[biz-engineer]

Ricoh ruined Pentax.

The Pentax K1 is too cheap, just look at the prices of similar cameras from other brands. Even the D810 older than the K1, sells for more than the K1. Pentax K-1 and K-1 II should be priced $2750, but now it is possible to find Pentax K-1 new for $1500, that's even cheaper than the price of an Fuji apsc flagship camera. Pentaxians just bought the K1 taking the 30% off for granted, and are grateful by using their old lenses on the K1, that's what ruins Pentax. How do you want Pentax to invest in R&D when they have 5% market share and sell flagship products at prices 30% lower than market leaders? Pentax customer base is about the same as the customer base of Harley Davidson, men in their 50s+ having a decent purchasing power and wanting to enjoy life and photography again after all these years of hard work and raising kids.

---

Last edited by biz-engineer; 11-10-2018 at 04:36 AM.

[rangercarp]

FF: (i) Pentax K-1 II

How quickly we forget...

As discussed in another thread, even Canon and Nikon releases have slowed to a trickle.

[Mistral75]

(...)

As discussed in another thread, even Canon and Nikon releases have slowed to a trickle.

Canon's 'trickle' in 2018:

1. EOS 4000D
2. EOS 2000D
3. EOS M50
4. PowerShot SX740 HS
5. EOS R
6. PowerShot SX70 HS
7. EF 70-200mm F4L IS II USM
8. EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS III USM
9. EF 600mm F4L IS III USM
10. EF 400mm F2.8L IS III USM
11. EF-M 32mm F1.4 STM
12. RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM
13. RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro
14. RF 50mm F1.2L USM
15. RF 28-70mm F2L USM

Nikon's:

1. Coolpix P1000
2. Z6
3. Z7
4. D350
5. AF-S Nikkor 180-400mm F4E TC1.4 FL ED VR
6. AF-S Nikkor 500mm F5.6E PF ED VR
7. Nikkor Z 35mm F1.8 S
8. Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S
9. Nikkor Z 24-70mm F4 S

[aurele]

EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS III USM

This lenses release is special : It's the same lens as before (opticaly) with some changes in the glass coating, probably due to an update in industrial process.

This kind of change is more or less the reason the K1 and K1-II existe. Ricoh should do it more often.

[usernametaken]

This kind of change is more or less the reason the K1 and K1-II existe. Ricoh should do it more often.

Not so wrong at all. A K-3 III with all the features of the K-3 II + the AF & HighISO optimizations of the KP would have meant little effort and still be better than nothing, bridging the gap til a real successor arrives.

[biz-engineer]

Canon's 'trickle' in 2018: EOS 4000D EOS 2000D EOS M50 PowerShot SX740 HS EOS R PowerShot SX70 HS EF 70-200mm F4L IS II USM EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS III USM EF 600mm F4L IS III USM EF 400mm F2.8L IS III USM EF-M 32mm F1.4 STM RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro RF 50mm F1.2L USM RF 28-70mm F2L USMNikon's: Coolpix P1000 Z6 Z7 D350 AF-S Nikkor 180-400mm F4E TC1.4 FL ED VR AF-S Nikkor 500mm F5.6E PF ED VR Nikkor Z 35mm F1.8 S Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S Nikkor Z 24-70mm F4 S

The problem for Ricoh is that Pentax market share is small, and Pentax leapfrogged all Canon full frame generations with the K1. I have a good friend using Canon, he was at his third upgrade from the 5D to 5DII to 5DIII to get a couple more mega pixels, when I purchased the K1 to jump from 24Mp apsc to 36Mp for the same money he spent on Canon gear. Once I have the K1, I don't feel the need to downgrade to 24Mpixels FF... and I don't feel that spending again 5 grands for 45Mp would make a difference in my images. Now, about the Nikon Z 24-70 f4: I have the 28-105 f5.6 very small from Pentax and the 24-70 f2.8, why should I get a Nikon Z6 and 24-70 f4 from Nikon? So yes, Pentax is doomed, but if they would release more of the same products they'd be even more doomed. Currently, I'm only looking forward to a couple of primes: 35 f1.4 or f1.8 and 85 f1.4/f1.8 or faster, and that's all for a number of years until my K1 breaks, and I guess I am not the only customer is that same situation. And with regards to a K3 II successor , I am not even sure that this is a good plan for Ricoh to make one, because the core of Pentaxians aren't shooting sports, so I doubt a Pentax D500 style would sell a lot, even if a few users would like to have one.

[normhead]

But I agree: this is a meagre harvest.

I don't really need a new camera right now. Just the news of the new APS-c in 2019 is fine with me.

[monochrome]

Three products in two lines actually:

• FF: (i) Pentax K-1 II and (ii) HD Pentax-D FA★ 50mm f/1.4 SDM AW
• WG: (iii) Ricoh WG-60

But I agree: this is a meagre harvest.

Quite concerning.

[usernametaken]

And with regards to a K3 II successor , I am not even sure that this is a good plan for Ricoh to make one, because the core of Pentaxians aren't shooting sports, so I doubt a Pentax D500 style would sell a lot, even if a few users would like to have one.

Why? Because with a sports camera you can't shoot anything else? If AF was improved that dramatically to be able to compete with the D500 (which I doubt will happen), many other areas of photography would benefit from that. Together with the small and sturdy body of the K-3 and WR it would also be the ideal nature/wildlife camera.

[beholder3]

Three products in two lines actually:

• FF: (i) Pentax K-1 II and (ii) HD Pentax-D FA★ 50mm f/1.4 SDM AW
• WG: (iii) Ricoh WG-60

But I agree: this is a meagre harvest.

Compared to mirrorless / mFT Olympus in 2018:

• mFT: (i) PEN-E-PL9

Three times as many.

I thought mirrorless is going to rule the world. No?

Maybe I need to check how many new pencils the manufacturer of my main pencil has introduced in 2018. If that is a low figure I guess I have to immediately stop using that pencil (best in class up until today) and jump ship to that other pencil maker.

I love it how quickly we can turn these information threads into garbage nonsense piles. Popcorn anyone?

[normhead]

Why? Because with a sports camera you can't shoot anything else? If AF was improved that dramatically to be able to compete with the D500 (which I doubt will happen), many other areas of photography would benefit from that. Together with the small and sturdy body of the K-3 and WR it would also be the ideal nature/wildlife camera.

Pentax AF.s is quite good already. And the K-3 already is great wildlife camera, for every thing but birds in flight. I shoot side by side with Nkon , Canon and Sony shooters with no apparent disadvantage at all. It's probably best if comments are directed at areas where people have expertise.

Wildlife | Flickr

The best wildlife images are when the wildlife stop and look at you. AF.s is fine for that.


And , when an animal is moving at normal speed my K-3 is fine for hot too.


The fact that some people loudly proclaim the K-3 doesn't work for wildlife doesn't make it true. This last one shot with a "sluggish focusing" DA*60-250. I swear a lot of people talk like they are some kind of photography superstars. Just get out and take some pictures, stop blaming your gear and learn how to use it.

[usernametaken]

The fact that some people loudly proclaim the K-3 doesn't work for wildlife doesn't make it true.

Just for the record: I didn't say that. I just say that there is room for improvement. I have a K-3 and I know what I'm talking about.

The best wildlife images are when the wildlife stop and look at you.

That's just a tiny fraction of what wildlife photography can be. Of course, if it's your favorite, that's okay. But it hasn't to be everyone's else.

[normhead]

Just for the record: I didn't say that. I just say that there is room for improvement. I have a K-3 and I know what I'm talking about.

Every camera everywhere has room for improvement, why say anything at all? That's a given.

That's just a tiny fraction of what wildlife photography can be. Of course, if it's your favorite, that's okay. But it hasn't to be everyone's else.

OK do tell, apart from birds in flight, what are these things that Pentax can't handle? Even in birds in flight, there are cameras better, most of them not in the K-3's price ranges but a few are.









You seem to be the expert on what the K-3 can do, but I'm the one posting the pictures.
What exactly is it you're having trouble with?

I ask because I do shoot side by side with a to of other shooters, and I find 95% of the time, Pentax's supposed deficiencies are meaningless. There are occasions where it's better to have a more action oriented camera, but in my experience, if you know your camera, you get what everyone else gets. And as I've mentioned many times before, sometimes I get the best shot, shooting with people who have spent 5 to 10 times what I've spent on my gear. Personally for the trade off, I'd rather shoot Pentax and save the money.

Some of the people I'm out with from time to time.








It's not like I'm living in some kind of Pentax bubble. It's not like I don't know what other people with other systems are doing. In my experience, most of them are doing what I'm doing with about the same rate of success. Just what is it you think I'm missing out on because I'm shooting a K-3?

I can look through other peoples lenses, fool around a bit with their systems, look at their results and think "I'm sticking with my K-3". When you look at all the other factors, one of which is cost, another being weight and ruggedness of construction etc. there's no guarantee you'll want something other than a K-3 even if you shoot wildlife. Maybe there's something else you'd like, but like my decision, that's personal.

Having a K-3 doesn't mean you know what you are talking about. It means you bought a K-3.

I'm posting images here so people can judge for themselves what I know.

[biz-engineer]

Why? Because with a sports camera you can't shoot anything else?

The way I see it , is that a lot of Pentax customers have bought a Pentax K1 or K1 II, most of them shooting landscape+portraits won't see any reason to buy a crop camera , except if it was very small like the KP or GRIII. When Pentax did not offer a full frame camera, all K mount customers would eventually buy the next apsc flagship, but now the K mount customer base is split between full frame and apsc. And given that Pentax shooters are mostly landscape oriented, doesn't leave a lot of space for selling new apsc cameras, except if they are pocket-able compared to a K1. That's the way I understand the lineup and also I see that Ricoh thinking is in line with my understanding because they are going to release a GRIII first. If I was Ricoh, I'd just make a GRIII and then a Pentax full frame with 24Mp and 10 FPS so that I can bring an advantage to all K1 users who are frustrated by speed and buffer on the K1 series (something like Pentax K-2, 24Mpixels, 100 AF points, 10 FPS and 4K video => horizon 2019-2020).

[usernametaken]

Every camera everywhere has room for improvement, why say anything at all? That's a given.

Please read the posts above.

Someone suggested, a K-3 successor optimized for sports (competing with the D500) would be less attractive for other types of photographers. I was actually just saying that a better AF (which I think "optimized for sports" means) wouldn't mean that other areas wouldn't benefit from that.

---------- Post added 11-10-18 at 07:46 AM ----------

What exactly is it you're having trouble with?

The AF tends to be a little inconsistent and too hesitating for moving objects towards or away from the camera. Not unusable, but the keeper-rate could be better. See the reviews, as it's obvious I'm not the only one with this experience.

And another thing: if you shoot in continuous-mode and use two memory cards, the buffer takes quite a time to clear. In this time, the camera is unusable. This could also be improved.



Please don't confuse "it could be improved" with "it doesn't work now". Thanks.