[Wheatfield]

It's cool that Ricoh is willing to invest to redevelop what many consider to be a stagnant (if not dead) field. It may not be the hybrid e/ovf that some of us were hypothesizing, but it shows that there's room for improvement in SLR tech. I think if Ricoh really is this serious about holding this niche, they really ought to bring back a line of film SLRs. There's a lot of modern tech and production methods that could easily be adapted to a film camera, but I wonder if this new pentaprism could fit in an SLR without getting too unbalanced.

Oh dear gawd. The film SLR is extinct. Nothing will bring it back from the dead.

[Smolk]

Oh dear gawd. The film SLR is extinct. Nothing will bring it back from the dead.

As a new product, yes. But plenty are working fine, and mechanical ones should be repairable for ages. Advantage: their viewfinders are often still better (pre-AF).
But on another note: if the APS-C baded pentaprism is that much larger than the previous version, how much larger will the one for the K-1 III be? I don't really mind the size that much - although I guess it will also bring more heft. Wondering how that will pan out.

[BarneyL]

I mean, Leica makes some film cameras, and is rumored to release new, "affordable" one soon, so...

[Dennis Forster]

When I read posts such as the new K3iii Pentaprism, it gives me new appreciation for the technology, dedication and attention to detail which Pentax (Ricoh) put into their products. It is absolutely amazing when you pause to consider how much technology is fitted into a relatively small camera.

[Ishpuini]

Did anyone get a chance to evaluate the new viewfinder with the O-ME53 viewfinder loupe ? It's become a standard accessory on my previous Pentax APS-C DSLRs, so I wonder how it would do with the larger viewfinder resulting from that beautiful pentaprism.

Wim

[thibs]

Looks amazing wonder how they will improve full frame

Indeed, I'm very curious

[thibs]

Did anyone get a chance to evaluate the new viewfinder with the O-ME53 viewfinder loupe ? It's become a standard accessory on my previous Pentax APS-C DSLRs, so I wonder how it would do with the larger viewfinder resulting from that beautiful pentaprism.

Wim

Good question, I'll get it for my K1.
Hope it works fine on K3III too.

[mtkeller]

Looks amazing wonder how they will improve full frame

There are a couple of limiting factors. One, the larger pentaprism seems to be more delicate. Ideally, Pentax has figured out how to machine these things out of the new glass in a way that allows other sizes. But the second is that making an OVF too big means that users will have to be moving their eye around to take in the whole scene or see the information displayed in the OVF. They want photographers to enjoy the OVF experience, so they will be sensitive to that as they see about any options for enlargement.

[Smolk]

There are a couple of limiting factors. One, the larger pentaprism seems to be more delicate. Ideally, Pentax has figured out how to machine these things out of the new glass in a way that allows other sizes. But the second is that making an OVF too big means that users will have to be moving their eye around to take in the whole scene or see the information displayed in the OVF. They want photographers to enjoy the OVF experience, so they will be sensitive to that as they see about any options for enlargement.

I have never seen an OVF that's too big - be it LX, Pentax 645N, Rolleiflex 6000. I don't think this is an issue with OVFs (I don't know about EVFs which could be larger). And a larger OVF will be significant but it won't be gigantic compared to that of the 645N (the film size is about 2.7 times larger; 0.76 x 92%).
The delicateness might be a problem, I don't know whether that also includes being shockproof, or as you say issues with manufacturing the prisms.

[Wheatfield]

I mean, Leica makes some film cameras, and is rumored to release new, "affordable" one soon, so...

Sure, the Leica M-A and M-P, both just shy of Can$7k and are based on bodies that have been around for decades and only sold to rich dentists. How many do you suppose they sell in a year? My bet is perhaps a dozen each worldwide, and those are hitting collectors display cases, not the street where they belong.
An "affordable" Leica film camera? That's a laugh, as they can no longer buy old Minolta bodies and slap their name on it.

---------- Post added Apr 25th, 2021 at 11:05 AM ----------

As a new product, yes. But plenty are working fine, and mechanical ones should be repairable for ages. Advantage: their viewfinders are often still better (pre-AF).
But on another note: if the APS-C baded pentaprism is that much larger than the previous version, how much larger will the one for the K-1 III be? I don't really mind the size that much - although I guess it will also bring more heft. Wondering how that will pan out.

Well, we are talking about new products aren't we?

---------- Post added Apr 25th, 2021 at 11:12 AM ----------

I have never seen an OVF that's too big....

^^^^^This^^^^^^

All the APS-C viewfinders I've seen up to now have been like looking through a pinhole. The K1 viewfinder is somewhat better, but still on the small side.
This is where mirrorless has a decided advantage. The viewfinder screen is not limited to the size of the sensor or the size of a pentaprism. You could mount a big screen TV on a mirrorless and have a great big viewfinder.

Good viewfinders are something I miss. If Pentax is going to stay in the SLR game, they need to make sure their viewfinders are up to it, and that means bigger and brighter. A K1 replacement has to do for full frame what the K3III has done for APS-C.

[Andrea K]

There are a couple of limiting factors. One, the larger pentaprism seems to be more delicate. Ideally, Pentax has figured out how to machine these things out of the new glass in a way that allows other sizes. But the second is that making an OVF too big means that users will have to be moving their eye around to take in the whole scene or see the information displayed in the OVF. They want photographers to enjoy the OVF experience, so they will be sensitive to that as they see about any options for enlargement.

K-1 OVF is still inferior to the MX (the film camera from the 1976).

[house]

I think if Ricoh really is this serious about holding this niche, they really ought to bring back a line of film SLRs. There's a lot of modern tech and production methods that could easily be adapted to a film camera, but I wonder if this new pentaprism could fit in an SLR without getting too unbalanced.

There are many 35mm film cameras still in working condition. I've said it before but I think making a new SLR as tactile and mechanical as the old ones will be expensive (guessing here). People who shoot film tend to value the experience so inferior build to vintage models wont sell.

645 or 67 however would see takers because the vintage cameras are rare and often faulty. Problem is the expense of making new ones.

If anyone I would expect a small Chinese company to start filling this niche.

[Kevin B123]

Good viewfinders are something I miss. If Pentax is going to stay in the SLR game, they need to make sure their viewfinders are up to it, and that means bigger and brighter. A K1 replacement has to do for full frame what the K3III has done for APS-C.

I agree with all you have said.
If they can get even an ME Super prism in the K-1iii, they can stop right there as far as I'm concerned and just pony up a pre-order date for me to sign upto.

[BarneyL]

Sure, the Leica M-A and M-P, both just shy of Can$7k and are based on bodies that have been around for decades and only sold to rich dentists.

That's one way to put it. The other way is, M-A and MP are the cheapest leica M rangefinder cameras that you can buy new in 2021

I don't know how many of them Leica sells, but if the rumor about incoming "affordable" M camera (where affordable is probably still quite a lot, but noticeably less) has some truth in it, it seems there's some kind of a market for it that is not necessarily "rich dentists". Maybe similar kind of market that would be potentially interested in a modernized version of Pentax 67.

Niche within a niche? Sure. But isn't Pentax like, a super niche brand at this point?

[Wheatfield]

That's one way to put it. The other way is, M-A and MP are the cheapest leica M rangefinder cameras that you can buy new in 2021

I don't know how many of them Leica sells, but if the rumor about incoming "affordable" M camera (where affordable is probably still quite a lot, but noticeably less) has some truth in it, it seems there's some kind of a market for it that is not necessarily "rich dentists". Maybe similar kind of market that would be potentially interested in a modernized version of Pentax 67.

Niche within a niche? Sure. But isn't Pentax like, a super niche brand at this point?

At some point, niche products are simply not viable. I have my doubts that the two Leica rangefinders are much more than pretty pictures, and if someone really wants one, for 7k they will build it.
Leica rangefinders were all bench built, and there is every reason to think that the tooling still exist.
I doubt very much if those Leicas are more than minor cosmetic reworks of previous cameras.
Pentax, otoh, more assuredly doesn't still have the tooling to make the only bench built camera they ever made, so they would have to make a significant investment in what would for sure be a money loser.
A revamped 6x7 would be an even greater fail. It was taken off the market because the numbers weren't there to keep it in production.
Sorry, it's just not a viable idea.
Leica can sort of get away with it because they don't have to reinvent the wheel. Pentax isn't in that position.