[Serkevan]

Why not

1. APS-C entry level (K-70)
2. APS-C compact/alternative (KP)
3. APS-C performance (K-3 II)
4. FF (K-1)

?
It would seem plausible to me that the "APS-C performance" line was dropped because it was assumed that most of the respective customers would choose the "FF" line anyhow.

Rather than stating "We dropped a line", it sounds better to state "We have a new APS-C flagship".

Apologies if I missed any posts that went over that already.

No no, that is also what, I think, will happen now. What I wrote is what I think was the initial plan; of course the demand for an action oriented camera turned out to be coming from APS-C shooters.

---------- Post added 12-13-19 at 10:49 AM ----------

I don't think there is a place in the market for both the K-70 and the KP. Even before the KP was announced, I was wondering how they would continue the K-70 line in accordance with their announced intention to become a more "premium" line. The K-S2/70 aperture control unit clearly works better than the K-30/50 version - but not as well as many of us would hope. Putting all of this thinking together, I would not be surprised it Pentax continues the K-70 line in some way, but "borrows" aperture control from the KP {and the KP is one of its kind}. Putting this together with the naming reversion that seems likely {running out of names in every category and beginning a new 'century' of the brand}, I expect APS-C lines to be two, and us to have fruitless discussions about whether the bottom line is a K-70 or a KP successor.

I don't think so either. The way the market is going, consolidating the product lines and culling -or, rather, reasonably "upgunning"- the entry level cameras is clever. The only way I can think of would be to have a K-S3 or K-90 as entry level, bring the KP to its logical conclusion of "ME-Digital" for taking advantage of the DA Ltds, and make the K-New line into superfast action machines.

If they do downsize to two APS-C lines, we would be left with "Entry Level" or, perhaps more accurately, "Compact" APS-C, Flagship APS-C, one FF line? If frame rate/action is the focus of the K-New, logic says the FF will continue to work as a field camera for all-terrain, uncompromised IQ.

With 3 K-mount lines, we get more leeway for 645/GR developments.

---

Last edited by Serkevan; 12-13-2019 at 10:56 AM.

[reh321]

I don't think so either. The way the market is going, consolidating the product lines and culling -or, rather, reasonably "upgunning"- the entry level cameras is clever. The only way I can think of would be to have a K-S3 or K-90 as entry level, bring the KP to its logical conclusion of "ME-Digital" for taking advantage of the DA Ltds, and make the K-New line into superfast action machines.

If they do downsize to two APS-C lines, we would be left with "Entry Level" or, perhaps more accurately, "Compact" APS-C, Flagship APS-C, one FF line? If frame rate/action is the focus of the K-New, logic says the FF will continue to work as a field camera for all-terrain, uncompromised IQ.

With 3 K-mount lines, we get more leeway for 645/GR developments.

As I have already said, my feeling is that a combination of the K-70 and KP would be the "Entry Level" camera; for marketing reasons, I would stick with the physical design of the KP, but I have no attachment to metal or plastic, so the body could be all-plastic. The weaknesses of the KP are mainly action-photography oriented - things like a larger buffer and larger battery, so I would make the 'flagship' "APS-C" camera also the 'action camera'.

I foresee Pentax as wanting more than one "FF" line; they could accomplish this goal by keeping the K-1ii and when they release another line. They might also introduce the 'Entry Level' innards in two bodies - with the only difference being that the second one is in a slightly larger "FF" body, where the innards differ not at all once you get past a 24mp sensor - one being "APS-C" and one being "FF".

[mlt]

Future development of both the KP and K-1 lines is probably dependent on how well received, i.e.sales, the K new is. I’m sure sales in both the home market and worldwide are more important to Ricoh than a handful of web sites more interested in other manufacturers.

[Class A]

Unfortunately, Ricoh Imaging have to make do with what's available.

Sure, I'm aware of that.

I didn't research though what kind of non-crop MF sensors are available.
I trust your overview is complete.

Perhaps they could strike a deal with TowerJazz?

Indeed; at the same time, they cut off their corner weaknesses.

Yes, that's true.

However, reducing the magnification helps the weaker corners to not appear as bad.
Vignetting should be a problem with post-processing and hopefully the old classic Pentax MF glass isn't that bad in the corners.

Whilst being significantly cheaper than current competitors, say $15-20,000, would it find a market when the Fujifilm GFX 100 (admittedly with a 33x44 sensor only) costs $10,000 and offers nine newly designed, top-notch lenses and an AF teleconverter?

I don't know, I'm not in the business of analysing markets.

However, I know that the EFV of the Fujifilm GFX 50 is not that great. I found it to be an appalling experience when I briefly used it.

If there are enough MF photographers who swear by optical viewfinders, perhaps a new Pentax MF camera stands a chance?

[Class A]

I would stick with the physical design of the KP

I think the KP's problem is that it prioritises compactness (with its pretty small grip), while there are more compact mirrorless solutions available.

To me a performance APS-C model with the classic renowned Pentax ergonomics makes more sense.

As @mlt already said, most likely the sales figures of the K-new will determine which way Ricoh will go.