[bdery]

I'd get a copy of the D FA 50/1.4 if Ricoh released a firmware for the K-1 II that supports disabling the "accelerator" processing. I'd love to get a sign from Ricoh that they have an open ear to responses to their products (here the K-1 II).

Is that crazy?

I don't see the link between the lens and the accelerator unit. and you can still use a K-1

From my current (incomplete as of now) testing, the accelerator unit improves things with JPEGs, and has a marginal impact (positive regarding noise, negative regarding details) on RAW. It's not a perfect trade-off but it's not an irrational one. Especially when remembering that this camera offers 36 MP, which is a LOT. And offers to disable the AA filter, and offers pixel shift (with a handheld option), all of which more than mitigates the minimal details lots.

That's my two cents.

[sbh]

Quite cheaper than what I had imagined. Good news, I think it will sell well

I thought the same.

It‘s cheaper in the Netherlands?? Maybe a dealer discount...

[Franc]

Yes a dealer discount. He sells the stuff 100€ cheaper then the other dealers and he is an official dealer (with also a B&M shop).

[ffking]

The 11-18 is sadly pushed back till next February maybe.
Best regards

If it's only next Feb, it's not as bad as people have been fearing :}

[Sandy Hancock]

If it's only next Feb, it's not as bad as people have been fearing :}

Things are rarely as bad as the FUD peddlers would have us think....

[Class A]

I don't see the link between the lens and the accelerator unit.

The connection is Pentax (Ricoh).

From my current (incomplete as of now) testing, the accelerator unit improves things with JPEGs, and has a marginal impact (positive regarding noise, negative regarding details) on RAW.

The impact on RAW exists and it simply shouldn't be there, or be optional.

Independently of what people like me think about RAW doctoring, DPReview marked the K-1 II down for this behaviour and I'm afraid that's going to have an impact on K-1 II sales. Completely unnecessary, if you ask me. Yes, I know, DPReview will always find something to moan about a DSLR, in particular a Pentax DSLR, but there is absolutely no need to give them free ammunition, in particular not, if not doing so would be of benefit to photographers (RAW shooters).

[JPT]

It's like Mistral75 says - The price Nokishita is reporting is the price after the retailer has applied a discount, and those discounts will apply from Day 1. The official price on the Ricoh site will likely be about 170,000-180,000 yen, but that's a price no retailer will be expected to sell at*. I'm not sure why Japanese electronics companies follow this bizarre convention, but it's not just Ricoh.

My point is that the 300mm never really sold at 150,000. It was probably selling for 125,000-130,000 at launch. That would be the price to relate the Nokishita price to if you want to make a comparison. But anyway, it looks like all will be revealed on Friday, so we will soon know for sure.

* Different retailers have different ways of offering the discount. Some are quite transparent and just apply a straight discount (like Fujiya, which is why I linked to it). Others have a point card system, where they give back 10% to the next purchase. Even Ricoh offers discounts to its Family Club members and extends the warranty to 3 years for people who buy direct. A further complication is that some retailers show the price before the 8% sales tax and others including tax. So it's easy to get confused by the camera prices in Japan.

I'm happy to admit I was wrong about this. It turns out that Nokishita was in fact quoting the Ricoh Imaging price when they said 148,500 yen. The discounted price is 133,650 yen. I think this will be a good seller in Japan at that price, because it is very well suited to portraits and Japanese photographers seem to use shorter focal lengths for portraits than other parts of the world.

[bdery]

Yes, I know, DPReview will always find something to moan about a DSLR, in particular a Pentax DSLR, but there is absolutely no need to give them free ammunition, in particular not, if not doing so would be of benefit to photographers (RAW shooters).

This makes sense. They could have, first, explained better the impacts and trades-offs (then it's not a flaw it's a feature) and making it optional would have quelled any discussion.

The K-1 is still available AFAIK for those not interested in the accelerator unit. And even though I reserve final judgment, I do think the actual differences in RAW are subtle and hard to spot, DPreview's opinion notwithstanding.

[reh321]

Who killed him?

death of bokeh? - PentaxForums.com

[Mistral75]

I'm happy to admit I was wrong about this. It turns out that Nokishita was in fact quoting the Ricoh Imaging price when they said 148,500 yen. The discounted price is 133,650 yen. I think this will be a good seller in Japan at that price, because it is very well suited to portraits and Japanese photographers seem to use shorter focal lengths for portraits than other parts of the world.

Isn't the RRP equal to ¥170,000 excluding VAT?

[Mistral75]

@JPT

Being now in front of my computer and not my phone, I confirm the following:

- ¥170,000 (excluding VAT) is the RRP of the HD Pentax-D FA★ 50mm f/1.4 SDM AW

ペンタックス「D FA★50mmF1.4 SDM AW」の発売日が決定 - デジカメ Watch

- ¥148,500 (including VAT; ¥137,500 excluding VAT) is the price proposed by some retailers, including Bic Camera, Yodobashi and, oddly enough, Ricoh Imaging's webstore

- Kitamura are asking ¥133,650 (including VAT; ¥123,750 excluding VAT).

[gm4life]

Things are rarely as bad as the FUD peddlers would have us think....

Absolutely correct Sandy!

[Rondec]

The connection is Pentax (Ricoh).


The impact on RAW exists and it simply shouldn't be there, or be optional.

Independently of what people like me think about RAW doctoring, DPReview marked the K-1 II down for this behaviour and I'm afraid that's going to have an impact on K-1 II sales. Completely unnecessary, if you ask me. Yes, I know, DPReview will always find something to moan about a DSLR, in particular a Pentax DSLR, but there is absolutely no need to give them free ammunition, in particular not, if not doing so would be of benefit to photographers (RAW shooters).

DP Review was never going to give the K-1 II a good score unless it was a Sony NEX clone. They want high end video (it wasn't coming with this camera), faster frame rates (once again not possible with this sensor), and smaller body size. The K-1 II is a tweak of the K-1 body, nothing more or less. It does indicate that Ricoh is committed to the K mount and certainly you will be able to use the DFA 50 on the K-1 -- there will even be a firmware update to include a lens profile for it -- although that is probably unimportant to most folks as it is only usable for jpeg shots.

I wouldn't worry about Pentax. There is enough of a road map to indicate that Pentax (the k mount) is going to be around for quite awhile.

[Class A]

DP Review was never going to give the K-1 II a good score unless it was a Sony NEX clone.

I realise that.

However, DPReview made the RAW smoothing their main line of attack against the K-1 II.
If they had been deprived of that angle then it would have been much easier to argue that their low rating is due to debatable evaluation criteria. As is, I cannot argue with a review site that criticises RAW smoothing.

certainly you will be able to use the DFA 50 on the K-1

Of course, but that's not the issue.

The issue, AFAIC, is looking forward: What kind of cameras will Ricoh offer in the future? Will they all have mandatory RAW smoothing? It seems the K-1 only got spared due to the development timeline.

The K-1 II is a tweak of the K-1 body, nothing more or less.

Again, I realise that and I agree.

I wouldn't have expected wonders from Ricoh at this stage and a mild upgrade was totally fine at this stage for Ricoh, in my book. It becomes problematic, however, if for some it is not "a mild upgrade" but actually a step backwards with respect to a pretty important area (RAW data integrity). It is even worse, if those "some" include one of the major sales influencers on the internet.

I wouldn't worry about Pentax.

I don't want to worry about Pentax either.

Getting slammed from DPReview and effectively having the K-1 score being downgraded as in replaced by the updated K-1 II score (which ideally should have been better) makes me worry. Can Pentax really survive as a "Japan only"-brand that makes some casual sales elsewhere?

I'm exaggerating, of course, but I felt better about Ricoh and Pentax before the K-1 II release, as there was still a perception of an (admittedly slow but steady) upward trajectory. With the K-1 II finding many critics, this picture isn't as clear anymore. I'm particularly worried that Ricoh didn't just respond with a firmware update. This would have removed pretty much all the heat the K-1 II has been getting.

[Rondec]

I realise that.

However, DPReview made the RAW smoothing their main line of attack against the K-1 II.
If they had been deprived of that angle then it would have been much easier to argue that their low rating is due to debatable evaluation criteria. As is, I cannot argue with a review site that criticises RAW smoothing.


Of course, but that's not the issue.

The issue, AFAIC, is looking forward: What kind of cameras will Ricoh offer in the future? Will they all have mandatory RAW smoothing? It seems the K-1 only got spared due to the development timeline.


Again, I realise that and I agree.

I wouldn't have expected wonders from Ricoh at this stage and a mild upgrade was totally fine at this stage for Ricoh, in my book. It becomes problematic, however, if for some it is not "a mild upgrade" but actually a step backwards with respect to a pretty important area (RAW data integrity). It is even worse, if those "some" include one of the major sales influencers on the internet.


I don't want to worry about Pentax either.

Getting slammed from DPReview and effectively having the K-1 score being downgraded as in replaced by the updated K-1 II score (which ideally should have been better) makes me worry. Can Pentax really survive as a "Japan only"-brand that makes some casual sales elsewhere?

I'm exaggerating, of course, but I felt better about Ricoh and Pentax before the K-1 II release, as there was still a perception of an (admittedly slow but steady) upward trajectory. With the K-1 II finding many critics, this picture isn't as clear anymore. I'm particularly worried that Ricoh didn't just respond with a firmware update. This would have removed pretty much all the heat the K-1 II has been getting.

Personally, I believe the reports of smoothing are way over blown. They aren't "fake news," but they are relatively unimportant in every day shooting. At the same time they pop up in just about every thread, even ones where the K-1 II isn't really the point of the discussion. I own both the K-1 and K-1 II and the K-1 II has less noise at high iso, but otherwise you would have a hard time telling their output apart at normal viewing and printing sizes. To me, the question is if you take your camera to a museum or to your kid's play and have to shoot at iso 12K, can you do it? The answer is that the K-1 II makes such an iso much more usable and that's enough.

As far as DP Review sinking Pentax's ship, I doubt that highly. And I don't think that Ricoh feels that this is a big deal because folks, like yourself, who are upset over the K-1 II's smoothing of RAW images just will buy a K-1, if they were ever interested in Pentax in the first place. At the same time, strangely a lot of folks seem to be actually purchasing a K-1 II and upgrading their K-1s, meaning that they do see some benefit from the upgrade.

In the end, Ricoh will make money on the K-1 II -- it is a relatively minor upgrade, but one that boosts what were probably flagging K-1 sales. It helps with funds for R and D going forward. As to whether or not they have compulsory smoothing on cameras going forward, I have no idea, but my guess is that they'll do the best they can to satisfy everyone, meaning I suppose, that no one will truly be happy.