[beholder3]

2) What Ricoh needs: what Ricoh needs is not the problem of the photographer. What Ricoh needs for successful business case is to address "points of pain" of camera users, the success of Ricoh camera depends on what the new camera would do that the K1 II doesn't do well, i.e sport shooting

No.

They need to fullfill the requirements of the vast majority of APSC K-5/K-3 users. Those are allround flagships.


Sports/action snapshots is relevant for a niche of 1 out of 10 Pentaxians, so its all gimmicky things like a pink outside.
While it is not bad to address irrelevant small niches as well, they need to focus on the requests of the majority.

It is normal for kids to claim their personal wishes (the SD bus-comedy in this thread is one hilarious example) are "the important thing", but they are not in reality.

A feature for focus stacking for example would be much more desired than some aspects helping just the spray & pray kiddies, since macro shooting is much more relevant overall.

[Serkevan]

For the record, I have no interest in sport and would not even consider such a sports-focused K1. I would, however, think that the reason there are few Pentaxians interested in sport and action is because they have been neglected and left. (Kiddies? Really? Just because people have different interests?)

Do we have sales data per model? Because if we don't, everything "for the vast majority" is speculation. Come on, this thread is purely speculation and will never be anything else than mental exercise. Getting offended because some wild ideas are floating around is nonsense: in the end, Ricoh will make what they make, we have no control about that.

[alfa75ts]

They need to fullfill the requirements of the vast majority of APSC K-5/K-3 users. Those are allround flagships.

Agreed.

since macro shooting is much more relevant overall.

Macro Lens club: 450,131 posts.

300mm plus Lens club: 2,900,541 posts.

It is normal for kids to claim their personal wishes (the SD bus-comedy in this thread is one hilarious example) are "the important thing"

Perhaps you have also fallen foul of 'personal wishes'.

But I don't mind, although the vast majority of my shots are of birds, I still want an 'all round' camera.

Focus stacking, fine. Pixel shift, fine. I'll use them at some stage. But make sure you through in better/faster/more confident AF-C and lower noise as well and perhaps a bigger buffer.

[beholder3]

Macro Lens club: 450,131 posts.
300mm plus Lens club: 2,900,541 posts.

Only that is no metric you can use to prove anything.

Action / sports is relevant for 1 out of 10 Pentaxians.
Macro is 5 out of 10.
This is actual data from the user survey last year.

But make sure you through in better/faster/more confident AF-C and lower noise as well and perhaps a bigger buffer.

That is a low relevancy personal wish except the noise part, obviously.

[alfa75ts]

That is a low relevancy personal wish except the noise part, obviously.

Yep, it's also a dumb spelling mistake on my part. Damn!

Is that 5 out of 10 users doing mostly Macro or 5 out of 10 users have done Macro? Likewise for the 1 out of 10?

Just jousting a bit there Bottom line is that whatever comes must suit many users, anything too specialised won't sell enough.

[Serkevan]

This is actual data from the user survey last year.

The same data where almost 30% shoot animals far away, and another 30% shoot animals up close in non-macro territory? How do we know that 60% of macro shooters do not like shooting BIFs as well? I bet unlike insects glued to a board, those things move. AF and high FPS would surely help there? Not even going into how focus stacking for macro is a quality of life improvement that ultimately can be done in photoshop, while a lower FPS count for animals might, in the worst case, mean you don't get a certain shot.

I would make a comment about how forums have historically never been able to accurately represent the actual user base of anything, but considering this is the only place where I get an indication that Pentax exists, I'll concede the point


This is quickly heading into a much too heated discussion, so I'm holding off on this thread.

---------- Post added 07-02-19 at 02:07 AM ----------

Just jousting a bit there

I think this is the key takeaway here, there's no need to get all ruffled for something that -again- we really have no clue about.

[TwoUptons]

Are you thinking of the "KP J", the special custom version of the KP???

Well, I was making fun of the KP J in a fashion.
I expect the next full frame camera will be a significant redesign.
But Pentax (and nearly every other brand) have a habit of doing special editions of existing models, so I think there's still a chance of a 100th anniversary K1ii variant.
But I don't really consider that a new model any more than the KP J, since it is really the same as the regular KP save for a few cosmetic touches.

-Eric

[Rondec]

Yes, that's right, things are mixed up.

The problem in that discussion is people confuse what would be practically useful to sport shooting, what Ricoh needs, and what the competition is doing.

1) What the competition is doing, is mostly irrelevant in ILC market because people still buy new camera models even if not top noch, simply because they have lenses in K mount. Evidence is the K1, the K1 isn't top notch, there are better cameras , but is good enough for slow shooting and can use K mount lenses. Customers still buy a K1 based on price, and based on having K lenses already.

2) What Ricoh needs: what Ricoh needs is not the problem of the photographer. What Ricoh needs for successful business case is to address "points of pain" of camera users, the success of Ricoh camera depends on what the new camera would do that the K1 II doesn't do well, i.e sport shooting

3) Sport shooting: 24Mpixels full frame is the best, it has always been, and it doesn't require to redesign the whole camera into a D5. While the 4.4 FPS and buffer @ 36Mp of the K1 is too slow and too short, the kind of frame rate of the K3 and buffer depth on a 24Mp full frame camera would be suitable, and it would require to redesign the K1 body, and the K3 electronics proves that Ricoh can a faster camera at 24Mp.

The K1 is sizable, a high resolution, relatively slow camera:
- for the size, Ricoh have addressed the gap with the GRIII, you can now buy a GRIII for when you still want to have good image quality when you don't want to carry a big camera around
- for the speed of operation, the gap is growing. Usually, rapid shooting require high shutter speeds, hence high ISO, and that's why a full frame sensor is more adequate, Pentax doesn't have a low resolution FF for sport shooting. Apsc 26Mpixels would be fast but noisy. Typically, still bird shooter use a 7D or D500, but for sports 7D and D500 are not the best choice, low res. full frame are the right choice, Pentax doesn't have such camera in the lineup.

Maybe so.

My guess is that Pentax is going to push Pentaxians interested in faster operation to the top end APS-C camera. I would guess the K-1 II sequel will use something like the 42 megapixel sensor in the A7r II. It is an older sensor at this point, but still capable of 4K video and 5 fps.

Pentax is probably too small to have multiple full frame models, except when they keep an older one around for awhile after a new one is released. Personally, I am OK with 5 fps, but I can understand those who want something faster too.

[Pål Jensen]

For the record, I have no interest in sport and would not even consider such a sports-focused K1. I would, however, think that the reason there are few Pentaxians interested in sport and action is because they have been neglected and left. (Kiddies? Really? Just because people have different interests?).

The misunderstanding continues. Action photography is not about shooting 10fps with 176 point AF with the lens pointed in the general direction of the subject, and hoping something worthwhile results. At 1/1000s you loose 990/1000 of the action; ie almost all of it.
Wildlife and sport can be shot to award winning standards with any DSLR on the market....

[biz-engineer]

Wildlife and sport can be shot to award winning standards with any DSLR on the market....

Horses can be used for farming, but tractors do the job faster.

There is a market for each type of camera, one of the type is full frame will lower mega pixel and fast operation. As I don't have any figures of the proportion of the Pentax market that would buy such 24Mp FF camera, I can tell if it should be a priority or not for Ricoh. Ricoh marketers are better placed to answer that question. What I can say however is: I can hardly go back to apsc (*) now that I'm used to FF and have lenses with the right focal length for FF. I'd buy a faster version of the K1 to complement my K1s, even if that mean less mega pixels for the faster camera.

(*) I've sold all apsc lenses, to buy Pentax D-FA lenses (quick and silent focusing), I wouldn't want to invest (buy) again screw drive and SDM lenses for an apsc camera. A faster than K1 full frame camera would suit me better.

[Kunzite]

Sorry, folks - but what are you arguing about? (without me )

Whom do we think Pentax will sell the new APSC and FF flagships? To those completely happy with the current models? To those mainly using old, manual focus lenses "at their designed focal length"?
I don't think that what the current models are best at should be used as an excuse to limit the next models. Or that we should try to decide what we're supposed to shoot or not.
Image quality is already great; higher performance would convince some of us to upgrade, and would keep some of us who are thinking to look for performance elsewhere (maybe even bringing back a few).

I'm not saying they should overdo it, in an all-out quest for the ultimate performance; no D6 competitor, Pentax doesn't have the user base for such a monster. But the things I'm reading here... is "competitive" such a strange concept?

[ThorSanchez]

No.

They need to fullfill the requirements of the vast majority of APSC K-5/K-3 users. Those are allround flagships.


Sports/action snapshots is relevant for a niche of 1 out of 10 Pentaxians, so its all gimmicky things like a pink outside.
While it is not bad to address irrelevant small niches as well, they need to focus on the requests of the majority.

It is normal for kids to claim their personal wishes (the SD bus-comedy in this thread is one hilarious example) are "the important thing", but they are not in reality.

A feature for focus stacking for example would be much more desired than some aspects helping just the spray & pray kiddies, since macro shooting is much more relevant overall.

It's hard to claim a camera is an all-around flagship if they've given up on things like autofocus and frame rate so retirees can take slightly better close-up photos of flowers.

[reh321]

(*) I've sold all apsc lenses, to buy Pentax D-FA lenses (quick and silent focusing), I wouldn't want to invest (buy) again screw drive and SDM lenses for an apsc camera. A faster than K1 full frame camera would suit me better.

I have three lenses in my KP bag

Sigma 10-20 (+)

DA 18-135 DC (*)

DA 55-300 PLM (*)

(*) quick and silent focusing

(+) uses screw-drive but the version now sold has a built-in "quick and silent" AF motor;
at my current age of 71, I've had trouble justifying purchasing another lens - but maybe I will.

My understanding is that the few APS-C lenses released recently - like the DA* 11-18 - have had a built-in modern AF motor, so building a practical "quick anf silent" collection of DA-type lenses is getting easier. Besides, you wouldn't have to sell your DFA lenses since they will work on APS-C cameras also.

[Kunzite]

By the way, I bought the K-1 knowing I'll be getting an excellent landscape camera.

What was the first (half-)serious shooting I've done with it? I'll post a sample.

[FozzFoster]

I'll post a sample.

This is an awesome picture Kunzite! I like how clear the pilot is, but the shutter still shows movement in the propellers. I like the foreground with the people and the wave - it really sells the story.
Good work!