[RockvilleBob]

I think it fair to say that the D7200 is a step below the K-3 in that it "only" offers 6fps, has a plastic/magnesium body, and no focus peaking (as well as lacking those Pentax-only unique features like pixel-shift, SR in body, and GPS/Astrotracer). Costs a bit more too.

This suggests to me that forthcoming Pentax K-1 FF will be likely be priced aggressively while offering similar specs as the D810 as well as offering Pentax-only unique features, making for a compelling value/price offering.

Michael

It is not just the 6 fps but the limited buffer size of the 7200. The attraction of the D500 to me is the autofocus system both in terms of potential capability and speed. In addition the D500 has what appears to be a phenomenal buffer system for continuous shooting. Potential because there has not been a review yet. If it was just the cost of the D500 to switch I would do it today. The cost of the D500 for a wildlife shooter is a pimple on the butt compared to the cost of buying a telephoto capable of using the autofocus capability of the D500 - about $12,000 just for the lens. I am waiting for the review of both the K1 and the D500 with regards to autofocus. My hope is the K1 autofocus is a significant improvement - enough of an improvement that has me waiting for the K3 follow on camera even though I am using the Sigma 500 4.5 with a screw drive.
Wouldn't it be nice if Pentax re-badged the HSM version of the Sigma 500 4.5 that also has the focus limiter not included with the K mount version of the Sigma 500. The Canon and Nikon versions of the Sigma 500 hare HSM with focus limiters.

[MJSfoto1956]

The cost of the D500 for a wildlife shooter is a pimple on the butt compared to the cost of buying a telephoto capable of using the autofocus capability of the D500 - about $12,000 just for the lens.

If I were to pick up an "800mm equivalent" lens these days it sure as heck wouldn't be something that would require a sherpa to haul around!
I'm expecting that 1" sensors will continue to improve. Currently the best of them deliver on par to the IQ of the old Nikon D200.

For whatever reason, M43 sensors haven't quite kept up the same improvement pace as either 1" or crop-sensor (DX) sensors have. However, if the next gen M43 sensor offers a significant improvement over current offerings, then pairing that with the new Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400mm f/4-6.3 lens might be an interesting solution.

Michael

[RockvilleBob]

If I were to pick up an "800mm equivalent" lens these days it sure as heck wouldn't be something that would require a sherpa to haul around!
I'm expecting that 1" sensors will continue to improve. Currently the best of them deliver on par to the IQ of the old Nikon D200.

For whatever reason, M43 sensors haven't quite kept up the same improvement pace as either 1" or crop-sensor (DX) sensors have. However, if the next gen M43 sensor offers a significant improvement over current offerings, then pairing that with the new Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400mm f/4-6.3 lens might be an interesting solution.

Michael

While very expensive the newly designed lenses are about 25% lighter than the previous design. The sherpa is needed to carry the money to buy the lens

[Spodeworld]

It's a step below in some respects, but a step above in terms of high ISO image quality (ISO 3200 images are definitely cleaner), AF tracking, video and for those who are big on flash, their creative lighting set up. So, it depends on what you value most and hard to say one is unequivocally a step up over the other.

I think it fair to say that the D7200 is a step below the K-3 in that it "only" offers 6fps, has a plastic/magnesium body, and no focus peaking (as well as lacking those Pentax-only unique features like pixel-shift, SR in body, and GPS/Astrotracer). Costs a bit more too.

This suggests to me that forthcoming Pentax K-1 FF will be likely be priced aggressively while offering similar specs as the D810 as well as offering Pentax-only unique features, making for a compelling value/price offering.

Michael

[john5100]

As someone who shoots concerts and events a lot with my K3, I can assure you that Todd Owyoung was using a flash during those D500 samples. Todd does a terrific job but not even a D750 or D4S would shoot that brightly and cleanly without additional light. I know the D500 will be fantastic however I doubt that it will clobber the K3.

Shooting Impressions: On Assignment With The Nikon D500 and SB-5000 - Photography Gear - ishootshows.com

[FantasticMrFox]

As someone who shoots concerts and events a lot with my K3, I can assure you that Todd Owyoung was using a flash during those D500 samples. Todd does a terrific job but not even a D750 or D4S would shoot that brightly and cleanly without additional light. I know the D500 will be fantastic however I doubt that it will clobber the K3.

Shooting Impressions: On Assignment With The Nikon D500 and SB-5000 - Photography Gear - ishootshows.com

I hope Pentax takes a look at the D500 and sources some ideas for the K3 II successor. It won't compete on that level but rather sit alongside the D7200, but it's still an APS-C flagship. Looking at the D500 the buttons on top of the control wheel look quite interesting. And please, give us a dedicated AF point selector joystick.

Other than that, a new 24 MP sensor with improved image quality (especially high ISO, but a bit more DR wouldn't hurt either), a vari-angle touchscreen, WiFi, GPS, between 8 and 10 fps, a faster processor, slightly increased buffer and hopefully better AF, with more AF points to cover more of the viewfinder (add a row and column on each side and you get 51 points, pretty much in line with the Canon 80D and Nikon D7200) and better AF.C. All of that in exactly the same body please

[john5100]

Sounds great FantasticMrFox

[crussellsprout]

Looking at the D500 the buttons on top of the control wheel look quite interesting.

Yes, although I'm not sure a dedicated button for 'image quality' aka JPEG compression is really necessary

[FantasticMrFox]

Yes, although I'm not sure a dedicated button for 'image quality' aka JPEG compression is really necessary

Maybe. It's a dedicated sports camera after all, made for speed in environments that require quick reactions. A lot of sports shooters shoot JPEG for higher speed, faster buffer clearing etc. Maybe there's something to it that we fail to consider

[slip]

I hope Pentax takes a look at the D500 and sources some ideas for the K3 II successor. It won't compete on that level but rather sit alongside the D7200, but it's still an APS-C flagship. Looking at the D500 the buttons on top of the control wheel look quite interesting. And please, give us a dedicated AF point selector joystick.

Other than that, a new 24 MP sensor with improved image quality (especially high ISO, but a bit more DR wouldn't hurt either), a vari-angle touchscreen, WiFi, GPS, between 8 and 10 fps, a faster processor, slightly increased buffer and hopefully better AF, with more AF points to cover more of the viewfinder (add a row and column on each side and you get 51 points, pretty much in line with the Canon 80D and Nikon D7200) and better AF.C. All of that in exactly the same body please

Just focus on autofocus, please
Joystick for autofocus would be great as well!

Randy

[RockvilleBob]

Yes please - just AF.C Autofocus and tracking that tracks. I could care less if it is 20 points, 120 points or 1 point; cross type or circular bulls eyes or trapezoidal 3D points; as long as it works on a par with Nikon and Canon.

[Uluru]

There is nothing that prevents Ricoh from making a killer APS-C camera. But, despite they had an opportunity, they never realised it.
K3II is fine, but Nikon 500 simply blows everything out of water. That kind of thinking Ricoh should have adopted and if they decided to wait and prolong their FF offer, their APS-C offer could have been the best in the world, and for once, deliver a pro-level APS-C camera. They have more crop lenses than anybody else.

But there is always something lacking, always some silly impediment, always some lame excuse, lack of will which keeps people off and wary of Pentax. All because there is no firm goal to establish themselves great or pro in anything, they solemnly stick to solid mediocrity. Therefore they are always overlooked. And that is why Fuji will get more and more attention than Pentax.

Ricoh sells far more APS-C cameras than FF cameras: if they decided to sit down for once, and make a killer AF for crop, they could use it in all their crop cameras at once and the market would gain all new confidence in the brand. But till they insist on idle Japanese approach of skimming and saving cents here and there by using ancient old tech; USB2. 11point AF. Etc. Users get a cheaper camera, but that is mediocre in everything, instead a modern and excelling camera which is still affordable thanks to economy of scale.

They can't even make economy of scale of own tech working for them — why doesn't K70 use K3 AF? Totally lost.

[Alex645]

There is nothing that prevents Ricoh from making a killer APS-C camera. But, despite they had an opportunity, they never realised it.
K3II is fine, but Nikon 500 simply blows everything out of water.
They can't even make economy of scale of own tech working for them — why doesn't K70 use K3 AF? Totally lost.

In theory that may be true, but in the reality there are plenty of things preventing this. Ricoh is a Japanese corporation that is considerably smaller than Nikon which is tiny compared to Canon. Giants like Samsung and Apple know the real profits is in cell phones, not DSLRs. The D500 replaced the D300 which was new in 2007; Nikon APS-C flagship owners that didnʻt jump ship to the D7000 series have been waiting 9 years! Comparing a $2000 D500 to a $650 K70 or $700 K3? Sure the D500 is awesome, but give me a K3 and $1300 for better glass any day.

Ricoh canʻt and isnʻt trying to compete with Canon or Nikon and would fail if they tried. Instead it seems clear that their identity and customer base wants value, weather-sealing, legacy glass, and innovation with features like Astrotracer or IBIS or pixel-shift, etc. Would all the sport shooters suddenly jump ship if Pentax improved AF? Would all the videographers toss their Lumix, Sony, and Canons for a Pentax with better video?

The reality is that Subaru makes very safe and reliable AWD vehicles. There is nothing preventing them from making a killer 2WD other than the market and what the brand represents. If Toyota, Honda, and Nissan abandoned their own successes, then Subaru could create something outside their brand. All I can say is that I appreciate that Ricoh has kept Pentax going when so many others have vanished.

Why doesnʻt K70 use K3 AF? So that youʻll buy a K3 or the eventual K2. The K70 is a notch above the K-S2, but wouldnʻt make sense if it surpassed a flagship APS-C of their own brand.

[rawr]

Ricoh is a Japanese corporation that is considerably smaller than Nikon which is tiny compared to Canon.

You may need to revise your perception of Ricoh. They have 110,000 employees after all. Not a small shop.

By most metrics (sales, employees etc), Ricoh is about 3 or 4 times larger than Nikon, but is still smaller than Canon in terms of sales.

[MJSfoto1956]

There is nothing that prevents Ricoh from making a killer APS-C camera. But, despite they had an opportunity, they never realised it.
K3II is fine, but Nikon 500 simply blows everything out of water.

Not sure I agree. A quick comparison shows that the two cameras are comparable yet address different markets. In fact, you could buy a K-3ii and a K-1 for "about" the same price as a D500. So I do think that Pentax have produced a quality pro camera system at a very affordable price point. There are many who recognize that and get it. There are others who love to show off their gear and perhaps are not a good fit for Pentax.

YMMV

Michael

---------- Post added 07-18-16 at 08:36 AM ----------

I might add that they could simply add the external LED lights, WiFi, touchscreen, and tilting screen from the K-1 and call it a day -- such a K-3iii would still address a viable market segment and be highly desirable.

M

I should add to the table that both cameras offer a "professional" shutter life of 200,000 actuations