[Fenwoodian]

.
I don't care if Samyang and all of the other lower-quality, manual-focus lens manufacturers permanently drop the K mount! Why???

I greatly prefer the overall IQ of older "easily adapted" : Olympus Zuiko OM, Contax Carl Zeiss C/Y, Canon FG, MOG, Fujinon EBC, Leica R, Voigtlander SL/SLII, Nikkor non-Ai/Ai/AIS, and yes, even some Pentax M42 and early K mount lenses to the rendering of the modern/low-quality/cheapo third party lenses. But that's just me....

[Wheatfield]

I have to disagree with you. There is many big differences between K1II and 7RIV. The major one is the autofocus. I had K1 and I have 7RIV.
I switched because I shoot moving objects and people. With K1 my keeper rate was poor, with 7RIV it's excellent. K1 was
good for stills without anything moving(landscape), great camera for that. But I have to say that 7RIV is something out of this world compared to K1. For my kind of shooting it is like night and day level difference. About image quality I like more 7RIV, but this is more question of taste than some hard data.

I know some of you will say aloud "My Pentax can shoot moving objects too! You are just poor shooter!" Might be but after 12 years and K100,K200,K20,K5,K3 and K1 and countless pictures I have taken this is my opinion and experience.
I still use a lot Pentax manual glass and I love them. For the body side I never looked back.

About trio of lenses. Tamron has 17-28,28-75 and 75-180. Together with 7RIII it's something like 5000-6000€

I think everyone here knows that Pentax has historically lagged behind in the autofocus game. The question has to be why did you stick so long with a system that didn't meet what you see as a primary need?

---------- Post added Jun 2nd, 2020 at 10:38 AM ----------

I like where this thread has gone.

This thread is clearly phasing out it's Samyang support now.

---------- Post added Jun 2nd, 2020 at 10:40 AM ----------

the US military is unwilling to have stuff they depend on fail in the middle of trying conditions.

Oh man, I just can't stop laughing.

---------- Post added Jun 2nd, 2020 at 10:46 AM ----------

I think you're correct, Thor.

It may even be $1700, $1800, depending on specs and engineering.

And that will shut out Pentaxians who did not buy their last camera for more than $1200. But a niche camera company, a Japanese Leica, could go broke catering for them.

Well, they did go broke once already catering to that market. It's highly unlikely that Ricoh will follow the same path.

[luftfluss]

Phasers set to *shrug*.

[Wheatfield]

I think you're trapped in the past, Rob, I'm afraid.

You're guided by pricing and strategies from the pre 2012 camera boom.

Camera companies are facing death in 2020-2030. They will not and cannot survive by shelves of product at Walmart. That sort of customer is now using their phones for pictures of their coffee, their dog, their child, and flowers.

Is it wrong for me to want to use my new D FA* 85/1.4 to take pictures of my coffee, dog, children and flowers?

---------- Post added Jun 2nd, 2020 at 11:03 AM ----------

The value of Pentax, and why Ricoh bought them, are the close to 30 000 000 Pentax K-mount lenses out there. The good K-mount lenses are very attractive. Pentax makes DSLR's to the owners of these lenses and selling more K-mount lenses in the process. The user base is therefore increasing. Doesn't matter if the users are growing old and die. They won't take the lenses with them (except for Wheatfield); the lenses will get sold to someone else. These someone elses will at some point want a modern camera for their lenses and/or buy a new lens as well.

I've always figured that the Third Party lens user isn't going to find Pentax bodies all that appealing anyway. As we are told so very often, Pentax doesn't do autofocus all that well, and that seems to be one of the primary considerations for camera purchasers. Third party lens users are, by definition, pretty brand agnostic. It seems to me they will be drawn to the brands that offer higher performance features, AF in particular.
Camera bodies are relatively inexpensive, if there is a Third Party lens one wants to use because the Pentax one is too expensive, buy the cheap lens and a used body from another manufacturer to go with it. If you want to buy a Third Party lens because it is a focal length that Pentax simply doesn't offer, it's possible you chose the wrong manufacturer in the first place and should consider changing brands, or augmenting with a different brand.
This is what I did some years ago when I bought an X-Pro1 and the lovely 35/1.4 Fuji lens. I was drawn to the brand because Pentax didn't make a fast standard lens for the format and I like fast standard lenses. It turns out that I quite liked the system and ended up with the 14/2.8, 23/1.4 56/1.2 and 60/2.4 macro as well as an X-T1.
And then, along came the K1, and suddenly I was happy with Pentax again.

---

Last edited by Wheatfield; 06-02-2020 at 12:04 PM.

[normhead]

The EOS RP may not be the very last word in image quality,

Really? Ya think?

I have never understood the value of 24 (or in this case 26) MP FF sensors, that can achieve so very little on top of what 24 MP APS-c has to offer.

And what is with 4 FPS in Focus priority as opposed to 8 fps on my K-3, or 7 on a K-P?

Seriously?

To me it just looks like you're saying if you're willing to lower your standards so you can get a cheaper camera that doesn't do nearly as much. 3EV DR bracketing, no SR, no pixel shift, no astro tracer, slower than Pentax AF, it has many features Pentax doesn't, but not many are things that will be of interest to happy Pentax shooters.

It doesn't have much to offer over a K-P for a lot more money. And what it does have over a K-P is compensated for by what it doesn't have.

But then I've never understood folks who just want a full frame, and don't pay attention to Resolution or Dynamic Range. Full frame stands out for those two features for us field camera guys. If it doesn't have those features then it's pretty much worthless, as full frame. Others seem to be more interested in the ability to say "I own a full frame" than in the qualities an FF has to offer. Unfortunately not all full frames offer those qualities. The EOS RP being one of them. A poser camera for sure.

[bertwert]

Is it wrong for me to want to use my new D FA* 85/1.4 to take pictures of my coffee, dog, children and flowers?

Only okay if it's a photo of your children drinking coffee while petting the dog that is eating the flowers.

[Wheatfield]

Only okay if it's a photo of your children drinking coffee while petting the dog that is eating the flowers.

I'll get right on that.

[HDpotato]

I'll get right on that.

Have someone juggle some Samyang lenses in the background and it will be perfect.

[Wheatfield]

Have someone juggle some Samyang lenses in the background and it will be perfect.

I see what you did there.

[HankVonHeaven]

I think everyone here knows that Pentax has historically lagged behind in the autofocus game. The question has to be why did you stick so long with a system that didn't meet what you see as a primary need?[COLOR="Silver"]
[

I didn't know for the better, as silly it may sound. It was a magical moment when I had my Sony for the first day and it has been pure joy after that. That said, I still appreciate Pentax what it is for and it's good sides.

[Wheatfield]

I didn't know for the better, as silly it may sound. It was a magical moment when I had my Sony for the first day and it has been pure joy after that. That said, I still appreciate Pentax what it is for and it's good sides.

To be fair, the first time I used my X-Pro1 and had an epiphany about the fact that one could get a camera where the AF actually worked. I've always accepted that Pentax AF was, to be nice, less than stellar. My needs have been such that semi functional AF wasn't a deal breaker, and the lenses more than made up for any failings in that department. The Ricoh made cameras do seem much better. My understanding is that they managed to fix the AF on the K5, my K3 was nothing to complain about, and the AF on the K1, especially with the K AF4 lenses seems to be superb.

[Zygonyx]

Thank you for your kind words. My job is investment banking, mergers and acquisitions more precisely, therefore analysing companies, their strategy and their financial performance (past and expected) is among the tasks I expect my staff to perform, teach to them and perform myself occasionally.

Good to know Mistral.
Then i hope you better trained the inspirator of "Ricoh Imaging joining the L-mount deal" before he left office
Now we know he was later on hired by Samyang

[clackers]

Thank you for your kind words. My job is investment banking, mergers and acquisitions more precisely, therefore analysing companies, their strategy and their financial performance (past and expected) is among the tasks I expect my staff to perform, teach to them and perform myself occasionally.

Well, there's another reason for you not to go into journalism, you'd be taking a massive paycut!

Anyway, thanks again for all your Ricoh and other camera company reporting, I often screenshot your stuff and repost it, crediting where possible!

[clackers]

For now, maybe. But who's the next generation?

No camera company has a solution for that, Thor, if you'd read the Canon executive's opinion a while ago, he thinks the industry will *never* recover. It will halve in size again over IIRC the next three years and the only customers will be a professional/semi professional minority. There will never be a generation of twenty-five year olds heading to Walmart to choose from all the brands on the wall for their first camera. The remaining customers will I think be quite esoteric, quite specific, quite fussy, quite contrarian, and largely immune to the tactics of mass marketing. Good luck to any advertising manager!

Third party lenses can attract new customers when first-party lenses are $2000 beasts.

You're thinking like it's still 1990, you'll never be employed by a camera company thinking like that. Even back in 1990, because the bodies in a platform are typically a loss leader, if someone bought a little Canon Rebel with a kit zoom then only put Tamrons and Sigmas on it, that was a disaster!

Now the third party lens companies think you're wrong, too. Their financials follow the camera industry, they've had plunging sales and cannot survive by undercutting the first parties and selling on volume. Cheap and cheerful zooms and primes are out, and premium is in. Sigma is still a relatively small family owned business, it has to do what it has to do.

[RobA_Oz]

Here below these launch prices (body only) in Euroland:

• K10D: €949 (September 2006)
• K20D: €1,199 (January 2008)
• K-7: €1,249 (May 2009)
• K-5: €1,249 (September 2010)
• K-5 II / IIs: €1,099 / €1,299 (September 2012)
• K-3: €1,299 (October 2013)
• K-3 II: €999 (April 2015)

The KP's launch price was €1,299 (January 2017).

Thanks, Mistral. With a bit of digging, the pricing in Australia turns out to have been a bit different at the end, mostly:

1. K20D $1750
2. K-5 $1849
3. K-3 $1399
4. K-3ii $1349

As I said, the exchange rate variation has probably contributed to much of the difference.