Endless fun can be had trying to make straight lines out of the meandering Pentax lineup, but I think focusing on the model names is a mistake. Pentax history has shown the naming schemes to be almost meaningless, and probably indicate the whim of a product manager more than anything. The K-70 and K-S2 are more closely related to each other in overall design and feature set than they are to either the the K-50 or KP. If you are looking for an "upgraded K-S2", then a slightly modified K-S2 body with an improved sensor, same shutter, same processor, and same AF module fits the bill more closely than a completely different body with an improved sensor, different shutter, different processor AND different AF module.
The KP has features of both the traditional low-end "plastic body" line, and the high-end "metal body" line. It's both and neither. It may be a one-off, or, given the muddled message at launch whether it was a "K-3 II replacement", it may be that Ricoh was unsure if there was even a
need for an APS-C flagship once the K-1 took on the mantle of K-mount flagship, and they were testing the waters in a different direction.
While the KP met my needs better than the K-3II (and I quite like my KP), I do think there is still a need for the K-7/5/3-style body with big grip, big battery, big buffer, top LCD, dual SD cards, and the other "flagship" features the KP lacks.
Last edited by THoog; 06-26-2017 at 08:09 AM.
Reason: typos