[Adam]

Given the similarity and class of the K-1 and K-1 II, I'd expect feature-enhancing updates to continue for both, until the K-1 line ends. However, given that the K-1 has already gotten a lot of feature-enhancing updates, I wouldn't expect too much in that department for either body.

Speculation of course

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[rawr]

Firmware updates for the K-1 will probably run for about 4 years, looking at past form:

From what I can tell, the K-5 got four years of firmware updates 2010 to 2014 (v1.01 to v1.16), K-3 got updates 2013-2016 (v1.01 - v1.3), 645Z got firmware updates 2014-2017 (v1.10-v1.30). Even the modest K-x got three years of firmware updates from Pentax after launch (2009-2012 - v1.01 to v1.03).

Some of those firmware updates (eg to K-5 v1.01 and K-3 v1.02, v1.10, v1.3) added new features and capabilities and weren't just bug-fixes. K-1 has also been down a similar feature-adding path with v1.3, v1.4 firmware too.

And now that Ricoh has released some SDK's for the K-1, KP etc, some third party tools may evolve which expand the capabilities of Ricoh cameras without users having to rely on firmware to do it.

[awscreo]

I'm using firmware version 1.43, so far so good, it is stable. Mechanical sensor stabilization the Pentax K5 series had it but it added some noise to the sound of the video recording and it also drained battery power, so, for those two valid reasons Ricoh replaced the mechanical stabilization by software, which is just fine.

I understand the reasoning, but I did enjoy stabilized video a lot on my previous body, and since I use an external mic (via hotshot) the noise wouldnt matter to me that much

---------- Post added 06-10-18 at 02:33 PM ----------

Firmware updates for the K-1 will probably run for about 4 years, looking at past form:

From what I can tell, the K-5 got four years of firmware updates 2010 to 2014 (v1.01 to v1.16), K-3 got updates 2013-2016 (v1.01 - v1.3), 645Z got firmware updates 2014-2017 (v1.10-v1.30). Even the modest K-x got three years of firmware updates from Pentax after launch (2009-2012 - v1.01 to v1.03).

Some of those firmware updates (eg to K-5 v1.01 and K-3 v1.02, v1.10, v1.3) added new features and capabilities and weren't just bug-fixes. K-1 has also been down a similar feature-adding path with v1.3, v1.4 firmware too.

And now that Ricoh has released some SDK's for the K-1, KP etc, some third party tools may evolve which expand the capabilities of Ricoh cameras without users having to rely on firmware to do it.

That'd be awesome. It's a good feeling when a company that sold you an expensive product tries to keep said product up the date. When you get a smartphone, you expect updates past the release date, same with the computer os. We can see from other companies that it's possible to do with cameras too, fw releases are major news in other systems, they often breathe a bit of life into an older body. Stability is the most important thing, I agree. However, in 2018, and mostly dealing with software (for firmware update), I feel there are more things companies can do with the products post release. Fuji does it, olympus does it, Sony does it, magic lantern did it for Canon.

Maybe I come to it from a different perspective, being used to all the mobile devices and computers constantly introducing features and upgrading operating speed and reliability via updates.

In any rate, can't deny that fw updates are good, and we'd like more of them rather than less

[richandfleur]

I understand the reasoning, but I did enjoy stabilized video a lot on my previous body, and since I use an external mic (via hotshot) the noise wouldnt matter to me that much

Yeah, give it as an option, even disabled by default and with a warning waiver the user has to accept prior to enabling.
Honestly I'm not sure if the new SR system is capable in video mode. ie is there more to it than they're letting on. If it could be re enabled I'd like to think they would have done it by now.
Pity though, as it's working on 4 other companies now.

Maybe I come to it from a different perspective, being used to all the mobile devices and computers constantly introducing features and upgrading operating speed and reliability via updates.

I think that's the guts of the issue now. Electronic devices are a bunch of input sensors and output actuators,and it's the software determines how those toys are used
Once again, I'd like to think that if older hardware is capable of handling a new software development, that Pentax would push this out to it's users.
Many would argue that it doesn't make financial sense, but regardless it's the reality of the industry.
It certainly imparts confidence that the company will look after you and support your hardware purchase into the future.

---------- Post added 06-11-18 at 11:29 AM ----------

Ricoh replaced the mechanical stabilization by software, which is just fine.

With due respect, that's your opinion and others will vary...

[rawr]

Sony does it ...magic lantern did it for Canon

Let's not get carried away. The last Sony A6000 firmware update, for example, was in 2016, so even for that very popular camera Sony has only offered a mere two years of firmware support from the date it was released. And Magic Lantern did it for Canon despite Canon offering zero support for that initiative. Overall, Pentax isn't so bad in this area.

---------- Post added 2018-06-11 at 09:50 AM ----------

...Once again, I'd like to think that if older hardware is capable of handling a new software development, that Pentax would push this out to it's users.

If I was Ricoh [or Nikon. Or Sony. Or Olympus. Or Panasonic etc etc], I'd just open-source all the firmware for discontinued cameras two or three years after they ended production. Wouldn't impact sales, would be great.

[richandfleur]

Let's not get carried away. The last Sony A6000 firmware update, for example, was in 2016, so even for that very popular camera Sony has only offered a mere two years of firmware support from the date it was released. And Magic Lantern did it for Canon despite Canon offering zero support for that initiative. Overall, Pentax isn't so bad in this area.[COLOR="Silver"]

To be fair though, Sony brought a major capability increase to the A6000, adding the XAVC S video format at 50Mbps, when it was about a year and a half old.

I wouldn't look to Canon as an example of customer service, as they've done very little in this area.
As you say Magic Lantern wasn't anything to do with Canon themselves, and is instead an example of what aftermarket software developers can do for given hardware.

Leaders in this field look to be Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic, and there's certainly more Pentax could do.

[clackers]

To be fair though, Sony brought a major capability increase to the A6000, adding the XAVC S video format at 50Mbps, when it was about a year and a half old.

I wouldn't look to Canon as an example of customer service, as they've done very little in this area.
As you say Magic Lantern wasn't anything to do with Canon themselves, and is instead an example of what aftermarket software developers can do for given hardware.

Leaders in this field look to be Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic, and there's certainly more Pentax could do.

The issue, Rich, is that firmware can't do anything the hardware wasn't already capable of, so it would be better of you to ask Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic why they denied that to the original purchasers.

Perhaps they were aggressive in sales, and released those products before engineering were ready?

[richandfleur]

The issue, Rich, is that firmware can't do anything the hardware wasn't already capable of, so it would be better of you to ask Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic why they denied that to the original purchasers.

Perhaps they were aggressive in sales, and released those products before engineering were ready?

Oh fully agree, and aren't denying that. The recent K-1 mkii is an example of that, where firmware can't make up for a lack of physical hardware in earlier models.

Software is developing though, and features like hand based pixel shift could potentially be brought to older devices I would have thought?

It's a bit simplistic to say that everything that could be done on this hardware is known at the time of camera release. New developments and learnings mean software is always improving, and it's rewarding to see a company that is prepared to make future developments available to end users for free, where the hardware allows for it.

[monochrome]

Pentax isn’t really known for supporting older hardware with new features.

The likes of Fuji have made a name for this, and it really does install confidence thay they’re looking out for you, well beyond that initial sale period when they iron out the firmware bugs.

I believe Ricoh was once known for regular firmware updates also.

[awscreo]

The issue, Rich, is that firmware can't do anything the hardware wasn't already capable of, so it would be better of you to ask Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic why they denied that to the original purchasers.

Perhaps they were aggressive in sales, and released those products before engineering were ready?

They couldve pushed the release date to be competitive, and planned on improving product in future. There's always room to improve

[stevebrot]

Perhaps they were aggressive in sales, and released those products before engineering were ready?

It reads like you may have taken part in a few bug scrubs. Tomorrows firmware update is yesterday's feature that was not mature enough to release.


Steve

[stevebrot]

Software is developing though, and features like hand based pixel shift could potentially be brought to older devices I would have thought?

Assuming that those older models have the hardware to support the feature and the "hooks" to support the feature. I seem to remember some significant changes to the main processor board in the K-1 II. Firmware merely ties together chip functions. Our cameras have no operating system, no address space, and very limited IO options and available functionality is limited to how good a job the engineers did in anticipating stuff to expose.


Steve

[stevebrot]

They couldve pushed the release date to be competitive, and planned on improving product in future. There's always room to improve

They could have done a lot of things. K-cup support for one as well as custom body armor and brand-agnostic RF wireless flash and a modular body oriented to high end video. (I could fill a page with PF user's deal breaker features.)


Steve

[awscreo]

They could have done a lot of things. K-cup support for one as well as custom body armor and brand-agnostic RF wireless flash and a modular body oriented to high end video. (I could fill a page with PF user's deal breaker features.)


Steve

Whatever floats your boat Steve

[biz-engineer]

Avoid direct competition on price implies differentiation on the products, hence the universal problem of buying a camera and then noticing that other models have features that your own camera doesn't have while forgetting that your camera has features that other cameras don't have. In order to solve this problem, one would buy all camera models that have at least one feature that other models don't have.