[WPRESTO]

Just in case the designers are listening (which I sincerely doubt), I will enter a vote for any kind of tilting screen: simple up/down; flip to the side for tilt/swivel; K1 style. The specific design makes no difference so long as it is there.

[virusn3t]

Just in case the designers are listening (which I sincerely doubt), I will enter a vote for any kind of tilting screen: simple up/down; flip to the side for tilt/swivel; K1 style. The specific design makes no difference so long as it is there.

Agreed, but the moon lander looks more cool and pro with the metal support and rods than the flippy screen of the KS series i dont have any of the KS so i think it made out of polycarbonate aka plastic

[disconnekt]

Flippy tilty screen, deeper buffer (at least 50% increase), UHS-II compatible, ISO 50 (wishfull thinking), something similar to Olympus's "Live Time"

[FantasticMrFox]

In the established Pentax product cycle of major upgrade, minor upgrade, major upgrade, minor upgrade (K5, K5 II, K3, K3 II) we're in for a major upgrade, so here's what I would like (albeit not expect) to see:

Better high ISO and DR - while the resolution increased from the K5 II to the K3, there seems to have been no palpable improvements in image quality (high ISO noise and DR) since the K5, DxO Mark rates all K5 series cameras higher than the K3 series. Sony (A6300) and Nikon (D500) have made major strides, with the latter getting close to FF quality, so Pentax better pump out something impressive here.

More AF points - Add a row on top and on the bottom each and a column on either side of the current array for a wider coverage. The current AF module only covers about the centre portion of the screen, more would really be helpful in order to not have to recompose as much (can screw up focus with fast apertures and shallow DOF) or keep a subject in focus when tracking.

AF point selector - Don't know why Pentax can't do what Canon and Nikon have been doing for a long time, i.e. add a dedicated joystick to select AF points instead of having to press a button to change the settings of the four way pad.

More consistent and faster AF.C - I've said it before (and got a lot of flak from some users) and I'll say it again: in terms of AF.C, even perfectly simple single-point on a predictably approaching target on the z-axis, Pentax is generations behind the competition, and the K-1 seems like only a minor improvement. If Pentax want to stay relevant, they absolutely need to make major strides here. They don't need to lead the pack and likely never will, which is okay, because their strengths are in other areas, but if they don't do something soon they will be left in the dust.

Deeper buffer - The K3 (+II) has a pretty fast frame rate (8.3 fps officially, DPR even measured close to 9 fps), but the buffer only holds 22 RAW files, so gives up after less than 3 sec. Doesn't need to be the 10 sec. the D500 can do, but for many situations more would still be better. Something like 5 sec.

Faster write/read speed - For faster clearing of the buffer and writing on SD cards.

Better connectivity - USB 3, WiFi/Bluetooth etc.

Better video - Yes, Pentax isn't the brand for the aspiring videographer, but 1080p at 30p is just completely outdated. 4K would be the way to go, but at least make it true 60p with better AF during video and additional features.

Adjustable screen - Personally I'd prefer the K-S2/K70 style over the K-1 execution, but either will do.

What can stay the same:

Resolution - For now 24 MP seems to be the sweet spot for APS-C. Nikon even went lower with 20 MP in the D500 for best image quality and to make it the speed monster that it is.

Frame rate - As mentioned above, the K3's frame rate is pretty fast, fast enough really for anything but the most intense sports and action. As the K3 can only deliver about 5 fps in AF.C with constant refocusing anyway (and still churns out loads of out-of-focus shots) a faster frame rate is hardly needed.

Body - The K3's body design is almost perfect, so not much to change here.

Menus - Reviewers often slander Pentax' menu structure, but I think it's great.

SR magic - Shake reduction, astrotracing, pixelshift etc. all seem pretty thought out, so no major improvements needed here.

[totsmuyco]

In the established Better high ISO and DR - while the resolution increased from the K5 II to the K3, there seems to have been no palpable improvements in image quality (high ISO noise and DR) since the K5, DxO Mark rates all K5 series cameras higher than the K3 series. Sony (A6300) and Nikon (D500) have made major strides, with the latter getting close to FF quality, so Pentax better pump out something impressive here

Totally agree.

[bobbotron]

If it were an incremental improvement on some of the big areas, that'd be great in my books. You guys want a lot. :P

[RonHendriks1966]

In the established Pentax product cycle of major upgrade, minor upgrade, major upgrade, minor upgrade (K5, K5 II, K3, K3 II) we're in for a major upgrade, so here's what I would like (albeit not expect) to see:

Better high ISO and DR - while the resolution increased from the K5 II to the K3, there seems to have been no palpable improvements in image quality (high ISO noise and DR) since the K5, DxO Mark rates all K5 series cameras higher than the K3 series. Sony (A6300) and Nikon (D500) have made major strides, with the latter getting close to FF quality, so Pentax better pump out something impressive here.

More AF points - Add a row on top and on the bottom each and a column on either side of the current array for a wider coverage. The current AF module only covers about the centre portion of the screen, more would really be helpful in order to not have to recompose as much (can screw up focus with fast apertures and shallow DOF) or keep a subject in focus when tracking.

AF point selector - Don't know why Pentax can't do what Canon and Nikon have been doing for a long time, i.e. add a dedicated joystick to select AF points instead of having to press a button to change the settings of the four way pad.

More consistent and faster AF.C - I've said it before (and got a lot of flak from some users) and I'll say it again: in terms of AF.C, even perfectly simple single-point on a predictably approaching target on the z-axis, Pentax is generations behind the competition, and the K-1 seems like only a minor improvement. If Pentax want to stay relevant, they absolutely need to make major strides here. They don't need to lead the pack and likely never will, which is okay, because their strengths are in other areas, but if they don't do something soon they will be left in the dust.

Deeper buffer - The K3 (+II) has a pretty fast frame rate (8.3 fps officially, DPR even measured close to 9 fps), but the buffer only holds 22 RAW files, so gives up after less than 3 sec. Doesn't need to be the 10 sec. the D500 can do, but for many situations more would still be better. Something like 5 sec.

Faster write/read speed - For faster clearing of the buffer and writing on SD cards.

Better connectivity - USB 3, WiFi/Bluetooth etc.

Better video - Yes, Pentax isn't the brand for the aspiring videographer, but 1080p at 30p is just completely outdated. 4K would be the way to go, but at least make it true 60p with better AF during video and additional features.

Adjustable screen - Personally I'd prefer the K-S2/K70 style over the K-1 execution, but either will do.

What can stay the same:

Resolution - For now 24 MP seems to be the sweet spot for APS-C. Nikon even went lower with 20 MP in the D500 for best image quality and to make it the speed monster that it is.

Frame rate - As mentioned above, the K3's frame rate is pretty fast, fast enough really for anything but the most intense sports and action. As the K3 can only deliver about 5 fps in AF.C with constant refocusing anyway (and still churns out loads of out-of-focus shots) a faster frame rate is hardly needed.

Body - The K3's body design is almost perfect, so not much to change here.

Menus - Reviewers often slander Pentax' menu structure, but I think it's great.

SR magic - Shake reduction, astrotracing, pixelshift etc. all seem pretty thought out, so no major improvements needed here.

That is a nice list. Personally I think that maybe a small upgrade as K-3iii could be coming before a big upgrade. These things take time and that time is been consumed with K-1.

[Nicolas06]

That is a nice list. Personally I think that maybe a small upgrade as K-3iii could be coming before a big upgrade. These things take time and that time is been consumed with K-1.

I'd suspect more change than a K3-III if history is any indication. K3 vs K5 was a major change as K5 vs K7. On the contrary K5-II vs K5 was just low light AF and K3-II vs K3 was just GPS and pixel shift. I'll not buy a K3-III in term of feature with just a bigger buffer or tweaking to get same AF as in K1, honestly.

I suspect we will get a K70/KS2/K1 mix that is an articulated screen of some sort, maybe the third whell and ergonomics of K1 and a new sensor, maybe the one of K70. The AF algorithms unfortunately may not be better than the K1. And of course wifi.

But if it is only that, honestly that mean there basically now reason to buy one. We also need significantly better AFC too as well as significantly better high iso to make the thing really differentiate itself. For the sensor I am afraid, Pentax has an history of keeping sensor for long time and using more basic one than the flagship competition. For example D810 has 50iso mode and A6300 is BSI...

For AF, they should go past this 33 AF point PDAF. They need 50+ point with a wider area covered in the frame and further tweaked AF algorithms that simply perform better.

I agree that in the end, the K3-II successor should have D500 has objective, not K3-III, otherwise that will not sell well and with K3-II that will be not much more than 600€/$ to buy, it would not help Ricoh one bit on the financial part.

But ultimately, this is not a K3 successor, but I wait for something that would be a mirrorless K-mount with good AF and with small/light profile. 400-500g instead of 700-800g.

[reh321]

.... But ultimately, this is not a K3 successor, but I wait for something that would be a mirrorless K-mount with good AF and with small/light profile. 400-500g instead of 700-800g.

As I've said multiple times here, I expect MILC to eventually predominate in lower end ILC, but I'd be surprised if it has much of a presence in higher end during my lifetime {I'm 68 already}. The type of person who buys top-end APS-C wants a large body to offset long lenses {no one seems to know how to hold a camera two-handed anymore} and doesn't trust EVF.

[totsmuyco]

A K-3 II successor that would have the specs and performance of a d500 will be a k-3III on steroids.

Man, to get a Pentax camera equivalent to a d500 at the price of the K-3II is a steal.

[Nicolas06]

As I've said multiple times here, I expect MILC to eventually predominate in lower end ILC, but I'd be surprised if it has much of a presence in higher end during my lifetime {I'm 68 already}. The type of person who buys top-end APS-C wants a large body to offset long lenses {no one seems to know how to hold a camera two-handed anymore} and doesn't trust EVF.

You know highend MILC are already here: A7 familly and the MF from hasselblad and if I admit you didn't write this from even, you actually lived long enough to see it. For high end APSC there A6300 and Fuji line.

As for your life expectensy, counting only your actual age 68, it is around 15 years for a man, 17 years for a woman. This is actually more than the life expectency you actually hear everywhere because it is the life expectency of somebody that was just born. And you at already 68 years, not knowing if you have any illness or anything like that and knowing you made it far up to 68 and avoided many cause of death we can expenct you to live by 83 to 85 years. And there a non negligible likelyness you could live a few years more... let say 5.

Lot of things can change in 20 years. 20 years ago there was no digital camera, no smartphone and no internet. By 20 years from now it could be very well that drones controled by our brain will take photos, we may almost all have automatic cars and robots everywhere...

[ivorianebony]

they should rather do a K-5 III then a K-3. really.

just look at that thing and place a K-5 aside...

where is functionality at home and where is "i want to impress" at home...?


I only like a few things about the K-3:

mode dial, top-LCD, the way you alter the AF and AE settings.
(despite the fact that the "AF-mode" button could sit on the levers knob.)

[Nicolas06]

they should rather do a K-5 III then a K-3. really.

just look at that thing and place a K-5 aside...

where is functionality at home and where is "i want to impress" at home...?


I only like a few things about the K-3:

mode dial, top-LCD, the way you alter the AF and AE settings.
(despite the fact that the "AF-mode" button could sit on the levers knob.)

Everybody has different need. I had a K5, the AF was soso overall and really terrible in low light. Actual high iso performance didn't matter because the subject was not properly in focus. Getting a shallow dof portrait right was also a challenge you asked the camera to focus on the eyes it could focus on the ear or on the nose... Then I brough a K3. The AF is fast all the time and perform well in low light. My portraits have the focus were I want it. For me this is the most important difference by far.

Now the 24MP + no low pass filter also mean that before if I was to crop, I had less margin, it would start to show On the K3 the image stay sharp. This is not big, but that's conveniant. More important maybe for sharpness, it make all you lenses much sharper. People will spend thousand euros over marginally sharper lenses... But at take the 18-135 at f/8 at 31mm on the K3 and an FA31 on the K5, and you'll see the 18-135 on the K3 give you sharper image. I don't care that much but many care.

For high iso, K3 maybe a bit behind but it depend a lot of the scene. K3 high iso stay sharp much longer than K5 and you can use your prefered noise removal software to fix the noise.

And of course there the other small stuff: 2 SD cards, camera is more responsive, live view work better, white balance and exposure are more accurate...

My personal view is that I certainly don't want to go back.

[hologram]

For the K3-ii successor.

Sharper images would be nice as i find that pentax images were always rather soft. Especially when you have the Nikon d500 at 20mpix and the only real improvement to the d500 was that they installed the D5 processing hardware into it.

Better AF as my k70 performs better than my K3 atm. Also group AF selections feature the nikon d500 has is most useful.

Dual memory card. XQD would be nice however there are so few xqd card readers for the amount of time XQD has been around that it might not be worth it. However for raw burst something with better buffer and data transfer speeds would be preferable.

Weather sealing is a must.

Keep and or improve the 5 axis IBIS.

Pixel shift.

Built in flash, just in case.

No GPS

The K-1 Stilt Screen i guess is ok but not the most EDC design if you want to monitor more selfie style photos and or video.

Wifi? Debatable and would depend on the connectivity and GUI.

Otherwise the K3 body and lens mount i wouldn't change. Although all the trouble with third party lenses not willing to make or offer the K-mount upgrade for their lenses. I would like to use more than one of the Sigma Art series lenses on my pentax cameras (sore point).

I guess that's about it. The K3 is already a good camera and the K-1 is a bit of a disappointment with its obviously restricted version of the sony A7R-II sensor.

I am pleased with my k-70 and to be blunt it's the only thing that has kept my interest in Pentax and not getting a Nikon d500.

There needs to be improvements to both the K-3 and the K-1. I don't care for sensor/camera performance limiting mierly so that it won't effect Sony cameras sales. There isn't enough competition in the digital camera sensor market atm.

Having tested the Sigma SD Quattro for about a week including high iso scaling it's difficult to resist buying one and i have a SD-1 Merrill. The foveon x3 noise issues are just about a thing of the past. Also the Sigma version of Pixel shift is so much better than the pentax version. Not to mention the chromatic aberration fix mode on the sigma is most useful for those lenses with the chromatic problems. The "H" model of the Sigma SD Quattro mirrorless camera shouldn't have a problem with noise even at 44.8mpix.

Just a thought, no need to go ballistic on me.

---------------------------------------------
Pentaxian *digivolve to* Ricohnian.

[Nicolas06]

For the K3-ii successor.

[...] Blablabla.... Describe a mix between K3 and K3-II and how tempted he is on Sigma foveon

Really but then why do we need a new camera? It already exist it is called K3 or K3-II depending of the flavor... As if you prefer a foveon from sigma? Why not just buy one, honestly ? Myself I would have absolutely no issue with you buying one. Sigma neither.

Anyway what name that camera should get? K3 1.5 ?