[JinDesu]

Man, it must suck to be Pentax sometimes. They bring out the k-5 and nothing for a while, and people say they are doomed. Then they bring out the k-5ii with some cool stuff while they test the waters with their lower end cameras in the k-30/k-50 range and people say they are doomed. Then they bring out the k-3 which was quite an upgrade from the k-5 in several ways, and then people were saying that Pentax is doomed because they stay in the APSC market. Then they brought out the k-3ii with minor upgrades while focusing on their internal development and people continued saying that Pentax is doomed.

Then they brought out the k-1 and people were saying that Pentax is doomed for bringing out a full frame so late and giving up on the APSC market. And now they bring out the k-1ii, basically in the same fashion that they've done for the k-5, k-3, and technically everything in between, and it's a black mark on Pentax for not innovating.

[Dan Rentea]

Man, it must suck to be Pentax sometimes. They bring out the k-5 and nothing for a while, and people say they are doomed. Then they bring out the k-5ii with some cool stuff while they test the waters with their lower end cameras in the k-30/k-50 range and people say they are doomed. Then they bring out the k-3 which was quite an upgrade from the k-5 in several ways, and then people were saying that Pentax is doomed because they stay in the APSC market. Then they brought out the k-3ii with minor upgrades while focusing on their internal development and people continued saying that Pentax is doomed.

Then they brought out the k-1 and people were saying that Pentax is doomed for bringing out a full frame so late and giving up on the APSC market. And now they bring out the k-1ii, basically in the same fashion that they've done for the k-5, k-3, and technically everything in between, and it's a black mark on Pentax for not innovating.

Facelifts are not about innovation. Look at cars as an alternative example. Facelifts usualy brings some general incremental improvements and they do fix the bugs from the previous model. Forget about af and video improvements which we know that requires money/investents and I understand why they remain unchanged. But K1 Mark II didn't solved any of the K1 "bugs": USB port, buffer, writing speed on the card...

I don't think Pentax is doomed. I just don't understand their policy at all (at least not when I look at their actions compared to their press statements).

[Rondec]

I'm trying to be glad, but it's difficult because K1 II is unexpected and with just very few improvements in 2 years.



6D Mark II brings:
6 more MP (26 vs 20)
45 af points, all of them cross type, with 23 compatibile to f8 (6D had 11, with only one cross type)
dual pixel af with face detection (this feature alone would worth the upgrade)
vari-angle touch screen
6.5 fps (6D had 4.4)
the same water resistance as 5D Mark IV

I think there are some big upgrades over the original 6D. Again, I don't want D5 kind of improvements on a Mark II camera from Pentax. I just want someone from Ricoh to read this forum and see where are the weak points of K1 and improve those. Would do much people happy and not only the landscape photographers.

I'm sure the 6D to 6D II improvements are significant, but I could also see some folks in the Canon camp being less than excited by them. I just don't see a reason to be really negative about a newly released camera. Particularly when we don't know what the real world differences will be.

[Pentax_WA]

I read here that many folks are happy with their K1 including myself, and no need for an upgrade. Then others, including again myself, argue that Pentax's minor changes aren't enough to attract non-pentax users when there are better cameras out there with reasonable price tag and lot more features to their needs. Now, my question is how would Ricoh generate revenue then?

[bobbotron]

Man, it must suck to be Pentax sometimes. They bring out the k-5 and nothing for a while, and people say they are doomed. Then they bring out the k-5ii with some cool stuff while they test the waters with their lower end cameras in the k-30/k-50 range and people say they are doomed. Then they bring out the k-3 which was quite an upgrade from the k-5 in several ways, and then people were saying that Pentax is doomed because they stay in the APSC market. Then they brought out the k-3ii with minor upgrades while focusing on their internal development and people continued saying that Pentax is doomed.

Then they brought out the k-1 and people were saying that Pentax is doomed for bringing out a full frame so late and giving up on the APSC market. And now they bring out the k-1ii, basically in the same fashion that they've done for the k-5, k-3, and technically everything in between, and it's a black mark on Pentax for not innovating.

I couldn't agree more with this post!

[Dan Rentea]

I'm sure the 6D to 6D II improvements are significant, but I could also see some folks in the Canon camp being less than excited by them. I just don't see a reason to be really negative about a newly released camera. Particularly when we don't know what the real world differences will be.

I'm not negative. I'm angry for the general impressions outside Pentax forum which are not so good. This is the last thing that Ricoh would wanted. And I hope that internet reviewers which do have influence on some photographers to be gentle in their reviews.

Yes, regarding 6D Mark II, I was not excited at all after I tested it for a few days. It was very good compared to 6D in some aspects that I was interested in, but the image quality was the same. And I've got 5D Mark IV brand new at a very good deal ( just 200 $ more than I would have paid for K1).

[fsge]

Pentax's minor changes aren't enough to attract non-pentax users when there are better cameras out there with reasonable price tag and lot more features to their needs. Now, my question is how would Ricoh generate revenue then?

I am curious to know which cameras these ppl speak about. Reality is that this K1II is really well positionned specs and price wise for a generalist FF.
It would be a waste of resources to use this body in crop mode only so I will not buy it but would I be into FF I would not hesitate to buy this markII

[MJKoski]

I like Pentax toolkit for tripod work so much that I preordered K-1 mk2 yesterday from a Finnish retailer. They announced today that deliveries might happen in March already. KP goes in the same trade. I will be okay with few .ZK primes, 15-30 WR and 100mm WR macro. Does not really get better than that in FF camp except for tilt-shift purposes and for that work I have Intrepid 8x10" coming

[IgorZ]

Improved AF algorithms (all improvements helps)
Better ISO (crucial for me)
Better color reproduction (for me working in extreme LED lights its lovely)
Pixel Shift Resolution System II – you can use high-res mode without a tripod (nothing I use, but good stuff)

The first K-1 was good enough for me shooting the biggest rockstars in the world, both at stage with smoke, difficult lights and in studio...So I'm pretty sure K-1ii will do even a better job.

So to all you complainers, you really dont need a D5 to shoot your neighbors cat or flowers.

I thought an ambassador is supposed to be politically correct

[redpit]

Disclaimer: the comment below is positive towards Ricoh-Pentax from an actual user of the K-1 accused of having really low expectations. You can ignore it and keep on whining.

I’m glad about my K-1 and I’m glad that Pentax released the mkII! To me these improvements make sense and are definitely desired. I’ll upgrade to mkII after reading the first reviews. I’m particularly interested in the new super resolution mode. It might be a game changer for the kind of pics I want it for. I’m really positive, optimistic and can’t wait to test the new camera myself when it hits the selves!

I'm not wowed, but I'm not disappointed. The last camera I thought was "revolutionary" was the OMD EM1-ii. Everybody else is working on evolutionary updates, including Pentax. The K1 is an excellent landscape camera, and just got a bit better. I'm not sure why anybody needs ISO 8-billion though...

Actually, the one revolutionary thing is allowing K1-i users to upgrade. That alone puts this update outside the norm.

[bobell69]

I've been holding off waiting for either a Mark II K1 or a replacement for the K3II. I think since the majority of my shooting is for landscapes, concerts and portraits that the new K1 may just be what I've been waiting for. The extra dynamic range will be very helpful in low light situations. I'm looking forward to seeing how Kenspro manages with the Mark II body.

[jatrax]

Actually, the one revolutionary thing is allowing K1-i users to upgrade.

That is certainly true. I don't believe I have ever heard of any camera company doing that.

I am astonished (though after all my years here I should not be) at all the negative comments about an evolutionary upgrade to a successful model. All Pentax users should be jumping for joy whether they are interested in this camera or the upgrade or not.

There is nothing revolutionary about the camera nor should there be or could their be. A DSLR is OLD and MATURE technology. Nothing is going to happen that revolutionizes a design that has been in place for a very long time. Evolutionary changes, things that improve a bit here and there are what we will see and should be welcomed.

Sometimes I think the current generations are so used to rapid change that we expect it all the time. The Pentax K1000 was produced from 1976 to 1997. 21 years virtually unchanged. And we complain when there is not a "new camera of the month"?

[bnhoj]

I'm abandoning ship.

[redrockcoulee]

With it being a relatively minor upgrade and the option of the upgrade, I doubt that Pentax will be banking on huge addition sales. That and the upgrade requires less development that would a more major one, the developers should have more resources to be working on the K3 replacement. Or on the 645.