[biz-engineer]

Camera concept logic.
I think the Canon 1Dx and Nikon D6 series don't have a tilt screen
The EOS R has a flip screen (video logging, on tripod / selfie)

The Pentax K1 has a tilt screen (field cameras, landscape on a tripod, no optimized to burst and af tracking)
The Pentax Kp is an apsc version of the K1 (same design look, accelerator chip, slow burst rate and short buffer)

So if the Pentax new apsc is a K3 successor and not a Kp successor, supposed to be an action camera concept, like 1Dx / D6, it should have a fixed screen.
Customers wanting an apsc with tilt screen can buy a Pentax Kp.

[biz-engineer]

Understanding camera mission profile is fundamental in selecting the right tool.

[house]

The lack of tilt screen emphasizes the ovf centric nature of the camera. The larger magnification is a much better improvement than hybrid viewfinder. Pentax really is concentrating on "the joy of photography" great stuff!

Consider the next ff model with this viewfinder design! This announcement is way better than I expected. Only time frame is up for criticism but I guess covid can be blamed.

[phoebus]

I don’t see a live view button. Am I just missing it?

I think it is on the knob to the right of the prism housing - similar to the KP where a collar around the 3rd dial mode selector is used to access OVF-LV-Video.

[RobG]

Only time frame is up for criticism but I guess covid can be blamed.

Frankly I was happy to hear that they will deliver the new camera this year, and I won't be left hoping that my K3 lasts until 2021 or 2022.

[zzeitg]

The funny part is that people like you really not need to use either articulated screen or video mode, but some people might need one of them, or both. So it's nothing wrong if one can use such a thing in FLAGSHIP camera, don't you think?

I'm not really sure what do you mean by "people like you", but certainly there are many people with many different interests. To be honest, I'm getting a little tired of several particular laments (articulated screen, video, EVF, MILC...), as many of them are completely inessential or irrelevant. You have the right to say that some triviality is important for you (for any reason), I have the right to say that I reject it, as it only costs extra money for nothing.

Well, we have 300/4, DA560 and DFA 150-450... With new APS-C model and its improved AF tracking that's gives us equivalent of 450mm to 840mm, rather slow, but that's better than nothing - for many years 300mm (or 450equivalent) was all we were able to buy non-second hand...

We have 300/4, not 300/2.8.
We have 150-450 f4.5-5.6 (not really optimal for TC).
We have 560/5.6 (with controversial telescope design and not really optimal for TC).

I'm lucky to be in possession of all of them, but still I'd welcome something like updated 300/2.8, 500/4 or 4.5, or even 600/4. Because very truly that's another league.

[RobA_Oz]

The higher magnification screen on the new body means that it will be dimmer than that on the K-3, all other factors being equal, so I’m not sure I’m all that excited about it. It’s one reason I went for the K-1 when it came out. However, if they’ve somehow managed to reduce the light losses in the viewfinder path, then that might be interesting.

I have used a magnifier on my Pentax APS-C bodies in the past, but mainly because it made using the eyepiece physically more comfortable by removing my cheek from the back of the camera, and reduced the amount of neck twisting.

On the matter of a movable rear screen, I personally would prefer one, having had the experience of using several now, including on the K-1. I use the K-1’s screen almost every time I venture out with that camera, but I’ll concede my technique probably isn’t all that common. Having used a TLR and a few 35mm SLRs with waist-level finders in the past (Including an LX), I have found that shooting from that position gives a different perspective that I like. While that isn’t a common technique, as I said, using the screen for low-level work is. I have the Pentax Refconverter A, and in spite of it being optically very nice, it’s nowhere near as convenient as using the rear screen. The Refconverter A, as far as I know, is no longer available new (though like many other rare things, it may still be listed in Japan) and is rarely available secondhand and quite expensive when it is. Using a smart phone or tablet with WiFi is, of course, an option and one I have used with my K-3, but again I find it not as convenient in many situations.

I do wish people wouldn’t take such dogmatic positions on things like this, based on personal preferences. It may well be that Ricoh has omitted a movable rear screen on the new APS-C body based on market research, but it may equally be that they have done so to achieve a price point or a weight and/or size target.

[superdave]

A bit disappointed by the flagship presentation...
The grip, I don't care
The slightly design change, I don't care
The slightly viewfinder magnifycation, I don't care...
The joystick, I don't care...

I expected more useful information...

but hopefully the new 16-50 really look like a new product!

[Not a Number]

Am I mistaken but does the previously blank button on the back upper left now has a padlock symbol stenciled on it?

Lack of a flip or articulating screen is not a deal breaker for me. My K10D doesn't have one so I won't miss it. Nikon releases bodies without flip/articulating screens and that doesn't generate much criticism.

[Madaboutpix]

You keep reading these reactions to the new flagship - partly stoked by today's presentation - that there is a lack of really revolutionary wow-factor features, and that nobody will buy the new camera once it sees the light of day.

To begin with, we still don't know the full feature set, and there may well be an ace or two up the developers' sleeves yet. And second, for all the tangible efforts to make it handsdown awesome, I also sensed a down-to-earth approach to what is possible at a price point significantly lower than the current FF flagship. Which means, my hopes have risen that if only I save up for a limited time, I should actually be able to afford the new model. Now that's good news in my book.

[er1kksen]

Any given user asserting that their particular use preferences are essential, others are nonessential, etc. is a really very arbitrary determination. My personal take is that the "flagship" should be as capable as possible to accommodate the widest range of needs possible. Being less compromised than the other cameras in the range being what makes it the "flagship," rather than defining by its functions some weird elitist concept of the "flagship user" that has no other needs. There are a lot of features I have no use for, but I don't mind that they're in the cameras I own. I know other people buy cameras too.

If it has an articulating screen, good. Some users find them incredibly useful. If you don't need it, then you don't have to use it. If it doesn't have one, it's not the end of the world, but it's not going to serve the needs of as many potential users as it could.

[Kunzite]

Any given user asserting that their particular use preferences are essential, others are nonessential, etc. is a really very arbitrary determination.

I'm not seeing such assertions.
What I'm seeing is people looking at what the camera (apparently) isn't/doesn't have, and then use that as an excuse.

[er1kksen]

I'm not seeing such assertions.
What I'm seeing is people looking at what the camera (apparently) isn't/doesn't have, and then use that as an excuse.

I can count several using the term "essential" and "inessential" right here in the thread so far.

An excuse for what? Some have taken the time to describe specific use-cases where they couldn't make the shot (or would have a much harder time making the shot) without an articulated screen. Why shouldn't they want their expensive camera to have features that make their shooting style easier?

It still might have an articulated screen. This is just a mockup, after all.

[Kunzite]

An excuse for what?

Try guessing.

It still might have an articulated screen. This is just a mockup, after all.

Nope.
An articulated screen isn't something they'd hide. Also, the prototype is detailed enough that they updated the joystick...
Last but not least, they talked about how the eyepiece protrudes from the screen. That wouldn't be true with an articulated screen's extra thickness.

[er1kksen]

Try guessing.

I'd guess your meaning is "an excuse for not getting the shot in other ways." Making excuses for not giving themselves a hernia trying to peer through a viewfinder on a camera at ground-level pointing upwards, perhaps.

That's ridiculous, of course. They'll still get the shot, but they'll use a different camera to do it. That's what I'm pointing out when I say that a "flagship" camera should cover the needs of as many different users as possible.