[phoebus]

The Nikon D780, like the D750 before it, is an "entry level 24mp" camera. B&H has it listed for $2296.99 for body only.

I would think Pentax could come up with their own "entry level 24mp" camera below the K-1ii if they want to, by combining a K-1 body {with 24mp sensor} with KP electronics for $1500 .... but that is a big IF.

Why would they do that? The K1ii is currently only £1389 including 20% sale tax in the UK. I can't believe there's anyone out there who didn't buy a K1 or K1ii, but would buy a K1only 24mp. Maybe an existing K1 owner would get one as a second body, but only if it substantially cheaper than a K1ii. Maybe £999 inc vat.

I expect Ricoh to continue with their limited line-up, keeping development, tooling and inventories at a bare minimum...

[reh321]

There is no reason why 24 MP FF could not be flagship

With 42 MP high resolution one. Especially when there will be also that even more resolution 645 camera(there already is)

Maybe so, but these days Pentax thinking seems to lead to 24mp for "entry" and more resolution for flagship.

[repaap]

Why would they do that? The K1ii is currently only £1389 including 20% sale tax in the UK. I can't believe there's anyone out there who didn't buy a K1 or K1ii, but would buy a K1only 24mp. Maybe an existing K1 owner would get one as a second body, but only if it substantially cheaper than a K1ii. Maybe £999 inc vat.

I expect Ricoh to continue with their limited line-up, keeping development, tooling and inventories at a bare minimum...

If that 24 MP one would be significantly more responsive, there might be some interesting for it. I would not mind having something like that

---------- Post added 01-07-20 at 19:44 ----------

Maybe so, but these days Pentax thinking seems to lead to 24mp for "entry" and more resolution for flagship.

It seems that they went for 36 just because it was good and available. It was little a bit old already when it came out, as usual for Pentax. I think that there are many who think that bigger is better. I also have thought so, but not sure anymore

[reh321]

Why would they do that? The K1ii is currently only £1389 including 20% sale tax in the UK. I can't believe there's anyone out there who didn't buy a K1 or K1ii, but would buy a K1only 24mp. Maybe an existing K1 owner would get one as a second body, but only if it substantially cheaper than a K1ii. Maybe £999 inc vat.

I was thinking of the original reason for going "FF" - letting {prime} film K-mount lenses be themselves. Personally, I am happy with the KP for my general purpose needs, but I might purchase an "entry level" full frame camera just for the purpose of using with my forty year old primes. Another decision Pentax could do is to follow the path set by Sony - keep the K-1ii in production regardless of what other cameras they introduce, but lower the price every so often.

[xmeda]

eeh.. FF makes some sense with 50-60+mpix.. same pixel density as APS-C 24mpix camera have. And now Canon has 32mpix APS-C D90!

[house]

I'm beginning to think that Sony is setting the agenda for the whole camera business. With the sensors they put out there is not much of an upgrade path for dslr's. The D780 camera has been long in waiting but there hasn't been any real sensor improvements for dslr's. Eventually you have to bring out a new model but the improvements are small. The D780 main thing is pdaf and video? Pdaf means faster focusing live view on a dslr. This is at the cost of pixels and dynamic range. Live view and fast focus seems like quite an odd combo to me. I'm seeing someone trying to pan a fast moving target with their arms outstretched squinting in the light as their arms flail. Not the most stable platform.

With sony pushing pdaf sensors with one hand and spec monster cameras utilizing said sensors with the other they have both the gearhead consumers and the manufacturers in their grip. Taking more and more of the profit per camera across most manufacturers.

I'm wondering what this means for the knew. Looks like we're unlikely to see IQ improvements. Would be awesome though if the knew comes out with an unknown non pdaf sensor.

Dslrs are looking really mature, Pentax is just lacking a bit in af and speed. Gear heads will have to abandon dslrs to keep feeding the spec monster inside.

[Serkevan]

eeh.. FF makes some sense with 50-60+mpix.. same pixel density as APS-C 24mpix camera have. And now Canon has 32mpix APS-C D90!

The K-1 has already even too much resolution for me . It still stomps the 24 MP sensor of my friend's D5600 all the way and that's using 40 year old lenses.
60 MP is unnecessary for most users but it sells because big numbers gud

Then again, most users don't "need" more than a recent M43 or APS-C camera to take great pictures.

[reh321]

The K-1 has already even too much resolution for me . It still stomps the 24 MP sensor of my friend's D5600 all the way and that's using 40 year old lenses.
60 MP is unnecessary for most users but it sells because big numbers gud

Then again, most users don't "need" more than a recent M43 or APS-C camera to take great pictures.

I originally started thinking 24mp "FF" Pentax when Nikon announced the D780. For years, Nikon users have sung the praises of focusing by the D500, but they talk about the D750 for high ISO use - so I was thinking that an "entry level FF" would server three purposes for Pentax:
1. entrance
2. high ISO
3. use old lenses at less cost

[house]

I originally started thinking 24mp "FF" Pentax when Nikon announced the D780. For years, Nikon users have sung the praises of focusing by the D500, but they talk about the D750 for high ISO use - so I was thinking that an "entry level FF" would server three purposes for Pentax:
1. entrance
2. high ISO
3. use old lenses at less cost

Come on reh321! Those graphs are meaningless because the KP is running NR. Just develop those raws and the other cameras will pull away. This will happen to every single files produced by those other cameras unless the user wants the noise for some reason. All raw software has can apply noise reduction which improves those graphs. It's not difficult to understand if you at least give it a minimum of effort.

[reh321]

Come on reh321! Those graphs are meaningless because the KP is running NR. Just develop those raws and the other cameras will pull away. All raw software has can apply noise reduction which improves those graphs. It's not difficult to understand if you at least give it a minimum of effort.

NO, NO, NO. The KP is running the 'accelerator", which lowers noise and raises DR and color fidelity in 'raw' files.

These graphs are based by measuring 'raw' files. Anything you can do to reduce noise in one is still available in processing the other. And one of the two charts is of DR - how do you use "PP" to raise DR? Finally, if you actually look at the graphs, you can see for yourself that the D750 shows well also.

[WorksAsIntended]

I remember the blue thing. Anyone know what that is about? Is blue a difficult colour for sensors? Anyone noticed an improvement?

It is one end of the visible spektrum and yes, a bit hard to get realistic. Not because of the sensor but because our eyes are bad at this.

[repaap]

NO, NO, NO. The KP is running the 'accelerator", which lowers noise and raises DR and color fidelity in 'raw' files.

These graphs are based by measuring 'raw' files. Anything you can do to reduce noise in one is still available in processing the other. And one of the two charts is of DR - how do you use "PP" to raise DR? Finally, if you actually look at the graphs, you can see for yourself that the D750 shows well also.

One thing about fewer MP (where 36 seems to fit perfectly) is that diffraction hit in later. I actually stop down lenses for landscapes past f8 really often.

[house]

NO, NO, NO. The KP is running the 'accelerator", which lowers noise and raises DR and color fidelity in 'raw' files.

The raw files are cooked raw files. They are indeed in a "raw" file format but the data has been massaged in a way that was previously avoided, for good reason, in raw files. You have to separate the concept of raw sensor data with the concept of raw the file format. This massaging of the raw data means that the are one step closer to non raw files. All classifications are based on drawing black and white separators in a greyscale mud. This doesn't make the classifications meaningless. The KP raws are moving across the raw line.

These graphs are based by measuring 'raw' files. Anything you can do to reduce noise in one is still available in processing the other. And one of the two charts is of DR - how do you use "PP" to raise DR? Finally, if you actually look at the graphs, you can see for yourself that the D750 shows well also.

Don't trust me just look it up. PP can raise DR. It's as I said previously not very complicated even if it's a bit unintuitive and not common sense to most.

Secondly you can't reduce noise as well in a previously manipulated file. The algorithms don't work on massaged data. It's math, you can figure it out (I don't find it easy though and trust authority on this point)

Just to repeat my standard disclaimer: None of the above makes the KP a 'bad' camera. I'm just doing the above as an educational quest "someone is wrong on the internet". There are some misunderstandings being peddled that will confuse things for people. Running those comparisons that clearly show what's happening and then suggesting they mean something else is misleading.

[Kunzite]

Come on reh321! Those graphs are meaningless because the KP is running NR. Just develop those raws and the other cameras will pull away. This will happen to every single files produced by those other cameras unless the user wants the noise for some reason. All raw software has can apply noise reduction which improves those graphs. It's not difficult to understand if you at least give it a minimum of effort.

Oh, boy. Why do you keep assuming the KP RAWs are unprocessed?
And it doesn't work as you think, except on uniform surfaces like test charts. Try this "pulling away" thing while retaining a high image quality...
I remember seeing a while ago two images equally ruined by too much NR as a "proof" that the accelerator can be replicated in software. Sigh..,

[reh321]

The raw files are cooked raw files. They are indeed in a "raw" file format but the data has been massaged in a way that was previously avoided, for good reason, in raw files. You have to separate the concept of raw sensor data with the concept of raw the file format. This massaging of the raw data means that the are one step closer to non raw files. All classifications are based on drawing black and white separators in a greyscale mud. This doesn't make the classifications meaningless. The KP raws are moving across the raw line.

These 'raw' files can still be changed. Colors can be changed, and noise can be changed. That is all that matters.

And by the way, has anyone actually looked at these graphs? The D500 has kinks in its {blue} lines too; they are smaller and earlier than those in the {green} KP lines, but they are there. I don't hear anything about Nikon "cooking" its 'raw' files, but the lines seem to say that Nikon starts processing earlier.

AND REMEMBER - the only reason I posted these two charts originally was to show in them what Nikon users have told me: the D750 is no slouch either; the D500 and KP were there initially just for reference.