[RobA_Oz]

I don't necessarily agree that a tilt screen is necessary for landscapes; I haven't had an issue without one. One thing that I have sometimes found though is that when using live view, the image lacks contrast on the screen due to the brightness of the sunshine. (Yes! Sunshine in the UK!) What I am keen to see is how the Knew's new OVF compares to something like the MX!

I can confirm that the sun does shine in the UK – I’ve seen it at least once!

Now, there isn’t much that is necessary for landscapes, but there are several things that are rather handy. Having now had a tilt screen (on the K-1) for a few years, I have to say that I find it so. My refconverter hasn’t come out of the cupboard since I’ve had the K-1. However, if your landscapes never include a lower viewpoint than eye-level, or you have no trouble flattening yourself to the ground when you need a low viewpoint, then I can see that a tilt screen wouldn’t be of great use.

[Lord Lucan]

I don't want a touchscreen on a DSLR, period . First thing I'd do would probably be to turn it off.

I'd do the same, but the trouble is that once a manufacturer of any gadget goes to touchscreens they start deleting buttons and other controls because it is cheaper to do them in software via the touchscreen. Eventually you won't be able to do much without the touchscreen.

In fact, fashion is now tending to move away from touchscreens. In a car forum I use, people complain bitterly about having to go down through touchscreen menus to control the heater for example, whereas on my older car I can reach for and turn a knob without even looking at it. Pentax cameras are doing well with their use of dials, and retro-style Fujis with emphasis on dials are selling well. Camera touchscreens are also geared to taking photos at arms length using LV, and do not fit with viewfinder use when the only thing that can touch the screen is your nose.

If a tilting screen makes the body 3mm thicker, so what? I don't get this obsession with thinness. Like phone/laptops/tablets/TVs, I predict that mirrorless cameras will get thinner and thinner as time goes on. So far they have only deleted the mirror box but I predict in ten years time the Socanikon crowd will be drooling over the latest 3mm thick camera bodies, like tablets with huge lenses on them. Of course, another new lens mount standard (or two) will be needed in the meantime. The Socanikon mirrorless salesmen must be wetting themselves with glee, knowing that they have manouvered their users to the foot of another "upgrade" escalator, whereas they were running out of things to say about mirror DSLRs.

[Kunzite]

I'd do the same, but the trouble is that once a manufacturer of any gadget goes to touchscreens they start deleting buttons and other controls because it is cheaper to do them in software via the touchscreen. Eventually you won't be able to do much without the touchscreen.

I've made this point before; Ricoh didn't delete any button on the GR III, a compact camera - nor (obviously) on the K-new. Both cameras can be operated without touching the screen, as well as a non-touch screen variant.
I see no reason to be worried.

[MMVIII]

I don't want a touchscreen on a DSLR, period . First thing I'd do would probably be to turn it off.

About the compromise, I know it has to be made. I just disagree with the result. I would have taken a body that was 2 or 3 mm wider any day of the week. People were saying "if you want a tilt screen get a KP/K-70". Well, that works both ways. If you want a small camera get a K-S2. The K-New is an action oriented camera so the last thing you want is for it to be too light and small to handle the big lenses. There's no need to make it A6600-sized.
I would have taken a tiltable, non touch screen any day of the week as well. Substantially more useful to me at least...

In any case, at the end of the day the camera is shaping up to be astonishing, we are talking about something that is unlikely to affect the Pentaxian who is already in Pentax land and wants an action oriented camera. The only concern is in how prospective buyers not already in the fold perceive it, and these days a movable screen is more or less standard.

---------- Post added 07-29-20 at 11:48 PM ----------



The KP sticks out like a sore thumb there, though, because it's such a good fit for the DA Limiteds. So street isn't the primary focus of the K-New (and for street the tilt screen is very useful, as you can shoot from the waist while being less obvious). For video a tilt screen is very important as well, I'd say.

Well, agreed. For me the K-P is the ultimate travel companion with the 20-40 ltd and the 55-300 PLM. Just adding a wider prime (the 15 ltd okay, but for technical photos I would prefer less distortion, field curvature and vignetting, it can be slow though, 16 f4...) and the 70 ltd to have the perfect kit.
And here I really miss the GPS in it to be perfect for traveling around the world with a small photo bag.
Thus, K-new will bring new technology to the system. It will not be targeted at the same user group as the KP or K1, but I still hope these bases will also be covered in future and just inherit some of this tech in an evolutionary way.

[Rondec]

I just declined to buy a same-model replacement car because the new one doesn’t have 8-way power adjustable driver’s seat, something I have become accustomed to and is beneficial for my soma-type to get a changeable seating position for long-drive comfort. Truly, I only need to change the seat position once or twice a year, but I want that capability to enhance my driving experience those few times.

Everything else on the replacement vehicle is more modern, more efficient or does something previously not available, which will be beneficial 365 days a year, but I’ll continue to drive my 2012 vehicle, or change to another inferior vehicle , because they took something away from me and I resent that.

I understand the perspective of people saying they don't want this camera if the screen doesn't tilt. I just think if you currently shoot a K3 II (which this is supposed to be the sequel to) then it isn't as though you are replacing a camera with a tilt screen. I guess the bigger thing is that it probably doesn't change the camera to complain about it a bunch. As Yoda would have said, "Buy or buy not. There is no whine."

[Serkevan]

I've made this point before; Ricoh didn't delete any button on the GR III, a compact camera - nor (obviously) on the K-new. Both cameras can be operated without touching the screen, as well as a non-touch screen variant.
I see no reason to be worried.

Nah, I'm not worried about the touch screen leading to the removal of anything in the K-new (or later models). If anything, Pentax keep adding dials!

[house]

I've made this point before; Ricoh didn't delete any button on the GR III

I think you need to look again. They deleted several buttons in th transition from GRII to GRIII

[bxf]

Yes! Sunshine in the UK!

July 21, 1971, and more recently, June 14, 2014.

I happen to have been there for both events

[ffking]

IF it is a touchscreen then the last thing you want is for it to be small. Ricoh have made the screen larger for better use as a touchscreen and as a result have it fixed.
All of their current Pentax asp-c cameras have 3" LCD movable screens.
Nikon have a movable touchscreen of 3.2" on their D500 but that camera is almost FF camera size.

I think Ricoh have built a compact ASP-C camera with a fixed 3.2 inch touchscreen and excellent ergonomics.

Do you really want a 3" movable touchscreen?

Good point. As I've said elsewhere, the decisions they make are usually rational, if only they'd explain them!

[Kunzite]

I think you need to look again. They deleted several buttons in th transition from GRII to GRIII

Right. But I'm talking about the touchscreen interface, which doesn't replace any button.
They did change the buttons as they tried to make the camera smaller. I'm not sure if I'm clearly able to express the difference.

[ffking]

It looks like Ricoh are pursuing a strategy of general purpose cameras with a leaning towards a particular specialism rathernthat trying to make all cameras good for all things, only at different price points. As has been said many times, the K-New fits into this scheme as an action oriented camera, leaving the K-1 for landscape, portrait etc and the KP for street, travel etc. The main advantages of APS-C are small sizw light weight - maximised in the KP - and greater reach on telephotos and macro - presumably to be maximised in the K-New by faster fps, deeper buffer, etc etc. Within this scheme, as has been said, a fixed screen makes sense - you have alternatives, and don't necessrily want to compromise the viewfinder experience or size advantage in a camera that is designed for used here it is normally held to the eye.

[iheiramo]

As Yoda would have said, "Buy or buy not. There is no whine."

This should be written on the top of news and rumors section

[repaap]

I'd do the same, but the trouble is that once a manufacturer of any gadget goes to touchscreens they start deleting buttons and other controls because it is cheaper to do them in software via the touchscreen. Eventually you won't be able to do much without the touchscreen.

In fact, fashion is now tending to move away from touchscreens. In a car forum I use, people complain bitterly about having to go down through touchscreen menus to control the heater for example, whereas on my older car I can reach for and turn a knob without even looking at it. Pentax cameras are doing well with their use of dials, and retro-style Fujis with emphasis on dials are selling well. Camera touchscreens are also geared to taking photos at arms length using LV, and do not fit with viewfinder use when the only thing that can touch the screen is your nose.

If a tilting screen makes the body 3mm thicker, so what? I don't get this obsession with thinness. Like phone/laptops/tablets/TVs, I predict that mirrorless cameras will get thinner and thinner as time goes on. So far they have only deleted the mirror box but I predict in ten years time the Socanikon crowd will be drooling over the latest 3mm thick camera bodies, like tablets with huge lenses on them. Of course, another new lens mount standard (or two) will be needed in the meantime. The Socanikon mirrorless salesmen must be wetting themselves with glee, knowing that they have manouvered their users to the foot of another "upgrade" escalator, whereas they were running out of things to say about mirror DSLRs.

Making it thinner was one thing, making the VF more further from back of the camera is for ergonomics they said they are working hard to make perfect. Smaller size is advantage for aps-c user. That is what they say..

[Zygonyx]

I don't necessarily agree that a tilt screen is necessary for landscapes; I haven't had an issue without one. One thing that I have sometimes found though is that when using live view, the image lacks contrast on the screen due to the brightness of the sunshine. (Yes! Sunshine in the UK!) What I am keen to see is how the Knew's new OVF compares to something like the MX!

There's absolutely no chance K-2 gets some "near MX viewfinder".
Even the K-1 falls very short of it [MX : 0.97x magnification with a 50mm 95% coverage ; K-1 : 0,7x magnification with 100% coverage]

[microlight]

I can fantasise, can't I? 😜