[Wheatfield]

Such as Pentax K-1 mark II ?

And at no time did Ricoh call it a new model, nor did they pretend it was a new model.

[biz-engineer]

Personally, I like discussing how to get better images. Not the relative advantages of technology that doesn't improve my images.

You could have stayed with 4x5 film, because digital images didn't improve, on the contrary , digital images (purely images) aren't as detailed as 4x5 film, if image quality was the only thing, disregarding usability, speed, auto-focus, image stabilization.
The underlying reason for arguing in favor of Pentax, is purely brand bias. Because we know that mirrorless camera are lighter (nice to have when we get older), and more AF points, better IBIS than Pentax (Canon tests show up to 7 stops, Pentax does 3.5 stops in the same test).
So, IBIS doesn't directly improve image quality, but better IBIS allows to not carry a tripod on long hikes, that's a big advantage, especially after having had surgeries.

---------- Post added 14-11-21 at 19:08 ----------

And at no time did Ricoh call it a new model, nor did they pretend it was a new model.

Yet, you consider other brands making minor improvements when the improvements are bigger than Pentax K1 to K1 II.

[Wheatfield]

Yet, you consider other brands making minor improvements when the improvements are bigger than Pentax K1 to K1 II.

No, that is not what I am saying. I suggest you go back and reread the posts you are alluding to.

[reh321]

And at no time did Ricoh call it a new model, nor did they pretend it was a new model.

Model numbers don’t matter. Capabilities do matter.
Pentax has made vast improvements since the K-1 was released.
{I am directly responding to your exact words}

[thibs]

No, that is not what I am saying. I suggest you go back and reread the posts you are alluding to.

I dont that's his intention at all.
Just bashing.

[biz-engineer]

I dont that's his intention at all.Just bashing.

I think we should clarify that progress is good for Pentax, knowing that opposing any criticism (criticism as opportunity for improvement) with the agenda to protect Pentax actually does more arm to Pentax than accepting criticism to open up ways for Pentax to improve and thus stay in business.

Historically, we've often seen on Pentaxforums the opinions that Pentax should NOT do what other brands were doing, such as:
- Ricoh shouldn't make a Pentax full frame (at the time there was no Pentax full frame)
- Ricoh should feature DSLR with a tilt display at the time there wasn't any on Pentax cameras, while tilt displays were offered by competition
- Ricoh should not make silent drive motor AF lenses because screw drive is just fine
- Ricoh should not make lenses with electronic aperture because an mechanical aperture lever is just tine
- Ricoh should not offer 4K video and improve video features in Pentax DSLR because no one used a DSLR to record video...
- Ricoh should not improve AF tracking of moving subjects and frame rates because using center point AFS is just fine

Until Ricoh did not listen to those negative opinions, and indeed implement such features now appreciated by many customers, including:
- The release of Pentax K1 full frame camera with which many customers are now able to use their legacy lenses
- The famous moon landing articulated display on the K1, that people opposed because the K1 , then complained about because not available on the K3 III
- The DC and SDM silent AF drive on all new lenses since the Pentax K1 was released
- The electronic aperture now featured on all KAF4 lenses that many customers enjoy using
- The 4K video feature provided with the Pentax K3 III
- The huge improvement from 27 AF points, 8 FPS of the K3 to 101 AF points 12 FPS tracking offered in the Pentax K3 III

Fortunately, Ricoh didn't listen to the supposedly brand protecting opinions that Pentax shouldn't offer what other camera brand offer.

[redrockcoulee]

I think we should clarify that progress is good for Pentax, knowing that opposing any criticism (criticism as opportunity for improvement) with the agenda to protect Pentax actually does more arm to Pentax than accepting criticism to open up ways for Pentax to improve and thus stay in business.

Historically, we've often seen on Pentaxforums the opinions that Pentax should NOT do what other brands were doing, such as:
- Ricoh shouldn't make a Pentax full frame (at the time there was no Pentax full frame)
- Ricoh should feature DSLR with a tilt display at the time there wasn't any on Pentax cameras, while tilt displays were offered by competition
- Ricoh should not make silent drive motor AF lenses because screw drive is just fine
- Ricoh should not make lenses with electronic aperture because an mechanical aperture lever is just tine
- Ricoh should not offer 4K video and improve video features in Pentax DSLR because no one used a DSLR to record video...
- Ricoh should not improve AF tracking of moving subjects and frame rates because using center point AFS is just fine

Until Ricoh did not listen to those negative opinions, and indeed implement such features now appreciated by many customers, including:
- The release of Pentax K1 full frame camera with which many customers are now able to use their legacy lenses
- The famous moon landing articulated display on the K1, that people opposed because the K1 , then complained about because not available on the K3 III
- The DC and SDM silent AF drive on all new lenses since the Pentax K1 was released
- The electronic aperture now featured on all KAF4 lenses that many customers enjoy using
- The 4K video feature provided with the Pentax K3 III
- The huge improvement from 27 AF points, 8 FPS of the K3 to 101 AF points 12 FPS tracking offered in the Pentax K3 III

Fortunately, Ricoh didn't listen to the supposedly brand protecting opinions that Pentax shouldn't offer what other camera brand offer.

This is just silly. I do not remember the majority of posters wanting Pentax to stop improving their cameras.

I do not understand why you think Pentax should change the mount just to sell more lenses. That is entirely different from your list.

I shoot an older Pentax. K5iis. It does what i need of it. I am aware that the new lenses do notbwork on it. I can live with that unless Pentax makes a lens i just have to have in which case i will buy a new camera. But if my existing lenses will notbwork on thecnewcPentax i will not buy it. So no new sales from.me.I

If i wanted mirrorless i would have already gone to Fuji. If Pentax goes mirrorleds and has a seamless adapter i may in the future go that route. But if thy simply change from the K mount i have no reason to stay.

We do expect changes due to improvements and new technologoly but changes just t sell more lenses to existing owners is not going to be a successful model. Might work for Apple but will not for most products.

[Kunzite]

I dont that's his intention at all.
Just bashing.

Bashing... Pentax, or us?

Curiosity got the best of me, and I had a look at his last post.

I don't think there's anyone here that doesn't have at least some small bit of criticism at Pentax. Mine is their (lack of) speed, although that seems to be improving.

In general, the opposition to the listed improvements didn't happen. Although there was criticism against Pentax having no FF, recently against the K-3iii not having an articulated display, video capabilities, AF, and the SDM micromotors.
In general, the people opposing unreasonable criticism are the same who want Pentax to move forward. And those who promote unreasonable criticism are the ones who don't. I've seen criticism of Pentax having FF, like that guy who insisted the FF impedes APS-C's development, but then he didn't like the K-3iii for [insert random reason].
Complaining that Pentax doesn't go mirrorless, for example, is just more of the same. Choose something Pentax isn't very good at. Complain about it. Exaggerate.
People insisting that Pentax should go mirrorless won't buy one if it happens. They're just complaining that the entire world doesn't align to their preference.

OTOH there's one force driving Pentax' progress: us, the buyers. Not the bashing on the forum.

[RobA_Oz]

My Pentax buddy and I share a love of the brand, but our politics are diametrically opposed (I exaggerate to make the point), but our arguments in cafes are sometimes compared with these two:

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Any comparisons with what’s going on here are purely coincidental.

[Wheatfield]

Model numbers don’t matter. Capabilities do matter.
Pentax has made vast improvements since the K-1 was released.
{I am directly responding to your exact words}

Yes, and those improvements merely haven't yet made it to a new full frame model. They had to throw the APS-C users a bone since it was 2013 when they last had a new top end camera.
While model numbers don't matter all that much, what the company pimps the new model as does matter. The K1II was not pimped as a new model, Ricoh was very plain about that.
Other companies have done less than what Ricoh did to the K1 and call it a brand new block of cheese, tastier, smoother and all round more filling than the last one (hello Canon).

[jersey]

This is photography. You prove you know what you're talking about with your images, not your words.

Photography is an art, how the heck can it serve to prove knowledge? And before you start whining about how this or that defines good photography - it defines it for you. No one else. Not to mention that such words sound hilarious from someone who is measuring worth of another poster by like-to-post ratio.


Now, I think I stop looking at this thread, it is bad on my nerves.

[Zygonyx]

Because, in some ways they're better.



Three recent images.

Nice picts.
Have you used polarising filters ?

[normhead]

Nice picts.
Have you used polarising filters ?

I took them off a while ago because I was shooting in low light, the loss of light was problematic. But you're right, I should put them back on at times.

[gatorguy]

Points made guys, no more needs to be said.


Thread closed.