[JPT]

So it looks like the following will be released.
- A very sharp 50mm f1.4 lens
- . . . which is stabilized, unlike similar lenses on Canon or Nikon
- . . . and can be used handheld with pixel shift resolution enhancement on the K-1II
- . . . and will benefit from the cleaner images enabled by the accelerator unit

Won’t this enable pretty much unprecedented low light capabilities?

---

Last edited by JPT; 02-20-2018 at 04:47 AM.

[redpit]

So it looks like the following will be released.
- A very sharp 50mm f1.4 lens
- . . . which is stabilized, unlike similar lenses on Canon or Nikon
- . . . and can be used handheld with pixel shift resolution enhancement on the K-1II
- . . . and will benefit from the cleaner images enabled by the acceleratof unit

Won’t this enable pretty much unprecedented low light capabilities?

Sure Not! I think I saw your face on the bottom left corner of the photo above...

[ogl]

Translator software says:
"The main feature of "PENTAX K - 1 Mark II" to be announced this week will be Real Resolution System II with new accelerator unit installed and hand - held shooting mode added. #rumor"

If they throw in a couple of KP firmware things like maximum shutter time for auto ISO thats nice.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/360874-k-1-mark-ii...ml#post4207856

[UserAccessDenied]

For a company that already has a fairly small market share, this move doesn't make sense to me.

Again, this is all rumor until we actually get to see it and compare it to the K-1, but let's say speculation is correct and it's only a marginal upgrade...

I'd assume most users would seek out a K-1 over the K-1ii for the cost savings, thus skewing the perceived market share by having new merchandise just sit on shelves.

Meanwhile, the K-3ii successor is being held up... By what?

I read somewhere that Ricoh is not focused on APS-C at the moment, which seems odd to me given the number of available lenses, and existing APS-C shooters using their products.

Yes, developing a marginal upgrade to the K-1 is much easier than a completely redesigned 3-year old APS-C camera.
This will put them on the map at upcoming showroom events and allow ads to go out proving they are still relevant; but this is just not a good move in the long run in my personal opinion.

I don't know how to explain the feeling, but it's not one I enjoy.

[bxf]

I fail to see the problem with a company releasing a camera that is only marginally better than an existing model. What's wrong with incorporating a bit of new technology into an existing model? How is not having some improvements better than having same?

[repaap]

hmmm. I have to agree that minor upgrade is good thing. seems that K-1 has managed well, and there is a way to improve that, so why not. as Rondec said at previous page, K-3 is getting little long in the teeth and might get replaced, I have thought exactly like vise. but will it be this or next K-1 . . . there is the question. better high ISO and functional Pixel Shift hand-held shooting sounds good. I think that I’ll wait and see. but atleast here at Finland, high ISO is quite often needed.

interesting.

I do also think that they are cooking something even more interesting stuff what will be coming to that aps-c flagship, and from there to FF and 645 system, so this is not just buying some time. if that accelerator chip is so effective, it could be also upgraded for next generation models. I suppose that improved PS ability and there fore SR functionality improvements are opening whole new things. It is getting more and more IBIS systems, so need to improve that.

[iudex]

Like the others said lets wait one day and we will see whether the Mark II will have just these rumoured tiny and uninteresting upgrades. Maybe Ricoh will surprise us all :-) (but actually I don´t believe it, not a bit).
The thing is although all of the Mark II versions were only small improvements there were some real improvements. As far as I remember my K-5 IIs had significantly improved autofocus over the K-5 (focusing down to -3 EV, more sophisticated focus tracking), AA filter removed and improved rear LCD. Not much, but the AF improvement was pretty significant. However the K-1 II doesn´t seem to bring such improvements and those rumoured are more like a new firmware (that other companies add regularly, see Fuji, without calling it a "Mark II").

---

Last edited by iudex; 02-20-2018 at 07:47 AM.

[kenspo]

Meanwhile, the K-3ii successor is being held up... By what?

I read somewhere that Ricoh is not focused on APS-C at the moment, which seems odd to me given the number of available lenses, and existing APS-C shooters using their products.

Yes, developing a marginal upgrade to the K-1 is much easier than a completely redesigned 3-year old APS-C camera.
This will put them on the map at upcoming showroom events and allow ads to go out proving they are still relevant; but this is just not a good move in the long run in my personal opinion.

I don't know how to explain the feeling, but it's not one I enjoy.

Come on..stop complaining They need a good FF to stay alive..They will come with a new high end APS-C as I've stated too many times! They dont have the capacity to do both at the same time, and certainly not when they also are producing lenses.

Pentax are and will be a small company, without the same possibilities to shoot out new cameras and lenses in the same tempo as others do. If you are unhappy, the easy choice is to switch brands. The door is right there --->

[troenaas]

Come on..stop complaining They need a good FF to stay alive..They will come with a new high end APS-C as I've stated too many times! They dont have the capacity to do both at the same time, and certainly not when they also are producing lenses.

Pentax are and will be a small company, without the same possibilities to shoot out new cameras and lenses in the same tempo as others do. If you are unhappy, the easy choice is to switch brands. The door is right there --->

"Live within your means" is a staple of prudent financial advice – recognizing that not everyone earns the same income (“means”), and therefore not everyone can afford to spend the same. Ricoh Pentax is doing what they can within their means.

Good advice from Kenspo..... :-)

[monochrome]

Come on..stop complaining They need a good FF to stay alive..They will come with a new high end APS-C as I've stated too many times! They dont have the capacity to do both at the same time, and certainly not when they also are producing lenses.

Pentax are and will be a small company, without the same possibilities to shoot out new cameras and lenses in the same tempo as others do. If you are unhappy, the easy choice is to switch brands. The door is right there --->

Much like Subaru (until the recent infusion of Toyota capital) and we all like Subaru.

[iudex]

"Live within your means" is a staple of prudent financial advice – recognizing that not everyone earns the same income (“means”), and therefore not everyone can afford to spend the same. Ricoh Pentax is doing what they can within their means.

Good advice from Kenspo..... :-)

Of course if your budget is limited it´s about priorities. But which of those has higher priority? Adding some irrelevant features to a reatively new camera that would be perfectly OK for one more year or so, or introducing a successor to a camera that is too long in the tooth (and which wasn´t a significant novelty even at the time of it´s release)? From my point of view the answer is obvious. ;-)
P.S. We all love Pentax and are still with it (well, the small bunch that´s left and haven´t gone mirrorless) but that does not mean we cannot state our opinion and critisize Ricoh (when there is reason to do so).

---------- Post added 02-20-18 at 04:01 PM ----------

Much like Subaru (until the recent infusion of Toyota capital) and we all like Subaru.

Well I hope Pentax will not go the Subaru way, their latest moves are not well received by fans (killing the iconic WRX STi, taking manual transmission away from Impreza because of stupid Eye sight etc.).

[Rondec]

Of course if your budget is limited it´s about priorities. But which of those has higher priority? Adding some irrelevant features to a reatively new camera that would be perfectly OK for one more year or so, or introducing a successor to a camera that is too long in the tooth (and which wasn´t a significant novelty even at the time of it´s release)? From my point of view the answer is obvious. ;-)
P.S. We all love Pentax and are still with it (well, the small bunch that´s left and haven´t gone mirrorless) but that does not mean we cannot state our opinion and critisize Ricoh (when there is reason to do so).

Let's ask a different question. Which is easier, adding a few features on to an existing (very well received) camera to make it slightly better or launching a brand new camera with high end specifications? I feel like I'm a stuck record (just dated myself with that reference), but a K3 II sequel is going to need better auto focus (both number of points and tracking), better video (probably 4K), 9 to 10 fps frame rate, plus all of the little features that make Pentax cameras stand out.

This K-1 II release doesn't mean that Pentax isn't working a K3 III -- it has been stated clearly by Asahiman and Kenspo both that they are -- it is just a lot tougher project and the K-1 II was done and they decided to release it.

To me, the worst case scenario would Pentax doing with the K3 II sequel what they have done here -- taken the existing K3 II and just tweaked pixel shift, added an accelerator chip and called it a day. Yes, that would get a "high end APS-C" camera out the door, but it would likely fail in the current market and I don't really think Pentaxians would be happy long term with such a camera either, as it wouldn't provide enough of an improvement over the K3 II and KP to warrant its price point.

[monochrome]

Of course if your budget is limited it´s about priorities. But which of those has higher priority? Adding some irrelevant features to a reatively new camera that would be perfectly OK for one more year or so, or introducing a successor to a camera that is too long in the tooth (and which wasn´t a significant novelty even at the time of it´s release)? From my point of view the answer is obvious. ;-)
P.S. We all love Pentax and are still with it (well, the small bunch that´s left and haven´t gone mirrorless) but that does not mean we cannot state our opinion and critisize Ricoh (when there is reason to do so).

---------- Post added 02-20-18 at 04:01 PM ----------


Well I hope Pentax will not go the Subaru way, their latest moves are not well received by fans (killing the iconic WRX STi, taking manual transmission away from Impreza because of stupid Eye sight etc.).

US + EU regulatory compliance . . .

.:

[troenaas]

Of course if your budget is limited it´s about priorities. But which of those has higher priority? Adding some irrelevant features to a reatively new camera that would be perfectly OK for one more year or so, or introducing a successor to a camera that is too long in the tooth (and which wasn´t a significant novelty even at the time of it´s release)? From my point of view the answer is obvious. ;-)
P.S. We all love Pentax and are still with it (well, the small bunch that´s left and haven´t gone mirrorless) but that does not mean we cannot state our opinion and critisize Ricoh (when there is reason to do so).

I would also like an updated K3 II, but I trust that Ricoh Pentax have a strategy that will serve me and the rest of the user base in the long run. And that they prioritise accordingly. What I personally don't understand is how some people think that spewing out doom and gloom is helpful. :-)

[RonHendriks1966]

Not that it means anything, but these are identical images that have just the difference for the ii marking.





All things are identical...... The lens was a photoshop thing and not a real lens in the original K-1 image. Same photo is used for the K-1ii.