[repaap]

I hear you perfectly. It is not a secret that Pentax is building up it's game. It takes time, and the fact that there is almost none third party offering in latest modern lenses( sigma ART, Tokina, Tamron latest) is a pity. But now it is possible to buy(expensive yes) complete set and FF for PRO shooting. If desiered. In few years, as you said there will be much more things to buy.

But this is just because of Ricoh want to have all threads in their hands. I can really understand this too. if there is too much of hasle, it is hard to build anything properly. But you said that it might be for you in couple of years(maybe ), pentax.

There is actually plenty to choose from, for budget already for your K-1, budget vise, those 24-70 and 70-200 ect offerings from sigma are not bad, and Tammy 28-75 and 70-200 is qood too.

But as said, in few years, it might be possible to find bargains in Pentax world too. There is several times been mentioned D750 and A7...well it is couple years since they have been released, and they have right now REALLY expensive siblings...how about A9? D5? then they have these 'bargain' models, which are those mentioned earlier...really. A real top tier is missing, and then things like K-1 will be looked as bargain, especially in few years. Not to forget tomention 645 system too, since APS-C has been brought up too. Now this is not about where this thread started from, but just to bring in bigger picture.

When did I say Pentax was too expensive for me? All I recall saying in the past is I personally found the current retail lens selection for K mount FF was weak, I wasn't particularly enthused about the K-1 (outside of the IQ which is stellar), and (as a result) I've looked at other systems.

The lenses you mentioned in your first paragraph are ancient, steam driven artifacts or not officially D-FA branded. It is a cobbled together system currently. When I look at Canon, Nikon, or Sony I see well put together modern FF systems... whole series/generation of modern lenses. Pentax is surely growing the FF system into something special, but it isn't fully realized.

Otherwise, why would Ricoh offer a road map with a brand new fast 50, 85, and (likely) 35? Plus a new UWA prime and a new telephoto zoom to boot. Obviously they see the holes too and they are plugging them ..slowly.. with fresh, modern designs driven by modern in-lens motors. The last full series of FF lenses from Pentax were the FA's. They are rather long in the tooth.. obviously because they picked APS-C to grow for a good decade plus and only recently have come back to FF.

If you build it, they will come. Again, I'm looking forward to Pentax FF in a couple of years. I think it will be healthy.

[Dan Rentea]

If you are the designer for the next Pentax traditional full frame, and you have to price match the KP, what K1 features are you willing to drop?
This is not Pentax usual policy, but it would be interesting..

I would trade anytime (I never used all these features on K-3 II):
- GPS
- pixel shift
- astrotracer
- video

for
- joystick for af
- 6 or 8 fps with faster clearing buffer
- better af-c than K1


I would like to keep from K1:
- build construction (althrough it's not that important for me since I used and still use rain cover in rough conditions)
- ergonomics and placement of the buttons
- articulated LCD
- wifi
- resolution (between 24 and 36mp it's more than enough for me)

I don't know if all this means that it can be done and sold for the price of the KP, but I think that if I would have a body like that, I would probably pay as much as K1 costs.

[leekil]

You write as if the KM and K1000 were introduced at the same time, or the K1000 came first. K David in the reviews of the KM here says something similar with "I just don't really feel like the KM has a reason to exist in the K lineup. The K2 and KX I get, totally, and the K1000 as well. But adding the [KM] ...". In fact the K2, KX and KM were the original K-series, and it was the K1000 that was added, a year later. But as we know the K1000 was a massive commercial success, seemingly because it was the cheapest SLR of any main brand that you could buy, despite the lack of a self timer which one would have thought essential for camera aimed partly at the "family" market; less so the DoF preview.

In fact both the KM and K1000 were basically the previous generation of Pentax SLRs, being the old Spotmatic F given the K mount and some cosmetics. The equivalent today would be Pentax still selling the *ist D at $500.

I'm going by their being on the market at the same time, and how they compared in price at the time. Was the K1000 a massive commercial success when it first came out, due to the small price difference, or was it a success over time because it remained the only non-automatic, manual focus camera they continue to make? Was it because it was (not?) particularly cheap compared to the KM, or was it because it was cheap compared to all the later automatic, and then autofocus, cameras?

[Lord Lucan]

I'm going by their being on the market at the same time, and how they compared in price at the time. Was the K1000 a massive commercial success when it first came out, due to the small price difference, or was it a success over time because it remained the only non-automatic, manual focus camera they continue to make? Was it because it was (not?) particularly cheap compared to the KM, or was it because it was cheap compared to all the later automatic, and then autofocus, cameras?

I was really giving the K1000 as an example of how a lower spec version of another camera can be a commercial success, albeit that the KM on which it was based was far from being the flagship itself. I don't know exactly how it originally compared with the KM in price, but the K1000 was devised to be the cheapest big-brand SLR on the market by stripping all "inessentials" from the KM design. Partly for the low price, and partly because it forced students to think about exposure, it became the recommended camera for art and photography students everywhere. From there its popularity seemed to snowball, despite, by the mid-1980's (when I bought my first SLR), the fact that not many buyers or reviewers considered its lack of an auto mode and self-timer to be actual advantages. I knew a family guy who bought one and was disappointed when he discovered it had no self-timer.

The K1000's popularity was exploited; I have a mid-80's price list from Jessops (big UK dealer) in which it, by then the only survivor from the K-Series, is priced at more than the distinctly superior MX (also fully manual), and still today some insane prices are being asked for K1000s on ebay.

---

Last edited by Lord Lucan; 11-28-2017 at 12:20 PM. Reason: Clarification

[Pål Jensen]

A low spec K-1 is very unlikely. Pentax is moving upmarket. KP, K3 replacement, 645Z replacement and eventually K-1 replacement is what you can expect in the near future IMHO.....

[Jeff Lopez]

A low spec K-1 is very unlikely. Pentax is moving upmarket. KP, K3 replacement, 645Z replacement and eventually K-1 replacement is what you can expect in the near future IMHO.....

I agree with you, in that it is moving upmarket, if we look at the recent patents. I have said before somewhere that it seems that Ricoh wants to put Pentax to a niche Leica market..
Have you considered that the K1 is and will be the only FF pro level camera by Pentax?

[totsmuyco]

I wouldn't bank on a FF with lower specs than the K-1. Like Jeff has said, I think Ricoh wants to push Pentax upwards to a new niche. The new sensor of the K-70/ KP is a breakthrough and, I would see a better K-3 replacement. Probably also a K-1 replacement in the near future. Maybe Ricoh is trying to decipher something new about the AF.C problem. Everything seem quiet and I think we will be up for a surprise. Shock me Ricoh! Shock me!

[Nicolas06]

I hear you perfectly. It is not a secret that Pentax is building up it's game. It takes time, and the fact that there is almost none third party offering in latest modern lenses( sigma ART, Tokina, Tamron latest) is a pity. But now it is possible to buy(expensive yes) complete set and FF for PRO shooting. If desiered. In few years, as you said there will be much more things to buy.

But this is just because of Ricoh want to have all threads in their hands. I can really understand this too. if there is too much of hasle, it is hard to build anything properly. But you said that it might be for you in couple of years(maybe ), pentax.

If you are after a price now, you don't really care WHY it is expensive and not interresting right now and that it might be interresting in 5 years from now...

5 years from now, you just double check what is available at the time and decide then. If you are not yet invested somewhere else and if you still have some need to satisfy...

[dbs]

Hi all

Mee the so called ff system by the opposition is not as new as you make out
Canons starts from the eos era and still being produced with cosmetic changes no different than pentax with fa lenses and these are younger

Dave

[hadi]

for me, i could do without the following info:
-high burst continuous shooting. i dont EVER use it. dont really see the point of it in my shooting
-intervelometer. even though its one of the most unique features in this that allows for clouds/water/star trails in long exposure, which helps with landscape stuff. i hardly ever use it.
- get rid of video. we know there are better options for video. no real need for it. just remove it. people can buy a lumix or sony for video if they really want to.
- get rid of gps. cool feature, again. i think i only use it to track/trail stars. no other purpose for my shooting.
-pixel shift. its a gimmick.

everything else. and i mean EVERYTHING ELSE, keep as is.

[zapp]

Different prism finder, more plastic, smaller sensor, lower fps rating... the standard stuff. Don't eliminate features, but offer less comfort.
K1 will come down in price as soon as the K1ii shows up. I don't see Pentax offering two FF cameras plus an DSLR APS-C line. I would expect one FF camera, one fast acting APS-C with very similar layout as the FF - smaller sensor, faster fps, improved AF.... downsizing should happen on APS-C bodies.