[Serkevan]

Doesn't have to be a notch per se.
In this patent from 2018, there's mention of magnets holding the screen in place as well as recesses and keeping the screen flush to the body so it's not in the way of button operations.
I'm not saying it will be in the new APS-C, but it is a very strong possibility since it seems to be an evolution of the K-1 screen mechanism.
US Patent Application for ELECTRONIC APPARATUS AND IMAGING APPARATUS HAVING MULTI-POSITION MOVABLE DISPLAY Patent Application (Application #20180367710 issued December 20, 2018) - Justia Patents Search

Justia does not show the figures, but Google Patents (US20180367710A1 - Electronic apparatus and imaging apparatus having multi-position movable display - Google Patents) does... and it's the cross-tilt screen of the K-1. There is no way they managed to fit such a thing in the K-new. The magnets mentioned are marked as the small circular thingies in the back of the K-1 as well, although they don't seem to work as magnets there, admittedly.

---------- Post added 07-31-20 at 05:41 PM ----------

It would appear that USB charging is also supported, unless I am reading this wrong.

Curiously, the "D-AC166" is the charger used in the WG-6. Hmmm.

[gatorguy]

Justia does not show the figures, but Google Patents (US20180367710A1 - Electronic apparatus and imaging apparatus having multi-position movable display - Google Patents) does... and it's the cross-tilt screen of the K-1. There is no way they managed to fit such a thing in the K-new. The magnets mentioned are marked as the small circular thingies in the back of the K-1 as well, although they don't seem to work as magnets there, admittedly.

---------- Post added 07-31-20 at 05:41 PM ----------



Curiously, the "D-AC166" is the charger used in the WG-6. Hmmm.

Nice job! Research is contagious.

[alfa75ts]

It would appear that USB charging is also supported, unless I am reading this wrong

I don't think you're wrong, the AC-U2 charger is used on the GR III but the manual says you can only charge when the camera is turned off.

[gatorguy]

Please let it be USB-C

[Kobie]

Justia does not show the figures, but Google Patents (US20180367710A1 - Electronic apparatus and imaging apparatus having multi-position movable display - Google Patents) does... and it's the cross-tilt screen of the K-1. There is no way they managed to fit such a thing in the K-new. The magnets mentioned are marked as the small circular thingies in the back of the K-1 as well, although they don't seem to work as magnets there, admittedly.

---------- Post added 07-31-20 at 05:41 PM ----------


.

Fair enough. We'll have to see what the final product actually does have.

[Not a Number]

You can guess-timate the space between the sensor and the back wall of the body from the sensor position mark painted on the body in the screen cap in this post.

R03010 = K-new was registered by FCC on 27 July 2020 - Page 5 - PentaxForums.com

Compare with the space on the cut-away of a KP (with movable screen) and also the K-30 and K-5ii (with fixed screens). There appears to be very little space to put some sort of complex hidden mechanism. You can see on all the models there is only a few millimeters space between the main board and the back shell or LCD. There would not appear to be much difference in the space from the mark to the back of the new body vs previous bodies.


Pentax KP (black) battery grip cutaway 2017 CP+
Morio / CC BY-SA (Creative Commons ? Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported ? CC BY-SA 3.0)

K-30


K-5ii


K-5ii and K-30 cutaway photos from this article on PF
Pentax K-30 vs K-5 IIs Cross Sections - Photokina 2012 | PentaxForums.com

[johnmflores]

There is a direct relationship between bandwidth, frequency, range, power consumption and transfer speed. Bluetooth is a low-bandwidth communication protocol, so transfer speeds are slower than high-bandwidth communication protocols like 802.11 WiFi, but requires less power to achieve a similar range. Bluetooth is marginally acceptable for high-fidelity audio communication; for transferring RAW images, it is perfectly useless. In a high resolution digital camera, Bluetooth is useful for quickly and simply making a connection between the camera's built-in 802.11 WiFi and a high bandwidth WiFi access point, while consuming very little battery power itself. It has a longer range and is more secure than using NFC (near field communication) to do the same thing in a digital camera.

The following isn't directed at anyone specific: If you want fast wireless data transfer, it takes power, lots of power, and if there isn't an equally powerful and fast wireless networked device within range to communicate with, wireless data transfer is like (insert crude barnyard simile here). For a group of camera users that obsess over unbaked RAWs and time consuming post processing to extract every last drop of IQ, it makes absolutely ZERO sense to obsess over faster wireless data transfer in a camera. If you really need to transfer images to a computer network with minimum delay after pressing the shutter, tether your camera to a laptop with high bandwidth network access. The same group of obsessive camera users also obsess over the size and weight of their equipment; well, putting faster wireless network access in a camera works against that. Wireless network access in a high resolution digital camera is good for Image Sync apps that let you remotely control your camera with a small compact device in specific instances where you can't see the live view display and you want to have some way to change camera settings and release the shutter without touching the camera. Period. For the easiest, fastest and most reliable transfer of RAW images, take the SD memory card out of the camera and copy the files to a computer. Period.

I shoot RAW because I need the quality for publishing. But I also need decent wireless transfer speeds for transferring JPGs from my camera to phone in the field for quick posting on social media.

The workflow on the phone is fast but problematic because I’m often doing quick edits in less than ideal light on a small, uncalibrated screen. Because of this, sometimes the processing is crap.

Transferring to a laptop is an option but it’s slower-I need to take out and fire up the laptop, transfer the images, connect to wifi or my hotspot, post, then put it all away. I’d hate doing that 4-6 times a day.

So from my perspective, ultimate IQ and fast wireless transfer aren’t at odds; it’s the reality of many working pros.

[BROO]

You could probably get a good idea of the rear LCD screen size based on those drawings (3.2" diagonal)?

It looks like they have decided to label the top left hand button with a lock. Therefore the previous lock button is labeled SR.

[Rondec]

<irony>

Instagram devices don’t have an SD Card slot.

</irony>

For ten dollars you can get an SD Card Reader for your apple devices... amazon.com: SD Card Reader for iPhone/iPad, TF & SD Card to iPhone Adapter with Dual Slot 3rd Gen, Trail Game Camera Memory Card Reader Viewer Compatible with iPhone/iPad, No App Required-White: Computers & Accessories?tag=pentaxforums-20& I don't personally have one (I did buy an older, pre-lightning jack version but I didn't really use it), but if you were doing a lot of file transferring from your camera to your iphone, it would certainly be a reasonable option and wouldn't take up much space at all in your camera bag.

[totsmuyco]

There ain't no notch. Screen cap from the Part 2 video:

The screen looks pretty fixed to me.

So no flippy screen. It ain't the end of the world.

[alfa75ts]

You could probably get a good idea of the rear LCD screen size based on those drawings (3.2" diagonal)?

Visible area seems to be 67.5mm x 45mm (81mm diag). Smaller than a K3 or K7, same height and slightly wider than a K-x.


EDIT: I did something dumb, I used my printed ruler which is scaled to the K-New drawing to measure the other screens.

The K-New screen is the same height as the K7 and 7.5mm wider.

[Class A]

For a group of camera users that obsess over unbaked RAWs and time consuming post processing to extract every last drop of IQ, it makes absolutely ZERO sense to obsess over faster wireless data transfer in a camera.

You've made very good rational points about Bluetooth but this seems like fighting a straw man.

Who are these people that "obsess" over "unbaked RAWs" and "faster wireless data transfer"?
I can't say I've ever seen anyone arguing for faster WiFi in order to have their unbaked RAW files to be transmitted more quickly.

I think it is perfectly fine to ask for faster WiFi transfer for the purposes of transmitting a better quality Live View image or decreased transmission times for full resolution JPGs in order to check focus.

I furthermore think it is unjustified to implicitly suggest that Pentax WiFi transfer speeds couldn't be improved significantly by a combination of different hardware choices and improved software.

[gaweidert]

There is a direct relationship between bandwidth, frequency, range, power consumption and transfer speed. Bluetooth is a low-bandwidth communication protocol, so transfer speeds are slower than high-bandwidth communication protocols like 802.11 WiFi, but requires less power to achieve a similar range. Bluetooth is marginally acceptable for high-fidelity audio communication; for transferring RAW images, it is perfectly useless. In a high resolution digital camera, Bluetooth is useful for quickly and simply making a connection between the camera's built-in 802.11 WiFi and a high bandwidth WiFi access point, while consuming very little battery power itself. It has a longer range and is more secure than using NFC (near field communication) to do the same thing in a digital camera.

The following isn't directed at anyone specific: If you want fast wireless data transfer, it takes power, lots of power, and if there isn't an equally powerful and fast wireless networked device within range to communicate with, wireless data transfer is like (insert crude barnyard simile here). For a group of camera users that obsess over unbaked RAWs and time consuming post processing to extract every last drop of IQ, it makes absolutely ZERO sense to obsess over faster wireless data transfer in a camera. If you really need to transfer images to a computer network with minimum delay after pressing the shutter, tether your camera to a laptop with high bandwidth network access. The same group of obsessive camera users also obsess over the size and weight of their equipment; well, putting faster wireless network access in a camera works against that. Wireless network access in a high resolution digital camera is good for Image Sync apps that let you remotely control your camera with a small compact device in specific instances where you can't see the live view display and you want to have some way to change camera settings and release the shutter without touching the camera. Period. For the easiest, fastest and most reliable transfer of RAW images, take the SD memory card out of the camera and copy the files to a computer. Period.

I have been using sneaker net since I got my first digital camera. But that is just me. If I want to get something out quick, the camera on my iPhone Xr is pretty decent. I do not Facebook or Twitter either. Just never got into it. But than again I am an old dog and that is a new trick.

[ThorSanchez]

There is a direct relationship between bandwidth, frequency, range, power consumption and transfer speed. Bluetooth is a low-bandwidth communication protocol, so transfer speeds are slower than high-bandwidth communication protocols like 802.11 WiFi, but requires less power to achieve a similar range. Bluetooth is marginally acceptable for high-fidelity audio communication; for transferring RAW images, it is perfectly useless. In a high resolution digital camera, Bluetooth is useful for quickly and simply making a connection between the camera's built-in 802.11 WiFi and a high bandwidth WiFi access point, while consuming very little battery power itself. It has a longer range and is more secure than using NFC (near field communication) to do the same thing in a digital camera.

The following isn't directed at anyone specific: If you want fast wireless data transfer, it takes power, lots of power, and if there isn't an equally powerful and fast wireless networked device within range to communicate with, wireless data transfer is like (insert crude barnyard simile here). For a group of camera users that obsess over unbaked RAWs and time consuming post processing to extract every last drop of IQ, it makes absolutely ZERO sense to obsess over faster wireless data transfer in a camera. If you really need to transfer images to a computer network with minimum delay after pressing the shutter, tether your camera to a laptop with high bandwidth network access. The same group of obsessive camera users also obsess over the size and weight of their equipment; well, putting faster wireless network access in a camera works against that. Wireless network access in a high resolution digital camera is good for Image Sync apps that let you remotely control your camera with a small compact device in specific instances where you can't see the live view display and you want to have some way to change camera settings and release the shutter without touching the camera. Period. For the easiest, fastest and most reliable transfer of RAW images, take the SD memory card out of the camera and copy the files to a computer. Period.

I add my vote to the group who wants to obsess over my RAW files and have really good WiFi connectivity with my camera to my phone. They're not mutually exclusive. The RAWs are mainly for me, the jpgs to share with friends and family. When my kid scores a goal I'd rather not wait hours or days to show grandma, but I will go home and tweak the RAW file as much as need be in RawTherapee.

[monochrome]

For ten dollars you can get an SD Card Reader for your apple devices... amazon.com: SD Card Reader for iPhone/iPad, TF & SD Card to iPhone Adapter with Dual Slot 3rd Gen, Trail Game Camera Memory Card Reader Viewer Compatible with iPhone/iPad, No App Required-White: Computers & Accessories?tag=pentaxforums-20& I don't personally have one (I did buy an older, pre-lightning jack version but I didn't really use it), but if you were doing a lot of file transferring from your camera to your iphone, it would certainly be a reasonable option and wouldn't take up much space at all in your camera bag.

I actually forgot I have one of those with a lightning connector.