New Pentax KP review

slartibartfast01 · 11-27-2019, 04:04 AM - **1 Like**

This is a bit strange. Why on earth would a review of the KP be published now (4 days ago)?

Pentax KP review | Digital Camera World

Bertrand3000 · 11-27-2019, 05:48 AM

It's odd indeed. Besides the review is saying that the KP is twice as costly than the K-70. While this may have been true in the past, it's not the case anymore.

**ffking** · 11-27-2019, 06:05 AM

very odd review too - very non-real-word

reh321 · 11-27-2019, 07:15 AM

Originally posted by Bertrand3000

It's odd indeed. Besides the review is saying that the KP is twice as costly than the K-70. While this may have been true in the past, it's not the case anymore.

Prices change daily, especially at this time of year. More to the point, if a consumer grade camera is adequate, then get a K-70. If someone needs ‘more’, then get a KP.

**luftfluss** · 11-27-2019, 08:06 AM

That review is dumb.

**Cerebum** · 11-27-2019, 10:23 AM

I suspect it is an old review that has been re published. They clearly didn't get the camera

7.62lew · 11-27-2019, 11:40 AM

Originally posted by Cerebum

I suspect it is an old review that has been re published. They clearly didn't get the camera

I do believe you are right about this being an old review as I remember seeing it a while back with a 2017 review date on it.

redmenace · 11-27-2019, 11:45 AM

Could also be a marketing tie-in to raise brand awareness around upcoming holiday sales.

**mikesbike** · 11-27-2019, 03:29 PM

Originally posted by redmenace

Could also be a marketing tie-in to raise brand awareness around upcoming holiday sales.

Probably. But instead they have promoted brand/model unawareness.

**NomNamNom** · 11-27-2019, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by luftfluss

That review is dumb.

This is what I thought while reading it last night. The complaint on the battery life was only based on the company quote as well.. I've experienced a lot more that that over a few hours.

**RGlasel** · 11-27-2019, 04:02 PM

Originally posted by Cerebum

I suspect it is an old review that has been re published. They clearly didn't get the camera

If you mean a general lack of understanding by "didn't get," you could be right and this quote makes me think you might be right about this being an old review: "we’re left thinking Pentax should now invest in rationalising and modernising its lens range, not launching new cameras."

Originally posted by ffking

very odd review too - very non-real-word

Just to flesh out the oddness here is a quote from the review: "Our KP was supplied with a Pentax 20-40mm f/2.8-4 ED ‘Limited’ lens, which highlights the variation in autofocus performance across the Pentax range. This lens has a built-in autofocus motor, but it’s quite noisy. " Who knows what is meant by "variation" and this is the first time the DA 20-40 Limited has been described as "quite noisy."

reh321 · 11-28-2019, 06:39 AM

Originally posted by RGlasel

If you mean a general lack of understanding by "didn't get," you could be right and this quote makes me think you might be right about this being an old review: "we’re left thinking Pentax should now invest in rationalising and modernising its lens range, not launching new cameras." Just to flesh out the oddness here is a quote from the review: "Our KP was supplied with a Pentax 20-40mm f/2.8-4 ED ‘Limited’ lens, which highlights the variation in autofocus performance across the Pentax range. This lens has a built-in autofocus motor, but it’s quite noisy. " Who knows what is meant by "variation" and this is the first time the DA 20-40 Limited has been described as "quite noisy."

I could view the 18-135mm as an appropriate ‘kit’ lens, but not the 20-40mm. On the other hand, when the KP first came out, Pentax did say that it’s size was a perfect match to ‘limited’ lenses.

wed7 · 12-01-2019, 11:19 PM

Woe to the reviewer and to the site as well. But who knows? Maybe it is Ricoh's marketing department finally doing its presence

If the DA 20-40 is noisy, how much more with the old DA's?

Very odd indeed.

Cheers.

11-27-2019, 04:04 AM - 1 Like	#1
slartibartfast01 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,931	New Pentax KP review This is a bit strange. Why on earth would a review of the KP be published now (4 days ago)? Pentax KP review \| Digital Camera World

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
KP vs K-70 - to KP or not to KP, that is the question	OldChE	Pentax DSLR Discussion	28	11-02-2019 05:29 AM
KP Overheating? To KP or not...	MrStupid	Pentax KP	28	07-12-2018 09:50 PM
Amazing KP deal at Jessops! KP and 18-50 for £599	Jeff	Pentax Price Watch	25	07-10-2018 12:59 PM
First Three Days with Kay Pi (KP) - KP vs. K-1 - infos and settings	acoufap	Pentax KP	10	05-27-2018 09:09 PM
Pentax KP - Review by Digital Photography Review	Mistral75	Pentax KP	57	03-31-2017 07:23 AM

11-27-2019, 05:48 AM	#2
Bertrand3000 Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2019 Posts: 2,009	It's odd indeed. Besides the review is saying that the KP is twice as costly than the K-70. While this may have been true in the past, it's not the case anymore.

11-27-2019, 06:05 AM	#3
ffking Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Old South Wales Posts: 6,038	very odd review too - very non-real-word

11-27-2019, 07:15 AM	#4
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,181	Originally posted by Bertrand3000 It's odd indeed. Besides the review is saying that the KP is twice as costly than the K-70. While this may have been true in the past, it's not the case anymore. Prices change daily, especially at this time of year. More to the point, if a consumer grade camera is adequate, then get a K-70. If someone needs ‘more’, then get a KP.

11-27-2019, 08:06 AM	#5
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	That review is dumb.

11-27-2019, 10:23 AM	#6
Cerebum Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: Lancaster Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,829	I suspect it is an old review that has been re published. They clearly didn't get the camera

11-27-2019, 11:40 AM	#7
7.62lew Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: North Carolina Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,192	Originally posted by Cerebum I suspect it is an old review that has been re published. They clearly didn't get the camera I do believe you are right about this being an old review as I remember seeing it a while back with a 2017 review date on it.

11-27-2019, 11:45 AM	#8
redmenace Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: dfw.tx.us Photos: Gallery Posts: 296	Could also be a marketing tie-in to raise brand awareness around upcoming holiday sales.

11-27-2019, 03:29 PM	#9
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,552	Originally posted by redmenace Could also be a marketing tie-in to raise brand awareness around upcoming holiday sales. Probably. But instead they have promoted brand/model unawareness.

11-27-2019, 03:33 PM	#10
NomNamNom Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Minneapolis, MN Photos: Gallery Posts: 235	Originally posted by luftfluss That review is dumb. This is what I thought while reading it last night. The complaint on the battery life was only based on the company quote as well.. I've experienced a lot more that that over a few hours.

11-27-2019, 04:02 PM	#11
RGlasel Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Saskatoon Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,228	Originally posted by Cerebum I suspect it is an old review that has been re published. They clearly didn't get the camera If you mean a general lack of understanding by "didn't get," you could be right and this quote makes me think you might be right about this being an old review: "we’re left thinking Pentax should now invest in rationalising and modernising its lens range, not launching new cameras." Originally posted by ffking very odd review too - very non-real-word Just to flesh out the oddness here is a quote from the review: "Our KP was supplied with a Pentax 20-40mm f/2.8-4 ED ‘Limited’ lens, which highlights the variation in autofocus performance across the Pentax range. This lens has a built-in autofocus motor, but it’s quite noisy. " Who knows what is meant by "variation" and this is the first time the DA 20-40 Limited has been described as "quite noisy."

11-28-2019, 06:39 AM	#12
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,181	Originally posted by RGlasel If you mean a general lack of understanding by "didn't get," you could be right and this quote makes me think you might be right about this being an old review: "we’re left thinking Pentax should now invest in rationalising and modernising its lens range, not launching new cameras." Just to flesh out the oddness here is a quote from the review: "Our KP was supplied with a Pentax 20-40mm f/2.8-4 ED ‘Limited’ lens, which highlights the variation in autofocus performance across the Pentax range. This lens has a built-in autofocus motor, but it’s quite noisy. " Who knows what is meant by "variation" and this is the first time the DA 20-40 Limited has been described as "quite noisy." I could view the 18-135mm as an appropriate ‘kit’ lens, but not the 20-40mm. On the other hand, when the KP first came out, Pentax did say that it’s size was a perfect match to ‘limited’ lenses.

12-01-2019, 11:19 PM	#13
wed7 Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Manila, Philippines Posts: 1,421	Woe to the reviewer and to the site as well. But who knows? Maybe it is Ricoh's marketing department finally doing its presence If the DA 20-40 is noisy, how much more with the old DA's? Very odd indeed. Cheers.