[Kerrowdown]

I went with 48MP, so I can crop further if I need to.

[sbh]

Speed! I want speed! Faster sensor readout &buffer clearing, much faster tethering, faster AF.
Other than that, an improved K-1ii (AF and 4K video with SR) with a next generation sensor. 36 MP is fine for me.

[ChristianRock]

I went with 48MP, so I can crop further if I need to.

I can understand that some might need that, but honestly, I can crop a K10D picture (10MP) down to 4MP and it still looks pretty good on my monitor

[Kerrowdown]

I can crop a K10D picture (10MP) down to 4MP and it still looks pretty good on my monitor

As long as it works for you, that's half the battle.

[Winder]

Ricoh doesn't need more than 36MP. The A7III, A9, D5, 1Dx, Df, D750, 5DIV, and most others have less than 36MP and for wedding and event shooters 36MP is really more than we want. Since I started shooting events with my A9, I have not had one occasion where I wished I had more than 24MP.

Ricoh needs speed. AF speed/accuracy. Image processing speed. Write speed. Buffer.

[ChristianRock]

Ricoh doesn't need more than 36MP. The A7III, A9, D5, 1Dx, Df, D750, 5DIV, and most others have less than 36MP and for wedding and event shooters 36MP is really more than we want. Since I started shooting events with my A9, I have not had one occasion where I wished I had more than 24MP.

Ricoh needs speed. AF speed/accuracy. Image processing speed. Write speed. Buffer.

Those are all good points... If Ricoh wants to cater to pros, just by going to 24MP they would increase the FPS automatically bu 50% at least. And with a new processor, even more. Then with improvements to AF and other refinements, it would make a very solid camera for pros!
I am among those who think 24MP is all I'd ever need.

[Kunzite]

Ricoh doesn't need more than 36MP. The A7III, A9, D5, 1Dx, Df, D750, 5DIV, and most others have less than 36MP and for wedding and event shooters 36MP is really more than we want. Since I started shooting events with my A9, I have not had one occasion where I wished I had more than 24MP.

Ricoh needs speed. AF speed/accuracy. Image processing speed. Write speed. Buffer.

After some deliberation, I have to disagree with the above. Except, of course, with the personal stuff - that you don't need more than 24MP. But what you don't need, and what Ricoh doesn't need are not the same thing.

IMO Ricoh/Pentax does need at least, or more than 36MP. This is a consequence of the fact that they're behind in speed.
Sounds counter-intuitive? Shouldn't they put all their effort into solving the weak points? Wouldn't it be nice to have a "K-1 pro" competing with the likes of A9, D5, 1Dx on speed?
Let's get real: Pentax is so much behind - in both speed-related technology and user base that would pay for speed - they won't be able to cover the gap in one step. It makes no sense to even compare with the A9, D5, 1Dx, to ask Pentax to emulate such speed monsters.

The way of competing, IMO, was shown by the K-1: for the same price level, have a clear advantage in image quality. Besides this, improve performance as much as possible (they're lagging a bit on that with the K-1, but that's understandable). In other words, to do what they can to cover the gap on the performance side, but their selling point would be image quality (what they're good at).
A "K-1 next gen" should follow the same path, and that means a 40+MP sensor.

[phoebus]

K1 is so good already for image quality, build quality and ergonomics. The emphasis needs to be with the details that add to the package:

Faster electronics and more memory - a given if Moore’s law is still valid - would give us:

• Higher frame rate
• Quicker data writing (UHS II)
• Quicker tethering with USB 3
• Hence ‘better’ video to tick that spec box

Adding this would make extended field use so much better:

• USB charging/power

And while at the electronics upgrade, add separate autofocus processor (function of accelerator chip?) to fix the AFC performance.

Keeping 36mp is fine for me, but offering a 24 and 48mp option should keep more people happy ;-)

[Mikesul]

I almost never use video but a new Pentax FF would probably sell better with improved video - so long as that does not impede the core functions of the camera. My top wish would be for a faster card bus. Other than that I am happy as a "bug in a rug" with the current model.

[Winder]

I can understand that some might need that, but honestly, I can crop a K10D picture (10MP) down to 4MP and it still looks pretty good on my monitor

What is the resolution of you monitor? Final output is really important. If you are printing on an Okidata 24 pin dot matrix printer you don't even need 4MP. 4K is 8.8MP. Are you using a 4K monitor? 8K will need 33MP and will start to become more popular in 2020. I believe the 2020 Olympics will be broadcast in 8K in Japan.

[ChristianRock]

What is the resolution of you monitor? Final output is really important. If you are printing on an Okidata 24 pin dot matrix printer you don't even need 4MP. 4K is 8.8MP. Are you using a 4K monitor? 8K will need 33MP and will start to become more popular in 2020. I believe the 2020 Olympics will be broadcast in 8K in Japan.

How did you know that this was my setup? You must be a clairvoyant!!





No, I don't have a 4K monitor yet and I don't print larger than 11x14. Though I have to say I have seen larger prints (don't remember size, 14x20 I think) that came from a D700 (12MP) that looked amazing. According to an article on the Circle of Confusion, the human eye can't distinguish more than 127 lines per inch anyway (5 lines per milimiter at a distance of 25cm) ... assuming a line is a color, that's 254DPI. So 300DPI has long been considered the standard that the human eye can distinguish even when pixel peeping.

And I think 4K is great but 8K is probably overkill for video because when you look at a whole picture at once, you can't see all the detail that is being shown. Only if you pixel peep on a corner your TV, so I see that in the near future, video artists will be replaced by video pixel peepers... God help us...

[disconnekt]

K1 is so good already for image quality, build quality and ergonomics. The emphasis needs to be with the details that add to the package:

Faster electronics and more memory - a given if Moore’s law is still valid - would give us:

• Higher frame rate
• Quicker data writing (UHS II)
• Quicker tethering with USB 3
• Hence ‘better’ video to tick that spec box

Adding this would make extended field use so much better:

• USB charging/power

And while at the electronics upgrade, add separate autofocus processor (function of accelerator chip?) to fix the AFC performance.

Keeping 36mp is fine for me, but offering a 24 and 48mp option should keep more people happy ;-)

My thought is close to yours. Pentax would do great having just 2 FF dslrs, a ~36MP camera & a 24mp camera with updated hardware/specs that are much needed (e.g. bigger buffer, more AF points/improved AF, usb-3, ush-II compatable).

Although I think they shouldn't try to straightout match the high-end dslr's (Nikon's D5, Canon's 1DX-II & Sony's A9) spec for spec in one go, but if they can get close to it in ~3 or so generations that would be great.

[neokind]

I was between the K1 and A7iii, and really did not want to add a new system. I don't use video, so that wasn't a consideration, but the primary advantages to me and the photos that I take or want to take were the Sony's excellent AF system, fast frame rate, and quick write speeds via UHS-II. What I miss are pixel shift and astrotracer, though I used the former sparingly and have never tried the latter but aspire to do so. I don't think that creating a new camera specifically to compete with the A7iii or any other specific camera model is an effective strategy, since it can limit innovation in pursuit of 'catching up.' I was originally drawn to Pentax because it created beautiful images with tough cameras and some really unique features. I like that they continue in that tradition, but would like just a little more effort put in to updating some of the other features that are mostly considered standard today.

I'm curious, since I do not know much about their numbers, but do they have a broad enough customer base to support two FF offerings? It'd be great if they could do that successfully. My entry into the system was through the K-x, but my next camera was the flagship (at the time) K3ii. They'd have plenty of people doing what I did.

[surfar]

do they have a broad enough customer base to support two FF offerings? It'd be great if they could do that successfully.

They are already doing it,K-1 the entry level FF and K-1ii,the super duper advanced model!

[neokind]

They are already doing it,K-1 the entry level FF and K-1ii,the super duper advanced model!

Not exactly what I had in mind...