[Rico]

Sounds more to me that your opinion claiming better image quality (a $500 better IQ upgrade ) is to justify your upgrade.. and that is fine. But lets face it, if you look for reviews MANY reviews, will show you that the MK2 IQ is not that much better than the original, and some even say (and show) that image detail decresed. But anyways that is not the point.. you claim that they had to use UHS II since they relese the camera (I agree with that), but IMO a quick momentary fix without messing too much with the camera hardware was to increse the buffer size to hold a little more momentary data before the buffer writes it to the memory card.. but this will be like a circle, you will keep talking about UHS II, i will keep talking about the buffer size.. End of story

I'll love to see a K1 style with a 24mp sensor sustancial improvements in AF-C and some speed, at a price to compete with the Sony A7iii.

kooks the problem with increasing buffer without moving to UHS-II will just drain the battery that much faster. Increasing the amount of images held in a larger buffer the faster the battery is drained. If they had used UHS-II would have increased the amount of images the battery could handle probably by a quarter to a third more as the images would not be held in the buffer for so long. At this point they shouldn't be moving to UHS-II they should just move right to UHS-III. But that aint happening so let's hope they at least go to UHS-II.

I have not seen any evidence image detail decreased for the K-1MKII. What the review sites all mistake is that the color noise in the K-1, D850, and A7R as ISO increases equals more detail which it is not it is just color noise. As ISO increases detail decreases for every camera. That is the nature of increased ISO. What the Accelerator Unit does is eliminates the noise while maintaining better continuous tone while holding better value. As ISO increases the Accelerator Unit holds better Black and White point values. This is abundantly clear in the Studio comparisons scenes at the various review sites.

[Andrea K]

24-90 f/4 might be a bit too much to ask but I wouldn't mind a newer version of the FA 24-90 f/3.5-4.5 with better optics.

Canon has a 24-70 f/4, a 24-105 f/4, Sony a 24-105 f/4, Nikon a 24-120 f/4... perhaps the 67mm filter size could be a problem, ok I can accept the 77mm but not other strange diameters

[Pikselisiirto]

Pentax K-1 gained attention because it has some great features for great price. I suspect that they had to make some compromises to do that. Next Pentax full frame camera is a choice battle for them between mirrorless and DSLR unless they find a way to include both. I don't know how Pentax could bring the lens closer to the sensor with that hybrid and it would require a different mount with new lenses? They just released the DFA*50 lens for DSLR and just don't see it happening considering Pentax's market position right now. Those are clear signs that they chose DSLR for the near future.


Generally stand-alone cameras lack a lot in software side when phone cameras are improving a lot in there. Pentax could make a difference by offering more versatile in-camera software to control the camera. They did some with K-1, but sadly many handy features are missing even though the camera itself probably could execute them. They released SDKs to make camera control apps which is a good thing, but it is unclear how much access you can get.

I just hope that Pentax stays as specialized camera manufacturer because bringing clones cameras of Canon, Nikon or Sony will not work. It would be all about the price and the preferences then. Doing something which those three won't or can't offer is the way to survive as we saw with K-1.

[texandrews]

Pentax K-1 gained attention because it has some great features for great price. I suspect that they had to make some compromises to do that. Next Pentax full frame camera is a choice battle for them between mirrorless and DSLR unless they find a way to include both. I don't know how Pentax could bring the lens closer to the sensor with that hybrid and it would require a different mount with new lenses? They just released the DFA*50 lens for DSLR and just don't see it happening considering Pentax's market position right now. Those are clear signs that they chose DSLR for the near future.


Generally stand-alone cameras lack a lot in software side when phone cameras are improving a lot in there. Pentax could make a difference by offering more versatile in-camera software to control the camera. They did some with K-1, but sadly many handy features are missing even though the camera itself probably could execute them. They released SDKs to make camera control apps which is a good thing, but it is unclear how much access you can get.

I just hope that Pentax stays as specialized camera manufacturer because bringing clones cameras of Canon, Nikon or Sony will not work. It would be all about the price and the preferences then. Doing something which those three won't or can't offer is the way to survive as we saw with K-1.

You bring up software in an interesting way, so I'd suggest that Pentax could get a lot of bang for its buck by spending R&D money of software development, both in camera and with its software for PP, tethering, and apps. They seem to have seen the light with the Theta, opening it up for development by outside developers. It also seems like at Pentax the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.

Question: anyone know why the Japanese seem to be so behind the beat with software development generally?

Personally, I think lenses and a high end "sport" APS-C body should be much higher on the priority list.

I'm not going to sift through the already 9 pages of posts in case someone has already said this, but that's going to be a tall order for Pentax/Ricoh and we all know it.

I wonder if it would be better to target the smallest full frame DSLR in the style of the KP or similar, to give them a USP of sorts. They're not going to overtake everyone on a sports camera, and I can only see the business case there being to try and make something competitive, but then undercut rivals. Not the best position to be in for profit it would seem.

An approachable full frame for consumers with 'enough' hardware controls and a not overly large/heavy body could be a route not explored yet?

[kooks]

An approachable full frame for consumers with 'enough' hardware controls and a not overly large/heavy body could be a route not explored yet?

Kind of what Sony just did with the a7iii.. that at this time is selling extremley well because of features/price

Kind of what Sony just did with the a7iii.. that at this time is selling extremley well because of features/price

A bit rich for most though, a 'KF' if you will, compact but able to trade blows with the D610/6D2 on price and quality (the D610 is particularly cheap at the minute), while offering the OVF and rugged build Pentax are famous for I would see as having a fighting chance of differentiating itself from the CaNikony alternatives. Though of course with Sony's current business model, you could opt for the Mk1 or Mk for mouth-wateringly good prices (£749 and £1199 with kit lenses!) so they would probably need to include the K-1II sensor to make it tempting, and that may not be viable...

I just can't see that happening with a Pentax 'sports ready' full frame, there are three other players (four if you count Olympus and the EM1-2) in that area already and I can't see them getting enough of a lead to jump ahead and carve out their own piece of the pie. A self-calibration facility for AF would be appreciated though, I'm sure I heard Nikon offer something like that.

[beli_delfin]

Sensor-wise Pentax seems to depend on Sony. 36mpix is fine and Pentax has proved that can get clean, noise-free picture from it. But pixel count is market-driven category, so for top-tier camera pixel increase could be mandatory.
Other fields, that need to be improved are processing power and energy- efficiency (contradictory), for better battery life.
But real surprise would be exchangeable viewfinder to high-resolution, 4mpix EVF. God-send feature for manual focusing and critical focus. In same time, Pentax would get some kind of "mirrorless" dslr without need to change much. Current mirrorless hype with new mounts/ lenses is market driven. It is not necessary to create new mount with shorter register distance to produce "better" lenses. Zeiss, Sigma and all other manufacturers have proven this. Lenses for mirrorless cameras are not necessary smaller and lighter, especiall high-quality wise. Also cameras are not necessary lighter/ smaller because of ergonomics and current k-1 is just fine.
Upgradability of k-1 from mkI to mkII is a nice touch and should be continued. Just perhaps not for such hefty price- brand loyality should be rewarded.
Next mk III should have of course even better pixel-shift. It is very strong feature, also marketing wise. Perhaps Pentax should market this feature even more.
Pentax has become niche-brand, so for survival it should concentrate on highest quality and smaller number of cameras. One full- frame dslr and one aps-c model is enough, especially with upgrade possibilities. Keep and enhance Ricoh GR and weather-proof compact. Big question is what to do with 645 system. And persuade big lens manufacturers, especially Zeiss, Sigma and Tamron to reintroduce their lenses in PK mount. The rest is a job for Pentax marketing department.

[kooks]

And persuade big lens manufacturers, especially Zeiss, Sigma and Tamron to reintroduce their lenses in PK mount. The rest is a job for Pentax marketing department.

IMO in order to do this Ricoh needs a new FF that proves to have really improved AF, top class video features and great IQ/DR.. At the time K1 was a great move, but it is not enough now days.. Sigma or Tamron will not come to a brand that doesn't provide something massive/generic so they can get profit out of it, at this poing Pentax is too nichy for them. Few years ago, people were jumping ships to Sony because they were able to use their lenses in with a smaller body, but now is not only that, now Sony is packing their cameras with lots of great generic features ( great AF, great video, etc ), and the thing is that general consumers are really interested in that features, having Pixel Shift is nice, but to be honest it is not a feature that many people will use (I have use it only once since i got my K1 two years ago), same as the astrotracer feature, which are really really nice features to have.. but IMO too nichy for Sigma & Tamron to be part of the game.. But if Pentax release a more generic FF camera with top features that people will use often, well, that would be another story. The thing is that they have to do it fast, and not to wait until the brand have nothing left.

[surfar]

The rest is a job for Pentax marketing department.

Ha Ha Ha...thats a good one.

[Wasp]

Does Pentax even have a marketing department...?

[surfar]

Does Pentax even have a marketing department...?

No, but RI have...you walk past the cleaners room at RI then first on left you will find that marketing guy.He will have a cleaners uniform on because he helps them out when someone calls in SIC!

[sutherland]

The only improvement I'm looking for is a D500 type APS-c body.

100% agreed.

[lotech]

I would like to have the following on the next FF or APS-? model :

1. Faster and more accurate AF
2. IR AF assist light, no reddish or Martian greenish light ok !
3. Back-lited buttons and dials, and red/flash to indicate error/warning
4. Top OLED matrix display, can be changed via FW update
5. Integrated vertical grip with stronger battery

6.Charging and data via USB-C

[Mikesul]

This has probably already been said by somebody but I hope they wait a good long time before introducing a new ff body. The K-1 and K-1ii give us all we need if not all we want. But lenses will fill out the system and provide the stability needed to attract more users. K-1 already does everything a still photographer really needs, even action if you know what you are doing.