[leekil]

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

I don't think that they are intending to limit the range of the camera with the "field camera" concept as much as you are suggesting, and maybe your field camera definition is slightly different than theirs. Ricoh describes it as:

When photographing outdoors, it is desirable that a camera is designed to be small, lightweight and highly resistant to the harsh natural environment.

Since the time of film-format cameras, PENTAX has developed a series of compact, lightweight and durable SLR cameras, and delivered numerous “field camera” masterpieces to our users. Among them are 67- and 645-series medium-format cameras, which have received tremendous support from both professionals and amateurs because of their remarkable maneuverability and exceptional imaging power. As for 35mm film-format cameras, the professional-standard PENTAX LX remained a best-selling camera for more than 20 years, as the first PENTAX SLR camera to feature a dustproof, weather-resistant structure. Then, the PENTAX ME became
an epoch-making model for its world’s smallest, lightest body.*

Now, equipped with an array of innovative features useful in outdoor photography,
the PENTAX K-1 is expected to broaden the potential of field photography, especially in such applications as landscape photography.

Landscape is called out in particular as a type of outdoor photography, but their specific emphasis is on weather-resistance and size. The LX and ME are included in this group; those are not specifically landscape oriented, nor particularly limited to a certain type of photography.

(Personally, I question some of their examples as regards to size and weight, but perhaps they are relative examples.)

[BarryE]

All those little things you would remove would save about $0.98 at the factory cost level, so $3.96 Retail. Development, the sensor, the frame, IBIS, CPU, any size back screen, peripheral connectors and assembly are where the factory cost is and they’re the same. Markup to Distributors is the same; further Markup to retailers is the same; further markup to retail selling price is the same. So you’d save $4. Not $1,000.

Your inhaling. Don’t inhale.

.:

The $1000 idea is not just about actual costs, it's more a direction. Keep it simple. Keep light. Make it WR and the best IQ. This might have drawn folk to Pentax and then to buy lenses. I'm more than happy with my two k-1 bodies, for stills, but there is so much, for me, superfluous function. Perhaps it's nice to know it's there, but I don't find myself using it.

ps it was just an idea ;-)

---------- Post added 04-06-18 at 07:56 AM ----------

Sounds like the old IBM sales mantra.

---------- Post added 04-05-18 at 06:57 PM ----------


Thanks Norm. I get really tired sifting through all the complaints about Pentax just to ferret out some morsels of truth in these threads. Your post hit the nail on the head. We shouldn't expect Pentax to be top dog in each photography niche, as Canikony seem to try to do. Assess what you need, assess the performance of the options available, and make your choice.

I don't need full frame, but I would really be happy if the next camera in the K-3 lineage had some of its IQ and ISO enhancing features of the K-1. But I am content to wait and see what is released and continue appreciating what I am able to do with my K-3.

Please don't mention IBM here. I'm trying to forget them:-(

[RonHendriks1966]

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

Well with no EVF that can be done

Compare camera dimensions side by side

It still doesn't get cheap when it is done right.

[Kunzite]

The $1000 idea is not just about actual costs, it's more a direction.

It's a bad direction. People unwilling to pay a fair price for a camera won't pay for lenses, either.
They will get the $810 Sony A7 and $10 lenses at the flea market.

[ogl]

Well with no EVF that can be done

Compare camera dimensions side by side

It still doesn't get cheap when it is done right.

FF K-mount mirrorless could be not big and real...But...Ricoh has no such direction of developing.

[Rondec]

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.

[Topsy]

The electronic shutter doesn’t need the first and second curtains to pass in front of the sensor to ‘expose’ the image because it is . . . . . well, electronic

Yes, which is why I don't understand why the curtains close after taking the exposure..

[monochrome]

Yes, which is why I don't understand why the curtains close after taking the exposure..

Their normal state is closed.

[dafbp]

Pentax has already stated that they have limited resources, and still people keep asking for a camera with limited sales prospects...
A 1000$ FF (if even possible) would be extremely limited in capability, and most people would rather spend the extra $ to get the K1, which does a bit of everything, and save buying 2 cameras. So much for sales prospects.
And, like others have said earlier, the margins are low, and it's unlikely they'd be generating sales in expensive lenses, so it's a [very few] win - [Pentax] lose business proposition. You get approval for that in parliament (everyday), not in a company board.


And don't forget the "cool" factor: if you buy a FF for the price of a mobile phone that's used by people that take the bus to work, you'll be seen as a FF wannabe, not a "specialized photographer that doesn't need a big bucks camera to take awesome pictures". How many wouldn't care about that?

[angerdan]

So, 6 to 9 months until the next APS-c flagship, it sounds like it will be the K-3 mkIII as he called it the "K-3 series."
The K-3 mkIII is coming.

He didn't call the Successor "K-3 series".
Also there hasn't been any III in Pentax lenses or bodies yet, only mass market manufactors like Canon do that.

Will we ever see another Ricoh / Pentax mirrorless camera, such as the K-01?
The Pentax K-01 was a mirrorless camera that used the full-depth Pentax K-mount, allowing full compatibility with existing Pentax lenses. While image quality was great, the camera was bulky, and there were some performance and autofocus shortcomings.
Our resources for research and development are limited and we are more focused on the development of K-series bodies and lenses. That is our first priority, and why we are currently not too involved in the development of other smaller cameras.

K-01 is an K-series body. So the statement doesn't exclude the creation of a successor of the K-01, since the performance of CDAF has increased since then.
Design was imperor over ergonomics and archived awards.
If the design a K-02 with ergonomics instead of design goals, it could be an success.

And while the renewed focus on updating their K-Mount lens lineup is encouraging, it must be said that the continued evolution of competitors' mirrorless camera offerings has Pentax's DSLR-only lineup looking a little staid.

DPReview seems to be not capable or not willing to check their statements before publications.
Ricoh Global as well as Ricoh UK&EU are still listing the Q-system.

[normhead]

He didn't call the Successor "K-3 series".
Also there hasn't been any III in Pentax lenses or bodies yet, only mass market manufactors like Canon do that.

But they've also run out of odd numbers, so they have to do something new.

They skipped K-9.... which would have been of great interest to dog owners. I guess they could go there.

[angerdan]

K-9 seems logical

[pres589]

They are kind of in a weird spot with naming. I can't see them using K-9, so it's K3-III or K-2 or something else altogether different. I'm sure it doesn't matter.

Something exciting is thinking about using lenses like the DA 21, FA 20, or the DA 40's as low light lenses due to how much high ISO performance has improved over the years. The KP might be there today as it is; I wonder how much more they can do with the next camera.

[monochrome]

He didn't call the Successor "K-3 series".
Also there hasn't been any III in Pentax lenses or bodies yet, only mass market manufactors like Canon do that.

Will we see an updated APS-C flagship camera in the future?

“For the flagship APS-C model, we have just started to develop that. It’ll be the successor of the K-3 II and will be an evolution of the K-3 series.”

[lytrytyr]

Live View post K-7 is the groundbreaking K-01 subroutine in a traditional dSLR (K-30/K50 is essentially a K-01 with an OVF system added).

No, while the K-01 has a focal plane shutter, it just goes "click".
Yet even Pentax DSLRs as advanced as the K-1 still do the "flop-click-flop" thing in Live View.