the rest of the world and marketplace shift around them.
High volume consumers are vanishing, increasingly happy with the camera in their iPhone 6/7/8/10 (which frankly are darn good.) Judging by the questions I answer at work (where folks always ask me for camera advice) there is less and less interest in carrying a DSLR system. Many people bought one, and either have no need to upgrade, or they realized they never bring their DSLR anywhere because of size and weight.
Meanwhile, pros and dedicated amateurs are warming to mirrorless, lead there by the pro mirrorless cameras offered by Hasselblad, Fuji and Sony. Pentax is left with SLR-based MF digital and full-frame 35mm digital that suddenly look outdated and clunky.
Yes, there are times you want an optical finder of a DSLR -- birding and high speed sports. But I don't personally know anyone who shoots those, and judging by Flickr the majority of folks shoot landscapes or slow-moving people (portraits.) For this majority, there are real advantages to mirrorless, and the DSLR architecture starts to look clunky and rube-goldbergian.
As a manufacturer (whether it's Pentax or Nikon) you have to look at Sony and Fuji and Hassy and think .... here's a way to make desirable cameras that cost less to engineer, manufacture and support, and/or offer a better profit margin.
If Pentax (and Nikon) aren't having these thoughts, then I worry about them still being here in ten years time.
The move to mirrorless is inevitable. It's like the move from viewfinder/rangefinder cameras to SLR cameras in the 60's. The rational drivers are too strong to resist for most of the market and manufacturers. Those with a valid reason to prefer the older technology will continue to be served, but likely only by one manufacturer who stakes claim to the legacy form. With rangefinders it was Leica. With SLRs ... who knows. But do Pentax or Nikon really want to become even more of a niche brand? Especially as they don't have the Veblen glow of Leica?
Therefore any thought of the Pentax K3 II successor being mirrorless is music to my ears.