[Wheatfield]

Comparing camera design to computer design is not useful. You can put your computer together in any way you choose and as long as you have adequate power supply and cooling, it will probably work. A camera has to have every single part integrated in a specific way to function. For Pentax to drop a touch screen onto this camera or do something to the buffer would probably require quite a bit more investment of resources than what they want to allocate to such a project.

It would also probably not be able to hit the desired price point to give Ricoh the desired ROI.

[reh321]

Comparing camera design to computer design is not useful. You can put your computer together in any way you choose and as long as you have adequate power supply and cooling, it will probably work. A camera has to have every single part integrated in a specific way to function. For Pentax to drop a touch screen onto this camera or do something to the buffer would probably require quite a bit more investment of resources than what they want to allocate to such a project.

As I said before, I think Pentax only has resources to focus on one camera at a time and they are working on the next generation K-1 camera. Since they didn't want to drop the K-70 line but parts weren't available, they replaced the parts that needed replacing and re-released the camera. Taking resources away from another, bigger project doesn't feel helpful to me. Entry level cameras, even when they are nice, aren't really that great.

They could made a parts substitution, and kept moving as they did with the solenoid; most likely, no one would have noticed.

[Rondec]

They could made a parts substitution, and kept moving as they did with the solenoid; most likely, no one would have noticed.

If the parts cost more and the price of the camera increases then they have to have a reason for that price increase. Continuing to sell a K-70 as a K-70 but now priced at 650 would inspire just as much angst as this decision -- maybe more.

[hcarvalhoalves]

That would probably entail raising the price to 900 or 950 MSRP with a street pricing of 850. This camera releases at 800 and will likely have a street price of 600 to 650.

New matrix, AF system and sensor capable of 4K video plus the hardware necessary to do 4K video aren't going to come in cheaply.

Canon EOS REBEL SL3: released 2019, 4k video, $ 749

You Tube

You Tube

Olympus OM-D E-M10: released 2017, 4k video, $ 598

You Tube

You Tube

Pentax is now half a decade behind.

[reh321]

If the parts cost more and the price of the camera increases then they have to have a reason for that price increase. Continuing to sell a K-70 as a K-70 but now priced at 650 would inspire just as much angst as this decision -- maybe more.

Prices go up now just because inputs cost more;
have you been following the price fluctuations of the K-70?
I haven’t - and I use cameras at that tier.

[ffking]

Pentax epitaph is put out constantly, for years. No surprise here.
All I can say is I hope they are wrong. I like my Pentax gear.

Ricoh seem to keep Pentax on a tight rein financially, which means that they are never going to lose them much money (for a corporation that size). It also means that they are never going to pull in huge profits - so it seems to me that they keep Pentax going because they want to, and I don't see any reason that would change (the Japanese business mentality being different to the US or even European mentality) unless Pentax became a reputational liability - and much as people mock and sneer in the West, they do make good products, so that shouldn't be a danger, not in Japan, at least. That's the way I see it, anyway.

[Jeff]

For me the biggest hoped-for improvement is a new solenoid design/part/component...if that is fixed or replaced so that it's no longer a lottery as to when/if it will fail then that would be the best thing. I guess we have to wait and see, unless anyone knows otherwise? On its own it is an incredibly capable camera and can do most of what more expensive bodies can do. I had one but sold it because I don't enjoy Russian roulette, especially with solenoids!

[Mistral75]

Do you remember the Kx to Kr? Or the K-30 to K-50? (...) there is almost no difference between the K-30 and K-50 except for some cosmetic changes.

One of the differences being that the K-r was launched 12 months after the K-r and the K-50 13 months after the K-30, whereas this KF is launched six and a half years after the K-70.

[D1N0]

Basically they needed an excuse to hike the price because of the price of components. If you are looking to upgrade get a k-70 from a clearance. Should be a great deal.

[FozzFoster]

You Tube

You Tube

[FozzFoster]

You Tube

You Tube

---------- Post added 11-10-22 at 10:22 AM ----------

F for Finder / Field

[Rondec]

One of the differences being that the K-r was launched 12 months after the K-r and the K-50 13 months after the K-30, whereas this KF is launched six and a half years after the K-70.

I guess I choose to view it as an indication that they are working something else that they find more important than a K-70 sequel. I could be wrong, but it doesn't make sense otherwise.

[titrisol]

It's great to see new cameras in the market, I guess demand is sufficient !

[jersey]

I already said it, and I will repeat myself. You wanted K-3 Mk III in plastic body for half a price. You did not get it, so you complain.

For me it is good camera for what it is supposed to be. K-50 was great entry camera to DSLR world. I jumped MILC ship into Pentax world, so I can say it with lots of confidence. And KF is better then my K-50 was in its time, so Pentax still has great camera as a door to DSLR, or now better to say: their exclusive world.

[jslifoaw]

I guess I choose to view it as an indication that they are working something else that they find more important than a K-70 sequel. I could be wrong, but it doesn't make sense otherwise.

I think/hope this is what's happening - they've made a bigger bet/investment on a higher value product (e.g. K1-III, more lenses) that is consuming more budget/resources, but are doing a low-cost (to implement) refresh of an existing lower-tier product to round out the lineup as a "quick win". It's too bad the message may have been embellished and resulted in higher expectations against what was ultimately delivered.

To the comments about pricing, even if the parts haven't increased in cost (which in itself is doubtful - the computer comparison is likely derived from incorrectly interpreting Moore's law as causing tech to become faster and cheaper on a predictable basis, such as doubling in performance per dollar every 18mo), companies don't always set pricing based on "cost plus" and even if they did, there are other potentially rising unit costs beyond the raw bill of materials, like that of the labour / infrastructure to put the final product together.