[garywakeling]

With the cut away shots, I keep trying to compare the pentaprism shape from K-new to K1, I don't mind a compact APSC camera staying compact without a floppy screen, it is interesting to see some actual marketing occurring from Pentax , teaser shots, videos, what next, hopefully a release date

[Not a Number]

As I recall one of the design goals of the KP was to keep it as compact as possible as well. This was achieved by using the smaller battery, repositioning the battery compartment, one card slot and the interchangeable grip. These aren't really suitable for a "flagship" so the design team had to look in other areas.

[EricBT]

Well the K3 is 77.5mm wide and K-New is 61.8mm. That is a significant difference.

Along with the new pentprism, the new image sensor is something I also want to know more about.

[edri]

Well the K3 is 77.5mm wide and K-New is 61.8mm. That is a significant difference.

You compare different sizes. The size presented in vol.3 is not the same as in the specifications. I measured for KP and the equivalent size to that of vol.3 is about 62.7mm. They gave up an important feature (the vari-angle or tilt-type screen) for an insignificant gain in camera thickness. It was fair for them to compare to other APS-C DSLRs, not an FF DSLR.

[BarneyL]

So, the fat lady has sung.

[Serkevan]

You compare different sizes. The size presented in vol.3 is not the same as in the specifications. I measured for KP and the equivalent size to that of vol.3 is about 62.7mm. They gave up an important feature (the vari-angle or tilt-type screen) for an insignificant gain in camera thickness. It was fair for them to compare to other APS-C DSLRs, not an FF DSLR.

They still slimmed down the sensor-to-back-of-LCD distance, but I also estimated that the total savings compared to a KP-style tilt screen were 2-3 mm at most. Thanks for making the measurements - it proves that the tilt screen doesn't make the camera "oh so bulky".

In any case, there's their answer. Reading a bit between the lines one could think the blunt version is "people love the GRiii's large touchscreen and there's no way we fit *that* one unless it's fixed, so fixed it is". Which is a respectable design decision, in and out of itself.

---------- Post added 09-04-20 at 01:00 AM ----------

So, the fat lady has sung.

And, against what some people really wanted to believe, she didn't break into a jazz improv during a scripted opera.

---------- Post added 09-04-20 at 01:04 AM ----------

As I recall one of the design goals of the KP was to keep it as compact as possible as well. This was achieved by using the smaller battery, repositioning the battery compartment, one card slot and the interchangeable grip. These aren't really suitable for a "flagship" so the design team had to look in other areas.

Yeah, but that slims down the right side of the camera along with the grip. The K-New is roughly the same thickness mount-to-LCD as the KP. According to edri's measurements, roughly 0.9mm thinner.

[Not a Number]

They gave up an important feature (the vari-angle or tilt-type screen) for an insignificant gain in camera thickness

As I noted before they achieved this in the KP by using the smaller battery, one card slot and the interchangeable grip. Would you give up a more comfortable grip, higher capacity battery and a second card slot for a flippy screen on a flagship model? Seems like the biggest criticism of the KP or what keeps the KP from being an upgrade for many from the K-5/3 are those three aforementioned features.

[ffking]

As I and others have said before, whether you agree with the decisions they make, the design team produce rational carefully thought out cameras rather than just throw a bunch of features together because they can. This approach doesn't always go down well with commenters, but does indeed produce cameras that are a pleasure to use, and I hope more people will come to realise this.

[bengibollen]

If it has Wi-Fi and I can use my phone as a viewfinder, this is not an issue for me.

[Serkevan]

As I and others have said before, whether you agree with the decisions they make, the design team produce rational carefully thought out cameras rather than just throw a bunch of features together because they can. This approach doesn't always go down well with commenters, but does indeed produce cameras that are a peasure to use, and I hope more people will come to realise this.

They've had that part nailed down for more than a decade. The K-7 fits like a glove (so I assume the same is true of the K-5/3) and, despite the increase in size and weight, the K-1 is *smacks lips*.


I don't agree with the screen decision because it's not good for me (and I genuinely believe that a movable screen is a feature that has come to be seen as "almost mandatory" by many) as I want a one-body-does-all for whenever I hike - but I can understand that, to have the larger touchscreen in a small body, they had to keep the screen fixed. It's not a tragedy, of course. For the people who will put the money down for a high-performance camera, it probably won't even be a big deal.


The rest of us can wait for "the next one" (APS-C or FF) that suits our needs better. It's not like we are all in desperate need of upgrading, not when the 6MP club keeps churning out beautiful photos.

[rawr]

From the K-1 manual, it's full depth (including all protrusions) is 85.5mm, which is very different from the 72.5mm shown in the K-new cutaway comparison. It will be interesting to get the K-new measured up once all protrusions are taken into account. My guess would be about 70 -72mm depth.

Which means the K-new will probably be similar to the K-5 in full depth, once you account for the pentaprism overhang and thickness of the eye-piece cover - ie nice and compact. But K-x will remain the thinnest Pentax DSLR to date.

Full depth of the K-3 is 77.5mm, KP 76mm, K-5II 72.5mm, K-x 67.5mm (and K-01 = 59mm).

On the matter of body depth and flippy screens, even with a flippy screen, the KP is still thinner than the K-3 ...


From CameraSize.com

[ffking]

If it has Wi-Fi and I can use my phone as a viewfinder, this is not an issue for me.

I've thought a lot about this since it became clear, erm, some time ago, that the screen was fixed. Really the only shooting I do where I wouldn't use a tripod, and thus using a smart phone would be problematic, is close to the ground macro of potentially moving subjects, and there I usually use manual focus through the VF anyway, for greater stability. The fact is that I love the screen on my K-1 but don't miss it on the K-3 - you do what you have to do to get the photo

[noelpolar]

Great misdirect by Pentax.... when it arrives with a flippy screen so many will be flabbergasted.... and... off course... if not so..... with a simplified construction it's bound to be cheap.....

[OoKU]

Appearance patent

[Serkevan]

Appearance patent

So there's a Bubblegum Pink version? Neat.