[jon404]

Impressed by the new K-S2, found myself wondering when all those features will show up in a successor to the K5 IIs that I have, The K3 doesn't do it for me, and I'm not interested in the full-frame design that's on the way. Hoping that Pentax continues making their 'high-end' APS-C cameras... will they? Or will they just have a lineup that makes a jump from the K-S2 APS-C ... right to full frame, with no K5/K3 inbetween? What do you think?

[maleek]

I think it is bound to happen that a new APS-C flagship will be released, but maybe it will take more time, since Ricoh/Pentax put more effort into their upcoming full frame model. It will probably be as with their Q-line up, which I hope will continue, but was hinted in the recent interview is not top priority at the moment.

[rod_grant]

APS-C isn't dead yet, but Ricoh have a full year's work ahead of them with what they have announced.
I suspect the next APS-C won't be until 2016.


[edit] Maleek beat me with the 'maybe it take more time'.
BUT anything is possible...!

[geomez]

Pentax used to be on a two year flagship replacement cycle. I believe the K-5 II and IIs (which debuted two years after the K-5) were just placeholders for the K-3 (which came out a year later). It is very possible they'll once again refresh every two years and wait until next year. Plus, they probably don't want to compete against themselves with the K-S2 and FF coming this year.

[calsan]

The top of the line models actually tend to run behind the lower end models as far as feature adoption - no one wants untested features in a pro model.

[Barry Pearson]

Impressed by the new K-S2, found myself wondering when all those features will show up in a successor to the K5 IIs that I have, The K3 doesn't do it for me, and I'm not interested in the full-frame design that's on the way. Hoping that Pentax continues making their 'high-end' APS-C cameras... will they? Or will they just have a lineup that makes a jump from the K-S2 APS-C ... right to full frame, with no K5/K3 inbetween? What do you think?

There are 2 different approaches for a K-3 replacement. Some "minor upgrades" that can be done by copying technology from elsewhere, resulting an (say) K-3II. (Just as the K-5II(s) was a minor upgrade to the K-5). Or a major re-working, resulting in something promoted as an entirely new camera. (Like the K-3 replacing the entire K-5-series). They obviously have different development costs and timescales. Some arguments against a total replacement may not preclude a K-3II.

APS-C cameras and lenses are capable of very high quality. The K-3 can be used professionally, or for international class salons, etc. And an APS-C system will have size and weight (and price) advantages. I don't believe most APS-C users will aspire to an FF camera, certainly not in the next few years, if ever. I think Ricoh will develop and promote the APS-C range as viable with growth as people demand more and become experts for a long time.

(Personally, I expect to have the flagship FF camera and the flagship APS-C camera as alternatives and back-ups for one-another for years).

[mecrox]

There are plenty of things Ricoh could add or tweak for a K3 Mk II or a new successor - tilt screen, wifi/NFC, better AF and so forth. However, the two crucial items are the sensor and the Milbeaut processor. Maybe they'll wait for next-gen iterations of those and in the meantime tweak a few things via firmware updates?

[Class A]

The K3 doesn't do it for me, and I'm not interested in the full-frame design that's on the way.

What is it you don't like about the K-3?

I don't see the K-5 line to be continued. The future APS-C flagship model will surely be based on the K-3, perhaps with some of the new technology of the FF model trickled down.

[Adam]

I personally doubt that we'll see an APS-C successor until after the FF is released. If they do launch a replacement this year, it would be a minor upgrade (similar to the K-5 II when it was released).

The K-3 is a really good body as is and I think it's still very far from being obsolete since even the latest K-S2 doesn't have any newer tech (except for the built-in Wi-Fi).

[jddwoods]

I personally doubt that we'll see an APS-C successor until after the FF is released. If they do launch a replacement this year, it would be a minor upgrade (similar to the K-5 II when it was released).

The K-3 is a really good body as is and I think it's still very far from being obsolete since even the latest K-S2 doesn't have any newer tech (except for the built-in Wi-Fi).

I agree completely. Now that I have upgraded from K-10D to K-5 to K-3, I am getting the impression there is not much more that I need or want now that I have the K-3. This camera gives me all that I could want. More megapixels was definitely a need in my upgrade path, especially going from the K-10D to the K-5 but I cannot see any need for more than the K-3 has. About the only thing I would like on a K-3 successor is a weather sealed articulating screen and even that would not send me out on the upgrading path. For years to come, My K-3 and my K-5 as well should continue to give me all that I could want. Of course upgrading lenses or adding something new like the DFA 150 - 450 will always be on my wish list.

[spartan]

I agree with Adam.. FF will be the focus and not sure what I would need from another APSC beyond what we have in K3....Other than improved video...

[zmohie]

a new successor to k3 will take time as i think. k3 will stay at market for a long time as canon did with 7d. time and effort will be for the new full frame only and any thing else will be frozen untill Ricoh read the market carfully and decide the periorties.
my 2 cents.

[monochrome]

read the market carfully

Irony?

[orcaspirit]

Hi kids - I'm new here and I have a K200D. I quite like the camera & lenses and I bought it used. Good enough to get my first cover shot on our regional glossy mag - Pacific Yachting in Feb. 15. My question is I was thinking to upgrade to a K-3 or K-5 but the trouble is already have a camera that is 10.2 MP what is satisfactory for my needs for now but the K-3 has 24.4 MP where the K-5 is only 16 MP.

Maybe a newbie question: How come? I'd thought 24.4 MP would be better than the K-5 at 16 MP. i like to do low light if I can and a bought a 1.8 lens recently for scenic which is better for either end of the day. And the opportunity that crop up.

I'm not new to photography but digital maybe. I'm just trying to learn.

Many thanks,
OS

---------- Post added 02-27-15 at 03:21 PM ----------

Hi kids - I'm new here and I have a K200D. I quite like the camera & lenses and I bought it used. Good enough to get my first cover shot on our regional glossy mag - Pacific Yachting in Feb. 15. My question is I was thinking to upgrade to a K-3 or K-5 but the trouble is already have a camera that is 10.2 MP what is satisfactory for my needs for now but the K-3 has 24.4 MP where the K-5 is only 16 MP.

Maybe a newbie question: How come? I'd thought 24.4 MP would be better than the K-5 at 16 MP. i like to do low light if I can and a bought a 1.8 lens recently for scenic which is better for either end of the day. And the opportunity that crop up.

I'm not new to photography but digital maybe. I'm just trying to learn.

Many thanks,
OS

[Dieseler]

Maybe a newbie question: How come? I'd thought 24.4 MP would be better than the K-5 at 16 MP. i like to do low light if I can and a bought a 1.8 lens recently for scenic which is better for either end of the day. And the opportunity that crop up.

I'm not new to photography but digital maybe. I'm just trying to learn.

Many thanks,
OS

I would try for a K5II/s over a K5 for slightly better AF, although the K3 can be had for quite inexpensive prices now and has better AF again.

Do not worry about 16MP vs 24MP, in fact the 16MP sensor may be slightly better at low light.