[ogl]

GRIII and K-3III will be this year. It's fact.

[Kunzite]

GRIII and K-3III will be this year. It's fact.

"Someday". "September". Coincidence? I think not.

[D1N0]

GRIII and K-3III will be this year. It's fact.

I have taken note of your post. I have created a reminder to remind you of it on 1/1/2019

[OoKU]

GRIII and K-3III will be this year. It's fact.

K3III will be 2019
GRIII will be this year.

[monochrome]

K3III will be 2019
GRIII will be this year.

Sounds reasonable.

[zapp]

GRIII and K-3III will be this year. It's fact.

Check out what Pentax has relased within the last 24 months.
Compare to the latest interviews talking about all kinds of updates from LaLaLand.

Make a reality check. No, we will not see a bunch of updated Ltd lenses, new Ltd lenses, a set of FF lenses, APS-C, K3III, GRIII in the near future.
K1 update has a price tag, I go for it. Feel free to prove me wrong and build trust Pentax, maybe hire more developers and less talkers.

[SSGGeezer]

Check out what Pentax has relased within the last 24 months.
Compare to the latest interviews talking about all kinds of updates from LaLaLand.

Make a reality check. No, we will not see a bunch of updated Ltd lenses, new Ltd lenses, a set of FF lenses, APS-C, K3III, GRIII in the near future.
K1 update has a price tag, I go for it. Feel free to prove me wrong and build trust Pentax, maybe hire more developers and less talkers.

Maybe Pentax is just doing it's due diligence and ensuring that what gets released actually meets the standards that they have set for it. If they are going to release a * lens, there are levels of performance that are expected by its consumers, and I would rather they get it right the first time instead of creating unhappy customers with a half-baked lens.

Pentax does not appear to be trying to create basic consumer lenses but higher end lenses, so they have to get it right.

[Dericali]

There is some good stuff there.


Pentax is for people who shoot mainly landscapes. You've got it there right from the horse's mouth. Time to stop complaining about what they don't do, and aren't going to do. Time to move to another brand. Pentax is never going to be what you want it to be. Pentax is not the droid you're looking for.

Pity that they didn't make that more clear in e.g. the K-1 marketing material. Maybe that should be the new slogan for the brand - "Pentax - for people who photograph stuff that isn't moving".

Kind of makes Pentax seems overpriced then if they're really only designed to work satisfactorily in such a limited range of all photography applications.

[ogl]

K3III will be 2019
GRIII will be this year.

No. This year.

[ogl]

Check out what Pentax has relased within the last 24 months.
Compare to the latest interviews talking about all kinds of updates from LaLaLand.

Make a reality check. No, we will not see a bunch of updated Ltd lenses, new Ltd lenses, a set of FF lenses, APS-C, K3III, GRIII in the near future.
K1 update has a price tag, I go for it. Feel free to prove me wrong and build trust Pentax, maybe hire more developers and less talkers.

K-3II was announced on April, 22, 2015. It will be 3 year very soon. I expect K-3III at Photokina 2018.

[normhead]

Pity that they didn't make that more clear in e.g. the K-1 marketing material. Maybe that should be the new slogan for the brand - "Pentax - for people who photograph stuff that isn't moving".

Kind of makes Pentax seems overpriced then if they're really only designed to work satisfactorily in such a limited range of all photography applications.

Oh come on, they did, they called it a "Field Camera" right from day one.

Should Canon say in their 1DX marketing material "it's not that great a landscape camera" Should Nikon say the D850 "is not that great an action camera". Learn to read and interpret market speak. No one pays to publish a bunch of negatives, no matter how true, in their marketing material, unless the government passes legislation forcing them too.

What camera isn't limited in some way? Where is this perfect camera that doesn't need a disclaimer according to that logic?

Personally I'm really happy to have a better than D810 for landscape camera for a fraction the cost. I didn't have to pay for what I don't need. You sound like you're upset that you got what you paid for. I paid for a K-3 with twice the sensor size at less than twice the cost. That's what I wanted, that's what i got. To me it's a bargain.

It is however disappointing that others thought they were getting something else. I'm definitely not convinced that's Pentax's fault, or that there is something they should have done better.

There's little more irritating than people imposing saying Pentax should do things no one else in the marketing world does.

I can see the Canon 1DX ad, "pay thousands of dollars more than you need to for AF speed and throughput, you are unlikey ever to have the skill or need to take full advantage of."

Or maybe a Sony A9 add.."You won't get better keepers than you would with a 15 FPS camera, but you'll love deleting an extra 7 frames per second from your hard drive.for every second you shoot."

It would be like medications, all harmful side effects of their unique implementation of a "camera" should be listed on the label.

"Warning, all high FPS fast AF cameras suffer from limited MP values to increase image throughput speed. Use only if maximum IQ is not required."

We'll just have to agree to differ.

This whole "My mistake is Pentax's fault" thing gets really annoying. Own up to your mistakes, quit blaming Pentax.

[surfar]

What camera isn't limited in some way?

Such an easy Q,its the one that hasnt been released(or announced) yet!

[normhead]

Such an easy Q,its the one that hasnt been released(or announced) yet!

Or more often the one that's been announced but no one has actually seen yet. They are always pretty good.

Although from what I can tell, the Sony A9 lived up to the announcement hype, but that's rare. And even Sony didn't say they had not produced a noticeably flimsy camera (compared to Pentax standards.) They said they were working to improve robustness, kind of the same way Pentax is "working to improve AF." everyone uses the same market speak, and I suspect you'd put your company at a severe disadvantage if you didn't. It's on the consumer to figure it out.

Every internet review site repeats ad nauseum, Pentax tracking AF isn't up to the other major manufacturers. I can't believe that anyone who read even one review didn't know that. I've read it 100 times more than I needed to, because i understood it the first time i read it,

[BarryE]

Oh come on, they did, they called it a "Field Camera" right from day one.

Should Canon say in their 1DX marketing material "it's not that great a landscape camera" Should Nikon say the D850 "is not that great an action camera". Learn to read and interpret market speak. No one pays to publish a bunch of negatives, no matter how true, in their marketing material, unless the government passes legislation forcing them too.

What camera isn't limited in some way? Where is this perfect camera that doesn't need a disclaimer according to that logic?

Personally I'm really happy to have a better than D810 for landscape camera for a fraction the cost. I didn't have to pay for what I don't need. You sound like you're upset that you got what you paid for. I paid for a K-3 with twice the sensor size at less than twice the cost. That's what I wanted, that's what i got. To me it's a bargain.

It is however disappointing that others thought they were getting something else. I'm definitely not convinced that's Pentax's fault, or that there is something they should have done better.

There's little more irritating than people imposing saying Pentax should do things no one else in the marketing world does.

I can see the Canon 1DX ad, "pay thousands of dollars more than you need to for AF speed and throughput, you are unlikey ever to have the skill or need to take full advantage of."

Or maybe a Sony A9 add.."You won't get better keepers than you would with a 15 FPS camera, but you'll love deleting an extra 7 frames per second from your hard drive.for every second you shoot."

It would be like medications, all harmful side effects of their unique implementation of a "camera" should be listed on the label.

"Warning, all high FPS fast AF cameras suffer from limited MP values to increase image throughput speed. Use only if maximum IQ is not required."

We'll just have to agree to differ.

This whole "My mistake is Pentax's fault" thing gets really annoying. Own up to your mistakes, quit blaming Pentax.

I mostly agree with the 'Filed Camera' angle. I've always had that little thought that it would be nice if they dropped all the fast stuff and produced a more basic camera, but with utmost IQ possible and full weatherproofing. Then there would be no ambiguity.

I wonder where the market might have gone for a $1000/£750 K1 and no 'unnecessary' extras ? I would have disturbed the market and brought a few to an exceptional, but slow 'Field Camera'. I'm guessing there's still a lot of photographers that take landscape shots as the vast majority of their photos.

There could still be the other variants, available of course.

[pres589]

Would this $1k K-1 w/ no frills have been the same physical size (or smaller!) than the K-5 or K-3 bodies? If so, yes! No Wi-Fi, no GPS, no articulating screen, shrink the screen, no programmable knob, the K-5's top-plate LCD, just one SD Card slot (I can hear torches being lit at this point...), maybe other things?

Anyone know how to wedge a full frame sensor into a K-01?