[Rondec]

I have said before and I will say again, DP Review is a lost cause. They just aren't interested in traditional SLRs any more, don't put a premium on still image quality (even though it is the real reason that most folks purchase cameras), emphasize small size, and are willing to let other brand's RAW adjustments slide, even while holding Pentax's feet to the fire with respect to the accelerator. And there is a strong feeling of animosity between some of the reviewers (Rishi in particular) and Pentaxians. It often isn't just what is said in a review, but the snide way in which it is said that indicates that DP Review's reviewers believe that Pentax is a lesser brand and not really worthy of their attention.

That said, all is not lost. By all indications next year should be a better year. DFA 85 and DFA 70-200 probably coming then along with the K3 II sequel. Those things alone should stir up excitement a bit (we've already seen the results of a prototype with no specs on the Forum). Ricoh is not losing market share (unlike some others) and with the down turn in the camera market, it is hard to throw serious investment but rather to do slow and steady development of both cameras and lenses. They are staying the course, although that probably means little investment in marketing outside of Japan.

[Andrzej Makuch]

There is nothing to worry about opinions and "tests" of portals - just this lens (DFA * 50 / 1.4) is excellent and worth the price. To the extent that I almost didn't buy it, even though I don't need the 50s for the K-1 at all (even I have FA50 / 1.4 which I don't use, and I had 50 / 1.7 and 2 pieces of DA50 / 1, 8). Waiting for DFA * 85 / 1.4 and I hope it will be as "bad" as the DFA50 ...

[Chris Mak]

This is what frustrates some users. Pentax is a small brand but Ricoh is a large company. They could invest more in Pentax but by not doing so it makes many believe there is no future. But is seems to me that the steady, if glacially slow, release of products over the past few years indicates just a very cautious commitment to Pentax but a commitment none the less.

There is so much to do though. Like developing new lenses to take advantage of higher performing camera bodies, with the emphasis on new high performance AF motors. I have to admit that Ricoh's refusal to put more of their weight behind Pentax was a major part in my decision to jump ship and go for a mainstream brand. But it was the KP as K3 successor that was the main reason.

[Kunzite]

But it was the KP as K3 successor that was the main reason.

You're still believing that?

[reh321]

There is so much to do though. Like developing new lenses to take advantage of higher performing camera bodies, with the emphasis on new high performance AF motors. I have to admit that Ricoh's refusal to put more of their weight behind Pentax was a major part in my decision to jump ship and go for a mainstream brand. But it was the KP as K3 successor that was the main reason.

I don’t believe the KP was ever meant as the “K-3ii replacement”. Perhaps the K-1ii was ..... until they discovered users considered it to be too small in crop mode and too slow in native mode, but the KP, with its small battery, single memory slot, small buffer, and lack of upper LCD never had a chance of being considered as a “flagship”.

[Kunzite]

I don’t believe the KP was ever meant as the “K-3ii replacement”.

The KP is a separate product - that was said by Mr. Takashi Arai in a past interview.

My guess is that:
- Ricoh's own troubles made it somewhat uncertain if a new APS-C flagship should be made, or rather how far they should go with it. "Leave no stone unturned", evaluating all business areas.
- The development of a completely new model took quite a bit, because Pentax' hardware was well behind the others'.

[Rondec]

You're still believing that?

To be honest, while the KP may not be a true successor to the K3 II, it was the only camera that was even close to that. The K3 II was released in May of 2015 -- roughly five years ago and has not been "replaced" except in a sideways fashion by the KP. We can argue about whether the KP was intended to be a successor, but if it wasn't intended to be that, then all I can say is that Pentax really dropped the ball on things. Even the KP is now three years out from its release date.

I am glad that there is finally a true sequel coming and I am a Pentax fan, but I can't say they've done a particularly good job of taking care of the crop folks recently (that may change in 2020, but still).

[reh321]

To be honest, while the KP may not be a true successor to the K3 II, it was the only camera that was even close to that. The K3 II was released in May of 2015 -- roughly five years ago and has not been "replaced" except in a sideways fashion by the KP. We can argue about whether the KP was intended to be a successor, but if it wasn't intended to be that, then all I can say is that Pentax really dropped the ball on things. Even the KP is now three years out from its release date.

I am glad that there is finally a true sequel coming and I am a Pentax fan, but I can't say they've done a particularly good job of taking care of the crop folks recently (that may change in 2020, but still).

This is 100% correct, especially the part about their running our of K-3ii bodies before they had a replacement in place.

[Kunzite]

To be honest, while the KP may not be a true successor to the K3 II, it was the only camera that was even close to that.

Only in price - compared to the K-3 II, not the K-3 - and possibly they were trying to buy time to finish the APS-C flagship.
Replacing the D300s with the D500 took longer.

[Chris Mak]

You're still believing that?

Of course I still believe that. I only now and then vist this forum, and I am sure you follow it ten times more intensively, but even I have read the confirmation in one of these threads, that the KP was indeed meant as the successor to the K3, but that Pentax/Ricoh realized that it did not meet the demands/needs of all Pentax users, hence decided that a higher end model was needed. Now just add the fact that the K3II has long vanished from the shelves, and the coming APS-C flagship is still probably half a year away, and you may get the message.

It is a shame in hindsight still, because I can tell you first hand, that even the best Canon sensors do not come close to the Pentax/Sony sensors when it comes to post processing latiutde, and this has proven a downside. I like to have post processing latitude as a wildlife/birder, because you usually have little to say about the light that you meet in nature, it can be harsh, contrasty, or misty and flat, it can be bright and induce atmospheric issues, or dim. A good sensor is paramount, and in all honesty, Canon still does not know how to make one. The latest generations are ok'ísh, but they overshot with 32,5 mp on a 1.6x crop area, and the extra resolution adds nothing to the IQ, but does make the files noisy. Only benefit is for abundant cropping, but then you are shooting m4/3 and I know why I left Olympus... My sweet spot for 1.5x crop has now settled firmly on 24mp, and I hope that Pentax sticks to that. Sadly, Canon has not to date produced a serious upgrade to the 1.6x crop 20mp sensor found in the 7DII, let alone a fitting body around it.
I have the 7DII, and in good light it performs much better than my K3, but in the winter season I can leave it in the closet and take the Sony A7RII with mc-11 adapter. I really prefer a high end Dslr for wildlife though, and at present, I think that only Nikon has got it all in order. I chose Canon because the 400DOII+1.4TC mirrors the DA560, and at that time, the Nikon 500PF was impossible to get anyhow, but when the rumoured Nikon 600mm f5.6PF comes out, I'll finally add the D500.

So there is a place for Pentax in my view.

[Rondec]

Only in price - compared to the K-3 II, not the K-3 - and possibly they were trying to buy time to finish the APS-C flagship.
Replacing the D300s with the D500 took longer.

As I said, it is not the true successor to the K3 line (buffer isn't as deep, smaller size, only one SD card), but it was all we had once the K3 II was discontinued. I guess the most accurate thing to say was that "the KP is the top of the line APS-C camera in the Pentax line up, but it isn't a true flagship camera." But for people waiting on the edge of their seat for the true APS-C flagship, I understand if their patience has worn a bit thin.

[Serkevan]

We can argue about whether the KP was intended to be a successor, but if it wasn't intended to be that, then all I can say is that Pentax really dropped the ball on things.

If they intended the K-1 to be the "upgrade" to the K-3 (which is most likely) they clearly underestimated the number of people who actually wanted an APS-C camera for DA lens use, smaller size/weight, faster frame rate etc. They also failed to properly communicate it.
If they always wanted the K-New to be the successor, then they didn't know what they were thinking by letting people think that the KP was "it", failed to communicate AND dropped the ball by discontinuing the K-3ii.

My money is on the K-1 being the actual, intended successor (one K-mount flagship only) and keeping APS-C as a casual-er lineup. This is supported by the obvious K-7/5/3/1 progression of flagships, and by what everyone else that has FF is doing (the last APS-C "Flagship" from Canikony was the Nikon D500 in 2016, and the previous one the Canon 7Dii in 2014).

Of course, saying they "misread the audience" is a gross understatement. The K-new will probably be a monster so I guess all will be forgiven?

[Kunzite]

Of course I still believe that. I only now and then vist this forum, and I am sure you follow it ten times more intensively, but even I have read the confirmation in one of these threads, that the KP was indeed meant as the successor to the K3, but that Pentax/Ricoh realized that it did not meet the demands/needs of all Pentax users, hence decided that a higher end model was needed.

There is no such confirmation; there's only confirmation bias.

---------- Post added 14-01-20 at 06:20 PM ----------

As I said, it is not the true successor to the K3 line (buffer isn't as deep, smaller size, only one SD card), but it was all we had once the K3 II was discontinued. I guess the most accurate thing to say was that "the KP is the top of the line APS-C camera in the Pentax line up, but it isn't a true flagship camera." But for people waiting on the edge of their seat for the true APS-C flagship, I understand if their patience has worn a bit thin.

If I'm not mistaken the D300s was also discontinued well before the D500.
I understand lack of patience. The truth still matters.

[Rondec]

There is no such confirmation; there's only confirmation bias.

---------- Post added 14-01-20 at 06:20 PM ----------


If I'm not mistaken the D300s was also discontinued well before the D500.
I understand lack of patience. The truth still matters.

Not sure about the whole "truth" thing. The truth just seems to be that Pentax hasn't released cameras at a reasonable pace. As to why, it seems pretty speculative.

[Kunzite]

Not sure about the whole "truth" thing. The truth just seems to be that Pentax hasn't released cameras at a reasonable pace. As to why, it seems pretty speculative.

At the very least one should strive to find the truth. But if you'd e.g. ignore what Ricoh Imaging - through Mr Takashi Arai and not only - says yet find "confirmation" to your own, old beliefs on Internet forums...

"A successor to the K-3 II is being researched.". Remember this? Stated in the CP+2017's interview with Pentaxforums - that is, a month after the KP's announcement.
Confirmed next year. "The KP is a separate product", Mr. Takashi Arai said.

According to a certain someone, believing such statements is "bonkers"