[mee]

A pinhole and a sony sensor.

Which would still have more DR than a Canon.

[reh321]

ok guys
almost of the features i mentioned up are not a photography features .they are a mobile features.

That's the way I thought until the K-3ii uproar; I still say that Pentax needs a master-capable flash before they stop putting flashes on cameras ... and I've given up guessing which other functions would arouse a passionate response if they aren't there.

[RonHendriks1966]

Basicly Pentax could have done that years ago. To make the camera cheaper, better to lose the parts that Cost money.

- SR is expensive
- the mirror is expensive
- interval Electronic hi-way is expensive

I would and did suggest K-11, mirrorless K-mount camera. But I would includes SR. Al those filters and things aren't the expenses. Want a fast camera is expensive. So just 1 fps in RAW as the K-01.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/189624-24-megapixel...11-coming.html

[zmohie]

what i have suggested is just a concept you can add or or decrease the non important features. we/me basicly/need a pure camera not a multimedia tool!

[mee]

what i have suggested is just a concept you can add or or decrease the non important features. we/me basicly/need a pure camera not a multimedia tool!

There is no 'we' here!

Leave me out of this. I want the onboard video support, the GPS, the astrotracer, the PS, the WiFi, and any other gadget they can add to the camera body. It doesn't mean I'm going to use them often though. The camera body today is much like a Swiss Army Knife; You may only use the 3" blade commonly, but it is nice to have the scissors, the screwdriver, and the bottle opener with you for those few times you can make use of them.

[jatrax]

We have been through all this before and the same posts have been made.

Just because you do not want/need a feature does not mean someone does not. And as already noted many of those things cost little or nothing to add to the camera so they do not change the price. What taking them out does do is reduce the number of potential customers for the camera and thus actually INCREASE the cost because development costs have to be spread over fewer sales.

Lets look at a couple of your items, (I am just throwing some numbers out here for illustration):
1) video. Lets say only 10% of the market ever uses this feature. Take it out and you just reduced the potential market by 10%. Lets say another 10% never use video but would not buy a camera without it, "just in case". So now the potential is down by 20%.

2) Flash / GPS. This seems to be either / or on Pentax right now but just for the sake of illustration let's keep going with the 10%. No GPS? 10% will not buy. No flash? 10% will not buy. Now you have reduced the market by 40%.

3) No Wifi? another 10%

4) No flippy screen? another 10%

So this is just for fun, but perhaps you can see why the "digital k-1000" is not going to happen. Unless Ricoh comes out with 10 different FF cameras, one for each segment of the market. Which they are not going to do. This is not a super-high end customized for the individual product. They need a "one size fits many" product and if that means the cost and feature set is slightly larger than the minimum they could make, too bad.

What Ricoh needs is a complete package, a full featured FF camera with cost/feature curve that is attractive and has no serious holes in the feature set that will drive potential customers away. Anything less at this point in time will be a major FAIL. And that will be the end of FF Pentax and perhaps the beginning of the end for Pentax as a brand.

[luftfluss]

I'm looking forward to a new digital FF m42 Pentax.

[ebk]

Basicly Pentax could have done that years ago. To make the camera cheaper, better to lose the parts that Cost money.

- SR is expensive
- the mirror is expensive
- interval Electronic hi-way is expensive

I would and did suggest K-11, mirrorless K-mount camera. But I would includes SR. Al those filters and things aren't the expenses. Want a fast camera is expensive. So just 1 fps in RAW as the K-01.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/189624-24-megapixel...11-coming.html

Agree 😊


Better a remake of the pentax mx☺

[Kunzite]

m42? I'm sure we can find something even more vintage than those screw mount lenses

[ogl]

9. No digital filters
10. No HDR
11. No menu's

Just:
a. Mode wheel
b. Exposure comp. wheel
c. ISO wheel
d. Front & back wheel for aperture and exposure

Right

And 1000 USD price

[Kunzite]

Basicly Pentax could have done that years ago. To make the camera cheaper, better to lose the parts that Cost money.

- SR is expensive
- the mirror is expensive
- interval Electronic hi-way is expensive

I would and did suggest K-11, mirrorless K-mount camera. But I would includes SR. Al those filters and things aren't the expenses. Want a fast camera is expensive. So just 1 fps in RAW as the K-01.

So the way is to remove USPs? And to retry a failed product, making sure to check all marks that made it fail? Interesting.

[thibs]

Actually a simple camera is alright to me. But if cheaper, not by much. Then we don't have to lose every feature either.

Market though...

---------- Post added 13-06-15 at 17:57 ----------

With this logic Leica would sell the cheapest FF camera on the market.
Removing existing features do not make camera less expensive, it only make them more niche, which will limit sales volume and price have to be higher to cover lower sales.

True but Leica chosed that way of a jewel-like camera.
This is not the only way but cheap it wouldn't be, IMO.

[normhead]

Here's the issue, a lot of us know we can get by with a lot less than the current feature set. We need what we used to have...

ISO on a dial on top of the camera.
Aperture control on the lens, preferably with a DoF scale.
Shutter speed on a dial on top of the camera.
An auto exposure system with EV override.
A way to capture and save the image.

That is all a camera needs to be.
Adding a rear screen with the ability to chimp is a nice extra.

For some reason that I don't understand, everyone seems to think this would be more expensive... or wouldn't sell.
Someone should give it a try. Some camera company is going to get back to building basic cameras. Whether or not it could be Pentax is a different question.

Add a removable prism assembly so you could look down through a top viewfinder and life would be peachy keen.

With all due respect to the modern way of doing things, my biggest problem in photography right now is inadvertently hitting those arrows that control white balance or the selective focus point. Or lifting my finger off the button while changing the EV setting and changing my aperture. My opinion, when stuff like that is happening, things need to be simplified. I am really tired of losing images or not getting the image I wanted, because of inadvertent settings changes.

When one of these things happen, I then have to figure out what i did wrong and reset things to the way they were. And many times, that has resulted in me missing photo-ops. I have missed wildlife images, because the selective focus point wasn't where I thought it was. Maybe I'm just stupid, but I don't need all this non-sense. I need a camera I can keep track of, because nothing changes unless I intend it to.

[lytrytyr]

m42? I'm sure we can find something even more vintage than those screw mount lenses

Pentax M37 Screwmount Prime Lenses - Reviews and Specifications - SLR and Interchangeable Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

[luftfluss]

m42? I'm sure we can find something even more vintage than those screw mount lenses

Pentax M37 Screwmount Prime Lenses - Reviews and Specifications - SLR and Interchangeable Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

Think how cheap it would be to implement... no electrical contacts.

Even better - Pentax introduces a Leica M-mount FF. Plenty of legacy glass available, and short enough flange focal distance that many lenses could be easily adapted.