[Vantage-Point]

I get the fact that Pentax does not want to make a mirrorless camera. I just would like a feature rich WR body DSLR with at least 2 control dials that is the size of the K-s1 or K-r bodies either APS-C or Full Frame or both. They have made cameras that size before.

[normhead]

and I'm not talking about BIF or anything fancy. sometimes my camera has trouble locking on to stationary objects. Frankly, Pentax should have been able to release a camera with decent AF - that is by no means asking too much.

Having watched the videos comparing the 24-70 and the 24-70s on other systems, I'm not sure you even have a point.

Pentax 24-70 compared to Canon and Nikon youtube - Yahoo Video Search Results

I wonder how many people realize that if your camera is set to shutter priority, it will fire the shutter before the camera is done focussing. There is just no information here to understand what is happening.

What you have there is people actually comparing actual cameras in real world use. They don't seem to find the pentax less than decent. Do I believe them, who actually have worked side by side with real systems? Or do i believe you and your negativity?

I know which one I think has a bit of understanding of what they are talking about. The point being, there may be situations where Pentax has trouble locking focus, the assumption that this is purely a Pentax problem that wouldn't happen with other systems is completely unsupported by any data. I have shot side by side with Canon shooters, who gave up because they couldn't lock focus while I was firing away in low light.

I got this, and about 20 more like it. This one taken with a Sigma 70-300 and a K-20D. The two Canon guys standing beside me walked away with nothing. Yet you don't see me going around claiming Canon low light performance is substandard. It's single case, one day, one set of circumstances. I understand that.



The fact that you at times can't lock focus, on it's own means next to nothing. I've seen lots of times when people with many systems can't lock focus for whatever reason. And there is actual test data out there that on stationary items with fast focussing lenses, Pentax is actually ahead of the curve, like at IR where Pentax checks focus on focus priority images faster than anything but an A9.

I suspect Pentax is more in the game than you think it is. This based on hours spent shooting beside users of other systems.

People who criticize Pentax AF, for some reason think that doing so gets then a free pass, and they don't have to provide any information, like what their situation was, and have the right to generalize from situations and are under no obligation to explain what those situations were. Most of the time when I'm shooting, next to Canon and Nikon systems, I don't find myself at a disadvantage. Perhaps the difference between me and you being, I've actually shot beside 50 or so other photographers over 8 years, talked to them about what they are experiencing and never felt the urge to trash Pentax the way you do. IMHO, sometimes I have more trouble than they do, sometimes they have more trouble than I do. I'll personally not even try and predict which system will be inadequate in which circumstances. I just know, sometimes my shutter clicks first.

Let that sink in. Sometimes I get the first shot off. it doesn't matter what everyone on the internet says about Pentax AF, sometimes I lock focus and start shooting before the Nikon and Canon guys. Explain to me how that can happen if Pentax AF is so inferior?

That would be different from what you are posting where Pentax AF would always be inferior. Again, in my experience, that's nonsense. Pentax AF is in some circumstances inferior. Like tracking BiFs. In many circumstances, it's not a disadvantage in the slightest.

If you are going to moan about how terrible Pentax AF is, at least give us the circumstances you were shooting in and light conditions etc. Someone might be able to help you out.

For example, if you are shooting in shutter priority, you may be firing the shutter before the camera is finished focussing. There are settings that can affect how many in focus images you get. Before i even entertain this "Pentax AF is terrible" kind of stuff, I want to know that the camera was set up optimally, for the task at hand.

[monochrome]

I get the fact that Pentax does not want to make a mirrorless camera. I just would like a feature rich WR body DSLR with at least 2 control dials that is the size of the K-s1 or K-r bodies either APS-C or Full Frame or both. They have made cameras that size before.

You won’t get feature-rich + 2 dials on a K-S1 sized camera. Compare it to a KP. 11mm narrower, 7mm shorter, slightly thinner, but look what ISN’T included to make it so small.

Change Camera 1 and camera 2 to Top View. . . . Comparison - Camera Size

[photoptimist]

I don't really think that Pentax had any intention when creating the K-1 except to make it as close to the D810 as they could while keeping the price below 2000 dollars. That's about it. As to what it is capable of, most things you would want to do with it. It could do sports, but due to the 4-ish frames per second frame rate and lack of long, fast lenses, it certainly doesn't seem like the perfect camera for that, but clearly people have gotten by with worse over the years.

As for EVFs, it doesn't feel like Pentax is really able to build a camera that would challenge Sony's mirrorless, spec monster cameras. Sony really has covered all of the bases here -- from 1000-ish A7 to top-end super fast (and expensive) A9, there doesn't seem to be much niche for Pentax to target. Because that is what Pentax does. They find a part of the market where they don't match up directly with Sony/Canon/Nikon and then they build a better camera for that market segment for an excellent price. That is the sort of plan that generates sales, but isn't going to win huge amounts of market share.

Exactly! Chasing competitors who have deep pockets is suicide. Let Sony be Sony and Pentax be Pentax.

What continually amazes me is all the things the K-1 can do that the competition cannot. From my perspective and photographic needs, the K-1 really is a higher-spec camera for a lower price. Of course, others may disagree because they want something else from their camera such as mirrorless, high fps, high-quality video, or whatever. There's no camera that does it all at any price. For example, even the D850 lacks IBIS which makes it totally inferior to the K-1 from my perspective.

It really comes down to each photographer deciding their priorities and picking a camera that suits them rather than expecting that every brand (especially the smaller ones) can offer every feature at every price point.

[normhead]

It really comes down to each photographer deciding their priorities and picking a camera that suits them rather than expecting that every brand (especially the smaller ones) can offer every feature at every price point.

Its the old glass is half full thing.

Some of us look thinking "look at all the stuff this camera does for this price."
Others think "Look what this camera can't do for this price."

And others just pile on with all the nonsense they've seen posted on other sites.

The thing is, all the negative stuff about what I can't do is often misleading in that it refers only to specific scenarios which I don't encounter often or is simply wrong based on my experience.

There are people here who seriously need to look throgh the images to find images they want to shoot, find the handle of the guy who took them and ask "how did you get that shot?"

And if you can't find the images you wish to shoot, maybe you shouldn't buy that camera.

People need to realize, the fact that they have issues, doesn't mean everyone does. Your problems don't define anyone else's reality, and in no way diminishes my happiness with what I do get. Telling me you have problems, doesn't mean I or anyone else have problems, although some think they are talking about the camera. IN fact they are talking about all kinds of things, their expectations, their skill level, their ability to choose the right focus settings for the subject they are shooting, etc.

In my own tests, I have often hit 5 out of 5 in various tests, for acceptable focus... but often one is sharper on the part of the frame I want in focus. That doesn't mean the camera didn't focus correctly, it means the camera couldn't read my mind as to which part of the image I wanted in sharp focus.

[angerdan]

I get the fact that Pentax does not want to make a mirrorless camera.

They did make several MILC cameras, from K-01 to Q-S1. They didn't say they won't make a MILC again.
THe just say, thei'l stick to K-mount cameras - which can be MILC too

[Vantage-Point]

You won’t get feature-rich + 2 dials on a K-S1 sized camera. Compare it to a KP.

Monochrome, I guess the K-s1 is probably a little to small for that. The k-r is probably a better comparison. I am just not a fan of the KP body.

[monochrome]

They did make several MILC cameras, from K-01 to Q-S1. They didn't say they won't make a MILC again.
THe just say, thei'l stick to K-mount cameras - which can be MILC too

What I gather, without C-Suite level knowledge, is that when Ricoh the parent took the empty compact camera plant away from Ricoh Imaging and transferred it to Automotive Vision, that reduced Imaging’s production capacity such that they can schedule production only for three OVF dSLR’s concurrently. This means two bodies will always be ‘in development’. Right now those two are the next 645 and the next APSc flagship. Both bodies are probably waiting for the next sensor availability.

At this time, even if Ricoh has chosen to produce a MILC and has started d velopment, it is probably years away and would probably have to replace something. It will be interesting, in that regard, to see what ‘evolution of K-3 series’ means.

I just think it would be a huge risk for Pentax to drop OVF APSc flagship bodies for a technology they probably don’t fully understand and a production process they’d need to design from a white sheet.

They’re simply not large enough to enter MILC. They don’t have the production capacity, much less the catalog of production process experience.

---

Last edited by monochrome; 04-07-2018 at 09:48 AM.

[photoptimist]

Its the old glass is half full thing.

Some of us look thinking "look at all the stuff this camera does for this price."
Others think "Look what this camera can't do for this price."

And others just pile on with all the nonsense they've seen posted on other sites.

The thing is, all the negative stuff about what I can't do is often misleading in that it refers only to specific scenarios which I don't encounter often or is simply wrong based on my experience.

There are people here who seriously need to look throgh the images to find images they want to shoot, find the handle of the guy who took them and ask "how did you get that shot?"

And if you can't find the images you wish to shoot, maybe you shouldn't buy that camera.

People need to realize, the fact that they have issues, doesn't mean everyone does. Your problems don't define anyone else's reality, and in no way diminishes my happiness with what I do get. Telling me you have problems, doesn't mean I or anyone else have problems, although some think they are talking about the camera. IN fact they are talking about all kinds of things, their expectations, their skill level, their ability to choose the right focus settings for the subject they are shooting, etc.

In my own tests, I have often hit 5 out of 5 in various tests, for acceptable focus... but often one is sharper on the part of the frame I want in focus. That doesn't mean the camera didn't focus correctly, it means the camera couldn't read my mind as to which part of the image I wanted in sharp focus.

There's a lot truth in what you say.

Modern cameras are extremely good but they are also extremely complex.

The problem with today's level of automation is that it gives the user the false expectation that the camera can read their mind because often it seems to. And the fact that the automation usually works means that a lot of people use cameras without taking the time to understand how the camera works, what each mode does, and how to get results in challenging conditions.

I'd not be surprised if the majority of lost shots and negative comments on every brand of camera are the result of operator error. I know that's totally true of my own failed pictures.

It's not the camera that has a high or low keeper-rate, it's the photographer.

[Vantage-Point]

"They did make several MILC cameras, from K-01 to Q-S1. They didn't say they won't make a MILC again.
THe just say, thei'l stick to K-mount cameras - which can be MILC too."

Angerdan, I mean that they don't seem to want to make another one. I think Pentax has great ideas first, but does not take them far enough. In the case of the K-01, if the camera had a good EVF along better auto focusing It could have been better received. The K-s1 needed a better grip and a couple of programmable function buttons instead of flashing lights in order to be taken more seriously as a possible camera choice.

[monochrome]

Monochrome, I guess the K-s1 is probably a little to small for that. The k-r is probably a better comparison. I am just not a fan of the KP body.

I get that. For my hands K-1 is perfect. I would put an APSc sensor in a K-1 shell and prefer it to the K-3 shell.

I love the KP images and portability but the KP ergonomics are either too big or too small for my hands

[Dericali]

@Dericali :
Of course it's not a camera solely intended for landscapes; it's a camera made by Pentax' strengths - and marketed as such. Pentax definitely doesn't intend to limit themselves to landscapes; the K-1 is just great in this field.
And making lenses dedicated solely to whatever the K-1 did great is not a such good idea... what about the next camera, and the next, and the next?

I was replying to an earlier poster's comments. And using sarcasm/hyperbole. Read the thread from the start...

[str8talk83]

Its the old glass is half full thing.

Some of us look thinking "look at all the stuff this camera does for this price."
Others think "Look what this camera can't do for this price."

And others just pile on with all the nonsense they've seen posted on other sites.

The thing is, all the negative stuff about what I can't do is often misleading in that it refers only to specific scenarios which I don't encounter often or is simply wrong based on my experience.

There are people here who seriously need to look throgh the images to find images they want to shoot, find the handle of the guy who took them and ask "how did you get that shot?"

And if you can't find the images you wish to shoot, maybe you shouldn't buy that camera.

People need to realize, the fact that they have issues, doesn't mean everyone does. Your problems don't define anyone else's reality, and in no way diminishes my happiness with what I do get. Telling me you have problems, doesn't mean I or anyone else have problems, although some think they are talking about the camera. IN fact they are talking about all kinds of things, their expectations, their skill level, their ability to choose the right focus settings for the subject they are shooting, etc.

In my own tests, I have often hit 5 out of 5 in various tests, for acceptable focus... but often one is sharper on the part of the frame I want in focus. That doesn't mean the camera didn't focus correctly, it means the camera couldn't read my mind as to which part of the image I wanted in sharp focus.

Great points. I think that anyone with reasonable skill can make just about any current camera work for them. Sometimes we find areas of weakness of our gear and we have to purchase something else to meet our needs. Sometimes we can’t do that and need to find ways to work around the limitations and improve our technique.

I’m thankful that I’ve had to compromise a lot and learn to adapt a lot. I would probably be much worse as a photographer if someone would have handed me the best gear available right off the bat and I didn’t have to push myself and learn what I needed vs. what I wanted.

[biz-engineer]

Sometimes we find areas of weakness of our gear and we have to purchase something else to meet our needs. Sometimes we can’t do that and need to find ways to work around the limitations and improve our technique.

The truth is, one must be either a beginner or a top notch professional talent to be able to claim the Pentax system prevents to get the wanted results. Simply because historically photographers have been producing stunning images with equipment much less capable that the current Pentax gear.

[Jonathan Mac]

In April of 2018, they are only now beginning development of the next APS-C flagship? I sincerely hope he misspoke.

This is exactly what I thought.

In general while reading the interview I thought that this guy world make a great politician - he replied without really giving any information away. Most of the info he did provide only served to show how far behind they are compared to what we had imagined.