[Pål Jensen]

My vision (for what little that is worth) is that Pentax has had two lines of APS-C cameras. The entry level body (K-30, K-50, K-70) and the pro-sumer level body (K-7, K-5, K-3). Each iteration has had improvements but the size, battery, controls, features have been somewhat distinct. The other models such as KS2 and KP have seemed to me to be technology demonstrators rather than a part of the 'lines'.

I am not sure what Pentax intended with the K-1. Surely they had heard the demand for a digital FF from its film era user base. And in some ways it was a gamble that it would sell. At that time Pentax was 100% focused on APS-C. I suspect they got the green light for it but that higher expected it to be a slow seller and it would be a one off. But sales met or exceeded expectations which allowed further development and releases. But much of the technology in the K-1 is simply K-3 wrought larger.

The question in my mind is whether the K-new will be the next step in the existing K-7/5/3/1 line or if it is the beginning of a completely new series. I think that the answer to that is what defines the future of Pentax.

I'm pretty sure that Pentax had initially no plan to make an FF body. They settled on Q, APS and cropped 645, and that was it. This is illustrated by lens nomenclature - no D-FA lenses, like the DA* 200 and 300mm lenses, in spite of FF compatibility (not made with FF in mind) - and a couple of cropped 645 lenses (and several in the pipeline now cancelled). With the launch and success of the K-1 the format strategy has changed. It is APS, FF and FF645. Yes, I'm pretty sure about the latter. They need space between FF and 645 best solved by a larger 645 format. As for the future of the 645 system, they have said that it will not sell on price. Pentax need updated lenses for the 645 system. The cancelling of cropped 645 lenses on the roadmap can be explained by going larger in the sensor department needing 645 D-FA lenses instead for the future. Of course, they could drop the whole 645 line but I doubt it.

---

Last edited by Pål Jensen; 10-02-2020 at 02:47 AM.

[garywakeling]

I have always gone with the top line camera of each era in digital *istD K10 K7 K5 K3 K1 , when told that the KP was not the replacement for the K3 , I waited and waited and despite the long wait, have not been tempted by the KP, it doesn't use the larger battery, single card slot and looks more like the K30 K70 line than the top line. Looking forward to the K-New, I am sure it will be a fine photographer's tool.

[FozzFoster]

From what I've seen, the Pentax philosophy from the K-10D on has been

See, this statement is where my issue lies.

The captain of that ship has changed three times since the K10D.

The 'Philosophy' of the leading Pentax camera has one sample point under the current captain: the K-3 (two if you count a relatively minor upgrade).

To make statements such as "from what I've seen since the X model" doesn't sit well with me - Ricoh has taken Pentax to a new level and extrapolating trends from way back when with three company owners ago doesn't make sense to me.

Asahi did the best they could approaching digital age.
Hoya (imo) never really intended to hold the brand, and really needed to make some cash outs because they paid out the rear-end for that brand name.
Ricoh is taking the brand somewhere else. One sample point.

[photoptimist]

See, this statement is where my issue lies.

The captain of that ship has changed three times since the K10D.

The 'Philosophy' of the leading Pentax camera has one sample point under the current captain: the K-3 (two if you count a relatively minor upgrade).

To make statements such as "from what I've seen since the X model" doesn't sit well with me - Ricoh has taken Pentax to a new level and extrapolating trends from way back when with three company owners ago doesn't make sense to me.

Asahi did the best they could approaching digital age.
Hoya (imo) never really intended to hold the brand, and really needed to make some cash outs because they paid out the rear-end for that brand name.
Ricoh is taking the brand somewhere else. One sample point.

Interesting points.

From what I've seen of corporations, they are like huge ocean-going ships. They do not turn on a dime and new owners cannot instantly change the philosophy of the engineers in the product groups or inherited product development projects. Moreover, the sample size of products created under each Pentax owner is so small and the development process is so long (overlapping more than one owner) that it's hard to see a distinctive influence.

The bigger issue is that external factors probably have a greater impact on what Pentax does than do the particular owners. These factors include: 1) the early rapid development of better sensors giving way to maturation (causing a slowing of product cycles ); 2) the rise of the smartphone threat (causing attempts in the 2010s to make "fun" cameras); 3) the stratification of the industry (causing Pentax to NOT try to compete in all ways against much larger competitors with mature video camera technologies).

Perhaps the captain of the ship matters less than the overall momentum of the vessel and the state of the weather and the seas.

[texandrews]

I'm pretty sure that Pentax had initially no plan to make an FF body.

That's forgetting that Pentax was the first company to attempt one, which sadly failed

They settled on Q, APS and cropped 645, and that was it. This is illustrated by lens nomenclature - no D-FA lenses, like the DA* 200 and 300mm lenses, in spite of FF compatibility (not made with FF in mind) - and a couple of cropped 645 lenses (and several in the pipeline now cancelled). With the launch and success of the K-1 the format strategy has changed. It is APS, FF and FF645. Yes, I'm pretty sure about the latter. They need space between FF and 645 best solved by a larger 645 format.

I hope that you are correct about the latter portions of this. Not certain you are correct about the first bit

As for the future of the 645 system, they have said that it will not sell on price. Pentax need updated lenses for the 645 system.

I see this thought a lot, but have yet to see the evidence that it's true. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I don't think we know.

The cancelling of cropped 645 lenses on the roadmap can be explained by going larger in the sensor department needing 645 D-FA lenses instead for the future.

Interesting interpretation

Of course, they could drop the whole 645 line but I doubt it.

I agree.

With respect to the discussion about flagships, I think that's a term that needs to be thought of in context with every company. It will mean one thing for Nikon and Canon, and another thing for Fuji, Oly, and us.

Also, as a dilettante military historian, I recall that flagships might be the biggest and "best" ships in the fleet, but not always. Generally, the other ships in the fleet get all the work done, unless you're Admiral Nelson....

[FozzFoster]

Perhaps the captain of the ship matters less than the overall momentum of the vessel and the state of the weather and the seas.

Thanks for playing with the analogy you too raise interesting points!
But if i may...

Moreover, the sample size of products created under each Pentax owner is so small and the development process is so long (overlapping more than one owner) that it's hard to see a distinctive influence.

'Flagship' products under previous owners were released in sequential years:
2008 - K20D
2009 - K-7
2010 - K-5
Hoya transitions Pentax to Ricoh near the beginning of 2011.
The K-3 doesn't come out until the end of 2013. They put real thought into this model, it wasn't just a sequential year update.
This furthers my position that trends perceived since the K10D should be taken with a grain of salt, at best. Ricoh are doing things very differently from the past owners.

They do not turn on a dime and new owners cannot instantly change the philosophy of the engineers in the product groups or inherited product development projects.

imo, I bet that's where the Q system and the 645 system are stuck at. Ricoh rounded off the last bits needed coming from the Asahi/Hoya R&D in those systems (recoup brand purchasing costs), but probably won't see Ricoh R&D in the future.
Further testament that systems shouldn't be compared going back to previous owners.

From what I've seen of corporations, they are like huge ocean-going ships. They do not turn on a dime

I understand that point, but I feel that it's more than a UK captain's choice of "Port of Halifax or the Port of St. John?", but more so a question of the "Port of Halifax, Canada or the Port of Boston, USA?"
Close to the same destination, but there are pretty drastic differences between a Canuck and a Yank.

[totsmuyco]

Just my own thoughts. I believe that there should be a top end APSC. Maybe you can call it that and have the K-1 series as the flagship model. But it might be good if the KP line should continue having its retro design and being smaller classified below the KNew. I also believe that the k-70 line should continue. However they have to address the solenoid problem which I think is the only fault I can find in Pentax's entry-level cameras if it can be classified as entry-level. The k-xx series I think too packed to be an entry-level series.

[BigMackCam]

Just my own thoughts. I believe that there should be a top end APSC. Maybe you can call it that and have the K-1 series as the flagship model. But it might be good if the KP line should continue having its retro design and being smaller classified below the KNew. I also believe that the k-70 line should continue. However they have to address the solenoid problem which I think is the only fault I can find in Pentax's entry-level cameras if it can be classified as entry-level. The k-xx series I think too packed to be an entry-level series.

I'm fairly confident the KP and / or K-70 lines will continue. They've been very popular thus far, if numbers of owners in these forums are anything to go by, and the significant expected price premium for the new high-end camera will either be unjustifiable or prohibitive for many who don't need everything that it offers. The price points for all three lines are quite distinct, and - combined with model-specific features and performance specifications - they offer different value propositions to prospective buyers. As such, I believe it's sustainable to maintain the existing APS-C line-up, or - at the very least - two of the three, with the K-New being one of them.

What we won't see - indeed, what we haven't seen for some time - is new models at each level every couple of years...

[Rondec]

Camera companies had best not stick to the idea that they have to launch new cameras on regular, set schedule. It used to be entry levels got updated every year, flagship APS-C every 18 months, full frame every 3 years. The thing is that companies that do that end up selling against themselves. You can still get new Nikon D5300, D5500 and D5600 cameras on line. Having all of those available and with as little difference as there is between each model generation tends to depress the pricing of the newest camera. Pentax has avoided that by spacing out new releases and making sure that stocks of existing lines of cameras have depleted.

As to the K-new, it does feel as though it is going to be a major step forward in some ways. The K3 was the first Pentax that really tried to do tracking auto focus. I know there was AF-C prior, but it never seemed very effective. At the same time, they have ridden the PRIME engine as far as it can go and whatever they replace it with should be more effective. More auto focus points, better video, better tracking, and deeper buffers will all be helpful.

Long story short, I think that Pentax is at the point where they will wait to release a camera till they have real improvements on existing cameras. The new releases will be more substantial but also spaced out a bit more than sometimes in the past.

[BigMackCam]

Camera companies had best not stick to the idea that they have to launch new cameras on regular, set schedule.

Absolutely.

Some of us consumers, too, need to look at things differently. There are some who expect new model launches every year or two, and consider anything much older to be quite outdated. That may have been true five years ago, but it's simply no longer the case. Image quality and - in most areas - performance of virtually any camera released in the last five years still hold up extremely well today, and many new models offer only incremental improvements. Plus, as each model ages, the retail and street prices drop accordingly, so even if we buyers aren't always getting a camera that's spanking fresh out of R&D, we're not paying a premium for that either. Today's cameras arguably have a five year product life, give or take a little, and folks should embrace that. Indeed, I think they'll need to.

[totsmuyco]

Camera companies had best not stick to the idea that they have to launch new cameras on regular, set schedule. It used to be entry levels got updated every year, flagship APS-C every 18 months, full frame every 3 years. The thing is that companies that do that end up selling against themselves. You can still get new Nikon D5300, D5500 and D5600 cameras on line. Having all of those available and with as little difference as there is between each model generation tends to depress the pricing of the newest camera. Pentax has avoided that by spacing out new releases and making sure that stocks of existing lines of cameras have depleted.

As to the K-new, it does feel as though it is going to be a major step forward in some ways. The K3 was the first Pentax that really tried to do tracking auto focus. I know there was AF-C prior, but it never seemed very effective. At the same time, they have ridden the PRIME engine as far as it can go and whatever they replace it with should be more effective. More auto focus points, better video, better tracking, and deeper buffers will all be helpful.

Long story short, I think that Pentax is at the point where they will wait to release a camera till they have real improvements on existing cameras. The new releases will be more substantial but also spaced out a bit more than sometimes in the past.

It's a company's way of enticing consumers to upgrade to regularly. It's a way of creating money by saying this unit is slightly better than its older version for a slightly higher price. Probably if they don't do that the R&D department will be out of the job.

Still, consumers do not have infinite funds to just keep upgrading. Pushing for a constant upgrade might lead to high inventory levels making them obsolete and selling those products at a discount. Especially now that the market is super saturated and the so called would be photographers realize that their cell phones is all they need.

[monochrome]

Until further developments GRlll is the Ricoh Imaging Ricoh flagship. K-1 ll is the Ricoh Imaging Pentax flagship.

K-new will blend the tech of both and add necessary DSLR physical features. The next FF (2021) will still be the flagship

Move along. Nothing to see here.

[FozzFoster]

GRlll is the Ricoh Imaging Ricoh flagship

Move along. Nothing to see here.

Theta Z1? - It costs more than a GRIII, at any rate.

GRIII @ $1199.95
https://www.mcbaincamera.com/productdetail.php?mcbain_id=3012011

Z1 @ $1349.95
https://www.mcbaincamera.com/productdetail.php?mcbain_id=3012064

---------- Post added 10-03-20 at 09:25 AM ----------

K-new will blend the tech of both and add necessary DSLR physical features.

I totally agree with this!
The Theta Z1 has decent connectivity with a smartphone.
I've been sayin' for a while now that any external camera will have to have a deep remote integration with smartphones in order to remain competitive against the internal cameras.
I believe Ricoh is doing great work and will be integrating their Ricoh tech into next-level Pentax hardware.

[BigMackCam]

It seems the term "flagship" always winds up dividing folks, possibly because they have interests in different sensor formats. If the K-1 series is the Pentax "flagship" then - with respect - it's irrelevant to folks whose primary interests lie with either APS-C or medium format. Whatever term we ascribe to it, there's an expectation that Pentax should have a high-end APS-C model that offers premium, "pro-sumer" features and performance offered by the K-3 and K-1 series...

[reh321]

But they made a mistake in not keeping the large battery and K-7/5/3 grip design.

"They made a mistake" only if they thought it would completely replace the K-7/5/3 family.
It is absolutely perfect for someone like me, who doesn't use the top LCD, and has never missed a shot because of the buffer size or the battery size or the lack of a second card.