[reh321]

If you focus on photography as opposed to camera equipment, you'll have no reason to be unhappy. Equipment doesn't matter much these days.

So, if a person knows from experience that he needs 6 fps with a buffer that will hold at least 20 'raw' images, which current-production Pentax camera should he purchase??

[c.a.m]

if a person knows from experience that he needs 6 fps with a buffer that will hold at least 20 'raw' images, which current-production Pentax camera should he purchase??

Of the current-production models, I think that only the K-1 or K-1 II meets that requirement by shooting in APS-C crop mode (6.5 fps, up to 50 frame buffer for RAW). The K-70 has a max frame rate of 6 fps and buffer limit of 10 RAW frames while the K-p is rated at 7 fps, buffer 8 frames RAW. The K-3 II exceeds the 6/20 requirement, but it's not in current production. The K-3 II may be available still from some dealers or Amazon (e.g., 6 units in stock today), or on the used market.

I think the conclusion would be that the requirement (6 fps/20 frame buffer and current production) could be met by the K-1 or K-1 II.

[RonHendriks1966]

So, if a person knows from experience that he needs 6 fps with a buffer that will hold at least 20 'raw' images, which current-production Pentax camera should he purchase??

He needs to learn to take the right moment to catch his frame instead of praying for a camera that maybe bring his frame.

[RobA_Oz]

IIRC KP wasn’t intended to be a Flagship body. It was intended to compete size and ergonomics wise with a APSc mirrorless when one of the three pancakes is mounted.

You do remember correctly – that was their clear intention at that time. I was speculating as to what they could do now, to maintain some presence in a rising-mirrorless segment, in the same way that they shifted from the larger film bodies in the K-series to the M-series, as a response to the Olympus OM bodies. I wasn’t suggesting that was the way they would move in the APS-C segment: rather, a way they could move.

The rest of your post there makes eminent sense to me, nonetheless.

[Larrymc]

IIRC KP wasn’t intended to be a Flagship body. It was intended to compete size and ergonomics wise with a APSc mirrorless when one of the three pancakes is mounted.

I imagine a flagship APSc will be a traditional body with a fixed, large grip to house a large battery, full external K-1 style controls, dual cards and some Pentax tweaks.

IMO the hold up is re-engineering the entire platform. I’d guess K-3ll was the end of the K-7 platform and we’ll get entirely new innards, a leap forward in AF, Video and processing speed. Such might require new component suppliers, such as ditching Socionext, developing and sourcing a new AF sensor, new bus tech, some co-processors (like the Accelerator Unit) and perhaps another major evolution of IBIS. A different sensor supplier is possible.

All of that would require ground-up new coding - ditching SAFOX altogether, for instance - and would set the direction for all three platforms for a decade. If they’re even talking about 645 mirrorless they have to be building the hooks into new base code and motherboard designs.

AFA ceasing K-3ll before a replacement is ready, I’d bet that’s due to a component supplier issue - they might simply have run out of a critical part and couldn’t obtain a short, small run at the right price.

It all can make some sense if you think about Pentax make a leapfrog move from the constraints of their elderly base code to something they can build on for a long time.

That’s a rational, positive take on it anyway.

Very astute, you sold me......but of course I,m an easy sale!

[leekil]

IIRC KP wasn’t intended to be a Flagship body. It was intended to compete size and ergonomics wise with a APSc mirrorless when one of the three pancakes is mounted.

But the KP doesn't seem so much different in size & weight than the K-3?

[monochrome]

But the KP doesn't seem so much different in size & weight than the K-3?

The KP body is thinner (not the grip - the main body) and the shoulders are lower. The K-3 grip is a major, undeniable difference. The K-mount of course is the same and the prisms make the overall heights the same, but that is deceptive. The KP body is shorter and thinner than the K-3.

Camerasize comparison

P

[reh321]

But the KP doesn't seem so much different in size & weight than the K-3?

When K-3 users say the KP is inadequate, size {of body and of buffer} are usually cited as reasons.
I have not handled it yet, but people who have usually say it feels smaller.

[RobA_Oz]

But the KP doesn't seem so much different in size & weight than the K-3?

The other replies have said most of it, but there's nearly a 100 gram difference between the two (the K-3ii is slightly lighter, so the difference is 80-odd grams), which isn't startling any way you look at it, but any reduction in the load on your neck or back is welcome, no matter how fit you might think you are.

However, that weight reduction is signified by the reduction in the overall appearance of bulkiness, with the KP.

Having said that, the mirror box and the glass pentaprism are always going to make a DSLR heavier than a MILC, all other things being equal. Only the development of a light-weight synthetic material with similar optical properties to glass is going to carve a substantial slice out of a DSLR weight.

Still, we can always hope for an interchangeable OVF/EVF model, too. Imagine having the option of a direct view onto the focussing screen, just like with the LX...

[biz-engineer]

So, if a person knows from experience that he needs 6 fps with a buffer that will hold at least 20 'raw' images, which current-production Pentax camera should he purchase??

Well, my K1 does 50 to 90 raws at 6.6 FPS (crop mode). I actually don't remember how many frame I can get from a continuous hi burst because I never reached the limit.

[repaap]

I'd say that APS-C status will change even more. K-3 -> K-1 what body is like. So that K-1 IS the flagship now, what K-3 was. I could see aps-c going where K-P is going and perhaps even slimmer to compete mirrorless things. More responsive and faster, while getting good image quality. That would make sense. I'd actually want to replace my K-3 and my OLY E5MII with little slimmer aps-c with pentax ergo and buttons where I like them to be. Touchscreen will come, at some point, just as it will be in GRIII. But that can be disabled for shooting in cold with cloves.

This is what I think ofcourse.

[Larrymc]

When K-3 users say the KP is inadequate, size {of body and of buffer} are usually cited as reasons.
I have not handled it yet, but people who have usually say it feels smaller.

The primary "rub" I have with the KP is the body ergonomics. The K-3 series has, for me, perfect ergonomics. The way the grip fits the fingers and the rear of the grip area fits the thumb with the raised area on the right side of the body is perfect. This makes for very comfortable holding until you are ready to bring the camera up to support it with both hands for a shot. I never saw the value in interchangeable grips.

[reh321]

Well, my K1 does 50 to 90 raws at 6.6 FPS (crop mode). I actually don't remember how many frame I can get from a continuous hi burst because I never reached the limit.

Crop mode on the K-1 is 16mp - I wonder how many users aren't willing to go back to that from 24mp.

[monochrome]

Crop mode on the K-1 is 16mp - I wonder how many users aren't willing to go back to that from 24mp.

FWIW I prefer 16Mp to 24Mp when shooting jpeg. I just don’t need the resolution unless I’m shooting RAW, in which case I shoot FF with FF lenses.

[c.a.m]

Crop mode on the K-1 is 16mp - I wonder how many users aren't willing to go back to that from 24mp.

Of course, it's impossible to know how many users would reject a 16 MP capability, even if their other requirements would be fully met.

Ricoh -- like all other camera/lens designers and manufacturers -- face requirement challenges, design trade-offs, and cost constraints, so compromises are inevitable. Similarly, almost all users face compromises on performance, features, price, or availability. If a user needs a 6 fps rate, 20-shot RAW buffer, and at least 24 MP, they may need to look at brands other than Pentax. Depending on the user's other strict requirements, finding a suitable camera in any brand might be difficult if not impossible.