[pid]

... the next body will be the D645z MarkII with Accellerator and Pixelshift II ...

[UncleVanya]

I see claims of improved SR in the K-3ii vs. K-3 but I have never seen any valid test data showing this. At the time it came out there was speculation that the improved paper claims were the result of changes in the test method not actual improvements. Can anyone who has tested both using reasonably consistent tests indicate if they found real improvements in SR from the K-3 to the K-3ii?

[monochrome]

... the next body will be the D645z MarkII with Accellerator and Pixelshift II ...

No one understands how small Pentax is. K-3 lll “delay” is a matter of production scheduling. Pentax can only build up Pre-Release inventory of one camera at a time. KP answered a broad call for a smaller camera optimized for pancake Limiteds. Next K-3 just has to wait.

[stihlmania]

I have to decide if I need to upgrade to FF, or stay with the K-3II and it's next generation. It is a constant, every shot is challenge to frame the A* 400 on the K-3II due to the crop factor. So far I have accepted the challenge and most likely I will continue as the photos I take now are that much better then the photos I took back when film and 6 megapixel was king...... Maybe as soon as Ricoh comes up with a AF 400 f2.8 then I can spend my hard earned dollars on a real long auto focus lens the can use a teleconverter without penalties...in case anyone was wondering, the A* 400 in 1994 cost 3,900 dollars, add 450 for the 1.4XL converter, purchased together as a matched set [It is a matched set!] The biggest limitation to photo quality as always is me!.........

[sealonsf]

I am very happy with this news. I would like it to come out sooner rather than later, but I'll wait for it to upgrade my K-5. I'm on my 2nd K-5 body so I hope it lasts until the new camera comes out, if not, I'll probably go for a KP. But...

Pentax, please don't let us down!

[Chris Mak]

"Waste" is pretty strong and emotive word to use, Chris... especially when you use it repeatedly. With respect, you're not doing yourself any favours

The way I see it:

The K-3 was indeed released 4.5 years ago. It got the kind of refresh we'd expect mid-way through that term, adding GPS (swapped for the internal flash), built-in astro, improved SR and pixel-shift (this last one being arguably the most significant). Not huge updates, but notable, and certainly worthwhile for many.

I think we'd have liked a K-3II replacement around now, but the K-1 and KP came first. Looks like those were the priorities. And the K-1II, in line with the K-3II, is just a mid-term update, so required much less development than an entirely new APS-C flagship.

We'll probably never know Ricoh's strategy and reasons for developing what they develop in the order presented. Those for whom the updated and newly-developed products are relevant have been happy. Those who hoped for something else - yourself, perhaps - aren't. Can't please everyone all of the time, right?

For what it's worth, I've been happy with the camera release cycle since I bought my new K-7 back in 2010. The K-3II replacement is taking longer than it should, in my view - especially as we're now without a current-production flagship APS-C body... but it's coming. None of us is without the ability to take great photographs in the meantime

I used "waste" intentionally Mike, because it is also a waste to wait for something, expecting it to come in its due time, and find it doesn't come in its due time...
I did not want to "waste" another year waiting, so I bought a KP, and am quite content with it for freeing me of my K3 that was acting up. It is a pretty nice, modest upgrade.
Wasting time can be prevented by solving the riddle of why it took so long, and get a better understanding of what was likely going on behind closed doors at Ricoh/Pentax.
Do you know that you are actually the first and as far as I know, only one, to suggest that the KP might have had priority over the true flagship?
I read a lot of old local reviews on the KP. In each and every single one, the KP was referred to as the next APS-C top model. Go figure.... Truth is, whether meant as a "flagship" or not, the KP was important enough to Ricoh/Pentax, to push back the next flagship for 1,5 years. The humble KP will even have to carry the flag when the last K3II are sold out, right up until the K.... flagship finally arrives.

[rod_grant]

Chris, your link to PF reviews led me to the KP review which states unequivocally, "The Pentax KP is a 24 megapixel APS-C format DSLR camera launched in early 2017 as a premium mid-range model between the upper entry-level K-70 and flagship K-3 II." (my emphasis). The KP follows the Pentax mode of introducing new stuff in models that are outside the normal model lines - eg KS1 KS2?




EDIT (just to finish my post after an interruption) Some other reviews may have posted that the KP was the replacement/upgrade/etc of the K3 line, but that doesn't make it true. It was made clear at the time that it wasn't a replacement for the K3/K3ii. By now we should be aware that not everything that is read in a review is entirely correct. (and that applies to reviews of things other than cameras!)

---

Last edited by rod_grant; 03-05-2018 at 08:16 PM.

[jatrax]

I'm not sure that the term 'flagship' means the same to Ricoh as it does to others, even allowing for translation problems. Ricoh can say "the KP will be our top camera". And how the word 'top' is translated can mean many things. Flagship? Newest? Best specced for now? Who knows.

What we have had in the past has been a consumer line (k-30, k-50, k70) and a prosumer line (k-7, k5, k-3) with a number of clear distinctions between them. Then there have been a few outliers like the K-S2, K-S1, KP.

I wonder how much of the confusion over the KP versus a new 'flagship' is people trying to put things into some organized pattern that makes sense rather than what the reality of things is. The KP has been an odd body, better in some ways than the consumer line but not as good in others as the prosumer line. Whether it was a compromise intended to merge both those lines and thus reduce the number of bodies, or just an interesting one off that trialed some new tech and designs will never be known to us.

At any rate without the heavier battery, dual card slots and more robust shutter and fps, I don't personally see the KP as any sort of 'flagship' for APS-C. But that is just my view.

[photoptimist]

I used "waste" intentionally Mike, because it is also a waste to wait for something, expecting it to come in its due time, and find it doesn't come in its due time...
I did not want to "waste" another year waiting, so I bought a KP, and am quite content with it for freeing me of my K3 that was acting up. It is a pretty nice, modest upgrade.
Wasting time can be prevented by solving the riddle of why it took so long, and get a better understanding of what was likely going on behind closed doors at Ricoh/Pentax.
Do you know that you are actually the first and as far as I know, only one, to suggest that the KP might have had priority over the true flagship?
I read a lot of old local reviews on the KP. In each and every single one, the KP was referred to as the next APS-C top model. Go figure.... Truth is, whether meant as a "flagship" or not, the KP was important enough to Ricoh/Pentax, to push back the next flagship for 1,5 years. The humble KP will even have to carry the flag when the last K3II are sold out, right up until the K.... flagship finally arrives.

Is there any evidence that Ricoh believes in flagships?

If you look at the original naval definition of "flagship", you'd be forced to conclude that Pentax's biggest camera (645Z) has to be the true flagship. The K-1ii is smaller and has lower resolution than the 645Z so the K-1ii is not the flagship. And the K-3 replacement will be very unflagship-like in having an even smaller body, lower resolution, and probably lower IQ than the K-1 or 645Z.

Honestly, the whole focus on flagship is silly. Even if you define "flagship" as having the best of the best of everything Pentax has to offer, then no camera fits the definition because every Pentax camera is inferior to some other Pentax camera on one or more performance dimensions.

Instead, all of Pentax's cameras are optimized for different purposes, trade-offs, and price-points. There's demand for a high-reach, high-frame-rate, high-features K-mount camera (APS-C + K-3 features) even if it means lower resolution and IQ. And there's demand for a larger highest-resolution, highest-IQ K-mount camera (the K-1 and now K-1ii). But there's also demand for a compact, high-IQ camera (the KP) and a more modest K-mount camera (K-70). Pentax has been steadily updating each model including putting new technologies in new bodies that aren't in so-called flagships (because they aren't really flagships).

And once it's clear that Pentax is simply making different cameras for different reasons, then there's no real stigma to a delay in updating any one of the types of cameras they make (note that new K-3iis are still available).

Yes, a delayed update may be frustrating to those want that particular type of camera. Just ask the people that waited years for a full-frame camera or all the people who thought Pentax had turned their back on their "small cameras with big functionality" roots. But the idea that one camera should be a special flagship that takes priority over other customers doesn't seem right and doesn't' seem what Pentax is doing.

[Racer X 69]

But is that true?

Yes.

There seem to be three problems with listening to the customer:

There will always be problems.


But good companies, with good staff, will turn those problems into successes.

First, there is no "the customer" in photography. There's a spectrum of first-timers, photography-enthusiasts, gear-enthusiasts, brand-enthusiasts, status-symbol-enthusiasts, and pros. And then there's all the genres of photography: landscape, product, architecture, macro, wildlife (of various sizes, distances, and speeds), portrait, weddings, sports, drunken bicyclists, etc. All these different customers provide different feedback and demand different things. These demands sometimes conflict with each other and they always compete for R&D and manufacturing cost budget. Some customers are a lot harder to satisfy than others.

But we aren't talking about photography, we are talking about business. The business of selling photographic gear. And without customers, there is no business.

Second, the customer may simply be wrong.

There are 2 rules for a successful business.


First the customer is always right.


Second, if the customer is ever wrong, refer to rule number one.

Third, the volume of the voices of the complainers can be entirely divorced from the volume of sales even if the company does listen. One loud mouth is not the majority and talk is cheap.

You and I both know there are many loudmouths here. Look at how active the News And Rumors section is, and how heated the discussions get.

Sometimes listening to the customer can kill the business, too.

Only if the company doesn't actually hear what the customers are saying and then respond with a good product, at a price the customer will pay.

The challenge for the company, especially a smaller one like Pentax, is to decide which subset of customers to listen to and ignore the rest no matter how noisy they get.

Absolutely.


And a good, successful company will meet those challenges and succeed.

[BigMackCam]

I used "waste" intentionally Mike, because it is also a waste to wait for something, expecting it to come in its due time, and find it doesn't come in its due time...
I did not want to "waste" another year waiting, so I bought a KP, and am quite content with it for freeing me of my K3 that was acting up. It is a pretty nice, modest upgrade.

Wasting time can be prevented by solving the riddle of why it took so long, and get a better understanding of what was likely going on behind closed doors at Ricoh/Pentax.

I guess I find the concept of "waste" difficult to grasp in this context, Chris...

From our perspective as photographers, the real waste is if we're not out taking photos when we want to be, and placing the blame on equipment limitations - because almost any limitation can be mitigated by our approach. Prior to buying your KP (which was a good move, I reckon) I suspect you didn't actually waste any photography time (you didn't, did you? ). You might have wasted some thought and emotion on a situation none of us has any influence over, but that's all.

From Ricoh's perspective, it might not have been working on the products you wanted or expected, but we can be sure it was working on products. You might feel that effort was expended wastefully because it didn't fit with your hopes, expectations and assumptions for the product roadmap, but without knowing Ricoh's strategy, that has no basis.

And that's the rub with your riddle... We'll never know what Ricoh's strategy is. Trying to solve it is an exercise in futility, and wasted effort indeed... you'd have more luck with "Who's on first?"

The K-3II replacement - whatever form that takes - will arrive when it arrives and not a moment sooner, utterly independent of our discussions and deliberations. In the meantime, you can enjoy your KP, others will enjoy their K-3, K-5, K-7, K20D, K10D etc. and all will be able to get out there and take great photos

[savoche]

Great that they finally get around to replacing the K-3. I don't really see a problem with a slower product cycle as I believe people (as in normal people outside of this forum) are slower to upgrade, too.

This was too slow for me, though, since the rascals launched the K-1 at too low a price

[beholder3]

Honestly, the whole focus on flagship is silly.

+1

It's people hoping for whatever they personally (that is a single opinion out of millions of others) want, nothing more.

[Rondec]

"Flagship" is a meaningless term in this setting. Pentax kept the K3 II around for quite awhile after the K-P was released purely because they didn't have a K3 II sequel ready yet. Why they have discontinued it now is debatable. Hopefully they are close enough to the release of its sequel that they think their existing stock will last until close to the release date of the K3 III (or whatever it is called).

The K1 and K1 II are different types of cameras and favor a bit more deliberate style due to their higher megapixels, buffer that fills up faster and slower frame rate.

Overall, I think the release of new cameras from all companies is bound to slow down. The market has matured and releasing a new entry level or mid level camera every 12 to 18 months isn't going to push many people to buy new cameras. The goal is to release a camera when you have something real to offer -- better image quality, better features. Bumping megapixels slightly or increasing frame rate from 7 to 8 frames per second used to generate camera sales, but I don't think it does any more. Existing cameras are good enough that people are holding on to their ILCs longer and only upgrading every couple of generations or when their cameras wear out.

[Chris Mak]

I'm not sure that the term 'flagship' means the same to Ricoh as it does to others, even allowing for translation problems. Ricoh can say "the KP will be our top camera". And how the word 'top' is translated can mean many things. Flagship? Newest? Best specced for now? Who knows.

What we have had in the past has been a consumer line (k-30, k-50, k70) and a prosumer line (k-7, k5, k-3) with a number of clear distinctions between them. Then there have been a few outliers like the K-S2, K-S1, KP.

I wonder how much of the confusion over the KP versus a new 'flagship' is people trying to put things into some organized pattern that makes sense rather than what the reality of things is. The KP has been an odd body, better in some ways than the consumer line but not as good in others as the prosumer line. Whether it was a compromise intended to merge both those lines and thus reduce the number of bodies, or just an interesting one off that trialed some new tech and designs will never be known to us.

At any rate without the heavier battery, dual card slots and more robust shutter and fps, I don't personally see the KP as any sort of 'flagship' for APS-C. But that is just my view.

Just a remark about the KP battery: I bought an extra D-Li109 to use in the grip.
Yesterday I was out shooting all afternoon (5 hours), with the grip on and extra battery inserted. I was expecting possible power shortness with one battery.
At the end of the day, a few hundred images later, the used battery was still far in the green and the second battery still full.
Comparing this to my Sony A7rII high end 3000,- body, not bad at all!
So some things are at least partially subjective. Not to say that I like the KP/Sony A7rII batteries, but things like responsive AF are of a lot higher priority to me, and loads more important in a high end body. The KP had zero responsiveness issues. The shutter though doesn't sound as high end as the K3, but indeed more mid level, although that is just a sound. I never reach the 100.000 mark with any of my camera bodies anyway. What they should absolutely add in the next APS-C top body though, is a 100% zoom setting on the display for quickly checking proper focus.
The focus drive process from body to DC motor lens is b.t.w. very different from the K3. IThe KP seems to keep an electrical signal ready for a few seconds, after which it shuts the signal off if you don't refocus, making a very typical sound But that's for another post.

Edit: I found today when using the KP on the same battery as yesterday, that it was quickly down to yellow and red, so a 5 hour shooting session is max. about what you can expect on one full charge. Luckily there was the second battery in the grip!