[abhaskare]

Any idea what price one can expect?

[Rondec]

My guess would be a launch price of 1500 to 1600. This is assuming the improvements in the auto focus system are as rumored and top end.

[abhaskare]

My guess would be a launch price of 1500 to 1600. This is assuming the improvements in the auto focus system are as rumored and top end.

That would be pretty high, lot more than double of what I thought!

Then wondering how one can bypass the K1mk2 than can practically also be an apsc!

[alfa75ts]

More than you want to pay - but low enough that you will probably buy it anyway

[reh321]

My guess would be a launch price of 1500 to 1600. This is assuming the improvements in the auto focus system are as rumored and top end.

That would be pretty high, lot more than double of what I thought!

Then wondering how one can bypass the K1mk2 than can practically also be an apsc!

I agree with @Rondec.

The KP is currently priced at $800, and I would expect the K-3ii replacement with what people are expecting to be around twice that.

[bobbotron]

That would be pretty high, lot more than double of what I thought!

Then wondering how one can bypass the K1mk2 than can practically also be an apsc!

The KP was over $1k when it first came out, and this will be higher spec'd. It won't be cheap!

[DeadJohn]

That would be pretty high, lot more than double of what I thought!

Then wondering how one can bypass the K1mk2 than can practically also be an apsc!

A new APS-C flagship will definitely(*) have some advantages over the K-1 for some types of photography. Expect smaller pixels than exist on the K-1, so if you are cropping photos of distant wildlife you can get higher resolution with APS-C. Burst speed will also hopefully be faster for action photography provided that Ricoh is using newer CPU and memory than what's in the K-1.

The K-1 might remain a better camera for landscape photography than the new APS-C camera.

(*) I'm confident on the "definitely" part. Even the old K-3 has smaller pixels and a faster frame rate then the K-1.

[Mistral75]

Neither news nor rumour, I'm afraid.

Otherwise, I agree with @Rondec, @reh321 and @bobbotron: the K-? launch price will be somewhere between the KP launch price ($1,100) and the K-1 Mark II launch price ($2,000).

To give some recent comparison points: the Fujifilm X-T3 was launched at $1,500, the Fujifilm X-H1 at $1,900 and the recently announced Canon EOS 90D, which is not Canon's APS-C flagship, at $1,200.

[zapp]

Below D500, above KP. And now we need features for pricing. We know nothing else than: flagship and APAC.

[FozzFoster]

More than KP, less than K1ii...

[Paul the Sunman]

It also depends on how long you are willing to wait after release date. The KP saw its first significant price drop in the US market after 4 or 5 months. Are you willing to pay the "early adopter's premium"?

[abhaskare]

A new APS-C flagship will definitely(*) have some advantages over the K-1 for some types of photography. Expect smaller pixels than exist on the K-1, so if you are cropping photos of distant wildlife you can get higher resolution with APS-C. Burst speed will also hopefully be faster for action photography provided that Ricoh is using newer CPU and memory than what's in the K-1.

The K-1 might remain a better camera for landscape photography than the new APS-C camera.

(*) I'm confident on the "definitely" part. Even the old K-3 has smaller pixels and a faster frame rate then the K-1.

Smaller pix will also mean a tradeoff on high ISO ..like we see between K5ii and K3ii
I would still say if price is above $1.2K it would be much better to go for a k1

[FozzFoster]

Are you willing to pay the "early adopter's premium"?

Yes. I am.

[BigMackCam]

Then wondering how one can bypass the K1mk2 than can practically also be an apsc!

Yes, but the viewfinder always shows the full frame. And the continuous shooting frame rate is lower. And the crop image is considerably lower resolution. And the camera is bigger, and heavier.

The K-1 and K-1II can take great APS-C images - but the experience is not the same as shooting a dedicated APS-C sensor camera. And the image resolution / detail is more or less equivalent to a K-5IIs.

I would still say if price is above $1.2K it would be much better to go for a k1

Given my comments above, you would be correct for some use cases, and incorrect for others. Use cases - and indeed, user preferences - will dictate which is the better choice... not price.

(... and moved to relevant forum )

[Paul the Sunman]

I would still say if price is above $1.2K it would be much better to go for a k1

It also depends which lenses you already have. I have a large collection of APS-C lenses that haven't been getting much use since I started shooting FF (a few spend some time on the K1 even though not designed for it). So I would be interested in a new APS-C flagship as alternate travel-and-wildlife kit.