Is Pentax thinking about a new k1?

normhead · 07-21-2021, 06:40 AM

I hope so....but looking at the price of the K-3iii, lets hope they don't go whole hog into K-3 tech.

mtkeller · 07-21-2021, 06:42 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by normhead

I hope so....but looking at the price of the K-3iii, lets hope they don't go whole hog into K-3 tech.

If you think a K-1 iii will cost less than US$2999, you’re dreaming.

normhead · 07-21-2021, 08:39 AM

Originally posted by mtkeller

If you think a K-3 iii will cost less than US$2999, you’re dreaming.

I assume you meant K-1iii.

Ya, that's the issue. Right now shooting the K-3 for wildlife and the K-1 for landscape for the most part, the shutter counts on my cameras are going up at half the usual rate. So I have time to save, But the end result is, If I buy a K-1iii, it's going to have to do both. I'm already avoiding the K-3iii because of the lack of a tilting back screen. I'm seriously interested in getting back to my K-5 "one camera for everything" days. The K-3iii missed out. Hopefully the K-1iii does better. But bottom line, I don't need a new camera and I'm already a generation behind. Who knows how things will be when I finally decide to go for a new one.

mtkeller · 07-21-2021, 09:11 AM

Originally posted by normhead

I assume you meant K-1iii.

Ya, that's the issue. Right now shooting the K-3 for wildlife and the K-1 for landscape for the most part, the shutter counts on my cameras are going up at half the usual rate. So I have time to save, But the end result is, If I buy a K-1iii, it's going to have to do both. I'm already avoiding the K-3iii because of the lack of a tilting back screen. I'm seriously interested in getting back to my K-5 "one camera for everything" days. The K-3iii missed out. Hopefully the K-1iii does better. But bottom line, I don't need a new camera and I'm already a generation behind. Who knows how things will be when I finally decide to go for a new one.

Yeah, that was a typo.

Honestly, people need to get over the lack of a tilting screen. The camera is excellent. ImageSync finally works properly and is more flexible than a tilting screen. The compromises required to add a tilting screen would not have been worth it. Given that the K-1 iii will not have a priority on compact and portable like the K-3 iii does, I expect that it will have some form of movable screen. We probably will also see a K-70 successor that retains the fully articulated screen but picks up a watered down version of some of the K-3 iii enhancements.

normhead · 07-21-2021, 09:15 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by mtkeller

Yeah, that was a typo.

Honestly, people need to get over the lack of a tilting screen.

No we don't.

I love the tilt back screen on my K-1 and I'm not interested in workarounds. I'm not carrying or futzing with extra gear.

I'm sure Pentax knew they would lose sales by not including it, and I'm sure they knew they'd lose more sales by including it and increasing the price.
But for me it comes down to "do you want my money or don't you?"
I have one on my K-1 and I'll have one on the next camera I buy. Pentax will probably get around to something I like before I'm ready to buy, so , it's all good. If worst comes to worst, my next camera will be a K-P. I can live with that.

**Pål Jensen** · 07-21-2021, 10:05 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by mtkeller

Yeah, that was a typo.

Honestly, people need to get over the lack of a tilting screen. The camera is excellent. ImageSync finally works properly and is more flexible than a tilting screen. The compromises required to add a tilting screen would not have been worth it. Given that the K-1 iii will not have a priority on compact and portable like the K-3 iii does, I expect that it will have some form of movable screen. We probably will also see a K-70 successor that retains the fully articulated screen but picks up a watered down version of some of the K-3 iii enhancements.

I find that I hardly need the screen on the K-3III. Since I got it i've only used the screen for reviewing images. Don't need tilt for that. The viewfinder is so great that using the screen for composing or focusing (except for astro/very low light work) seems a waste. In addition AF is accurate and fast and I can still bend my knees and back if needed....

**acoufap** · 07-21-2021, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by normhead

No we don't.

👍 - if without the moonlanding screen, we at least nead a moonlanding smartphone holder attached to the camera.

normhead · 07-21-2021, 10:19 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

I find that I hardly need the screen on the K-3III

Other's uses may vary.

One good reason for using a flip screen.

You don't have too lie in the mud. Kneel maybe but not lie. For this use, the flip screen is essential, but not everyone does this.
The focus assist on the flip screen lets you position your DoF perfectly. To date, that's not available through the viewfinder.

**DonV** · 07-21-2021, 11:25 AM

Originally posted by mtkeller

Honestly, people need to get over the lack of a tilting screen. The camera is excellent. ImageSync finally works properly and is more flexible than a tilting screen. The compromises required to add a tilting screen would not have been worth it.

Honestly,
this is just your opinion and it is great that you are fine with the lack of the tilt screen; but please don't presume to dictate what others need or want in a $2k camera body. JMHO.

---------- Post added 07-21-21 at 11:28 AM ----------

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

The viewfinder is so great that using the screen for composing or focusing (except for astro/very low light work) seems a waste. In addition AF is accurate and fast and I can still bend my knees and back if needed....

Quite right the screen is really helpful for astro pictures, and for low angles.
Good for you that you can still bend and flex and lie on the ground if you wish, I can't - or won't - as I may not be able to get back up!

Jonathan Mac · 07-21-2021, 01:54 PM

The K1 is due a refresh of some sort, if only to get the features for using manual lenses that the K3 III has.

JPT · 07-22-2021, 05:15 AM

I think. we'll hear something about it next February at CP+ 2022. It doesn't make sense to have the FF camera trail the K-3 III for too long. There are a whole host of obvious upgrades to be made by just bringing across tech they have already made. Presumably it will be rather expensive though.

**ehrwien** · 07-22-2021, 09:02 AM

And didn't a lower tier camera accompany (like within a year or so) many newly released top tier cameras? Hoping for a K-70/KP hybrid as a successor of those with the KP's aperture motor instead of the K-70's solenoid based aperture control, with fully articulating screen of the K-70, new sensor and accelerator of the K-3 III, one card slot, D-Li109 battery, don't know about af and fps, electronic shutter like was added to the K-3 III right now, body/grip shape like the K-70 perhaps. I think the new viewfinder would be too expensive for that level. Give it a pop-up flash instead. Price it around the KP's level.

normhead · 07-22-2021, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by JPT

I think. we'll hear something about it next February at CP+ 2022. It doesn't make sense to have the FF camera trail the K-3 III for too long. There are a whole host of obvious upgrades to be made by just bringing across tech they have already made. Presumably it will be rather expensive though.

The 645 line is in serious need of an update. And I'm more in favour of a K-P mk ii than a really expensive FF.
The Fuji GFX 100s is eating Pentax's lunch.

But hey, everyone's different.

**mikesbike** · 07-22-2021, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by mtkeller

Honestly, people need to get over the lack of a tilting screen.

I'm with Norm and others on this. One good thing is, the new K-3 III's lack pushed me to finally get into FF, buying the K-1 II instead, and finally putting my excellent FF lenses back into use, that are not really suitable for APS-C. The K-1 II turns out superb imaging, with even better resolution than the K-3 III using a fine lens providing the same framing, with a yet slightly larger VF, and similar low light/high ISO performance. And the price is great. I also got it with the excellent 28-105 kit lens, saving another $100 off the lens. Of course I still often use my compact but excellent KP when I need more compact carrying, and I am a very happy camper.

When it finally does come, the FF K-new will no doubt follow the K-3 III's example in having a BSI sensor to likewise improve high ISO performance even more, along with improved AF, and will no doubt cost upwards of $3,000. Hopefully, it will not follow the K-3 III's example in what it lacks- we'll see.

---------- Post added 07-22-21 at 04:00 PM ----------

Originally posted by normhead

And I'm more in favour of a K-P mk ii than a really expensive FF.

That would be very cool. It would still cost more with the BSI upgrade, yet well below the K-3 III. Then there would still be a compact Pentax answer to high-end mirrorless APS-C, with its OVF and yet more features and control aspects. Just not also removing any current features! The K-3 III would still appeal to those needing faster fps, deeper buffer, dual card slots, a meatier grip, etc.

With the K-3 III being up there in price even if it comes down to $1,500 after a year or so, a mid-price body would be a good thing. The KP II at perhaps around the $900-$1,000 range, after it settles down from the intro price. There is always a need for a low-price basic model, which mainly needs a fix on the solenoid problem.

kanyck · 07-23-2021, 12:19 AM

Originally posted by mtkeller

Thinner body (front to back) is what creates more eye relief.

Still missing the point... how body size is connected to eye relief?

07-21-2021, 06:42 AM - 1 Like	#32
mtkeller Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2019 Location: Sioux City, IA Photos: Gallery Posts: 938	Originally posted by normhead I hope so....but looking at the price of the K-3iii, lets hope they don't go whole hog into K-3 tech. If you think a K-1 iii will cost less than US$2999, you’re dreaming. Last edited by mtkeller; 07-21-2021 at 09:09 AM. Reason: Typo'd K-3 instead of K-1.

07-21-2021, 09:15 AM - 1 Like	#35
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by mtkeller Yeah, that was a typo. Honestly, people need to get over the lack of a tilting screen. No we don't. I love the tilt back screen on my K-1 and I'm not interested in workarounds. I'm not carrying or futzing with extra gear. I'm sure Pentax knew they would lose sales by not including it, and I'm sure they knew they'd lose more sales by including it and increasing the price. But for me it comes down to "do you want my money or don't you?" I have one on my K-1 and I'll have one on the next camera I buy. Pentax will probably get around to something I like before I'm ready to buy, so , it's all good. If worst comes to worst, my next camera will be a K-P. I can live with that. Last edited by normhead; 07-21-2021 at 09:22 AM.

07-22-2021, 03:51 PM	#44
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,549	Originally posted by mtkeller Honestly, people need to get over the lack of a tilting screen. I'm with Norm and others on this. One good thing is, the new K-3 III's lack pushed me to finally get into FF, buying the K-1 II instead, and finally putting my excellent FF lenses back into use, that are not really suitable for APS-C. The K-1 II turns out superb imaging, with even better resolution than the K-3 III using a fine lens providing the same framing, with a yet slightly larger VF, and similar low light/high ISO performance. And the price is great. I also got it with the excellent 28-105 kit lens, saving another $100 off the lens. Of course I still often use my compact but excellent KP when I need more compact carrying, and I am a very happy camper. When it finally does come, the FF K-new will no doubt follow the K-3 III's example in having a BSI sensor to likewise improve high ISO performance even more, along with improved AF, and will no doubt cost upwards of $3,000. Hopefully, it will not follow the K-3 III's example in what it lacks- we'll see. ---------- Post added 07-22-21 at 04:00 PM ---------- Originally posted by normhead And I'm more in favour of a K-P mk ii than a really expensive FF. That would be very cool. It would still cost more with the BSI upgrade, yet well below the K-3 III. Then there would still be a compact Pentax answer to high-end mirrorless APS-C, with its OVF and yet more features and control aspects. Just not also removing any current features! The K-3 III would still appeal to those needing faster fps, deeper buffer, dual card slots, a meatier grip, etc. With the K-3 III being up there in price even if it comes down to $1,500 after a year or so, a mid-price body would be a good thing. The KP II at perhaps around the $900-$1,000 range, after it settles down from the intro price. There is always a need for a low-price basic model, which mainly needs a fix on the solenoid problem. Last edited by mikesbike; 07-22-2021 at 04:17 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax Battery Grip D-BG6 for K1, K1 Mark II	tscip22	Sold Items	2	09-27-2019 01:56 PM
Pentax K1 or Pentax K1 Mark ii	giselag	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	15	01-04-2019 01:36 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax K1 Kit - Pentax K1, Sigma ART 35mm F1.4, and Pentax 77mm F1.8	Jerry_Lundegaad	Sold Items	14	11-13-2018 03:10 PM
Thinking about getting a K1	richard0170	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	18	07-04-2018 06:02 PM

07-21-2021, 06:40 AM	#31
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	I hope so....but looking at the price of the K-3iii, lets hope they don't go whole hog into K-3 tech.

07-21-2021, 08:39 AM	#33
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by mtkeller If you think a K-3 iii will cost less than US$2999, you’re dreaming. I assume you meant K-1iii. Ya, that's the issue. Right now shooting the K-3 for wildlife and the K-1 for landscape for the most part, the shutter counts on my cameras are going up at half the usual rate. So I have time to save, But the end result is, If I buy a K-1iii, it's going to have to do both. I'm already avoiding the K-3iii because of the lack of a tilting back screen. I'm seriously interested in getting back to my K-5 "one camera for everything" days. The K-3iii missed out. Hopefully the K-1iii does better. But bottom line, I don't need a new camera and I'm already a generation behind. Who knows how things will be when I finally decide to go for a new one.

07-21-2021, 09:11 AM	#34
mtkeller Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2019 Location: Sioux City, IA Photos: Gallery Posts: 938	Originally posted by normhead I assume you meant K-1iii. Ya, that's the issue. Right now shooting the K-3 for wildlife and the K-1 for landscape for the most part, the shutter counts on my cameras are going up at half the usual rate. So I have time to save, But the end result is, If I buy a K-1iii, it's going to have to do both. I'm already avoiding the K-3iii because of the lack of a tilting back screen. I'm seriously interested in getting back to my K-5 "one camera for everything" days. The K-3iii missed out. Hopefully the K-1iii does better. But bottom line, I don't need a new camera and I'm already a generation behind. Who knows how things will be when I finally decide to go for a new one. Yeah, that was a typo. Honestly, people need to get over the lack of a tilting screen. The camera is excellent. ImageSync finally works properly and is more flexible than a tilting screen. The compromises required to add a tilting screen would not have been worth it. Given that the K-1 iii will not have a priority on compact and portable like the K-3 iii does, I expect that it will have some form of movable screen. We probably will also see a K-70 successor that retains the fully articulated screen but picks up a watered down version of some of the K-3 iii enhancements.

07-21-2021, 10:05 AM - 1 Like	#36
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by mtkeller Yeah, that was a typo. Honestly, people need to get over the lack of a tilting screen. The camera is excellent. ImageSync finally works properly and is more flexible than a tilting screen. The compromises required to add a tilting screen would not have been worth it. Given that the K-1 iii will not have a priority on compact and portable like the K-3 iii does, I expect that it will have some form of movable screen. We probably will also see a K-70 successor that retains the fully articulated screen but picks up a watered down version of some of the K-3 iii enhancements. I find that I hardly need the screen on the K-3III. Since I got it i've only used the screen for reviewing images. Don't need tilt for that. The viewfinder is so great that using the screen for composing or focusing (except for astro/very low light work) seems a waste. In addition AF is accurate and fast and I can still bend my knees and back if needed....

07-21-2021, 10:14 AM	#37
acoufap Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Munich, Germany Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,187	Originally posted by normhead No we don't. 👍 - if without the moonlanding screen, we at least nead a moonlanding smartphone holder attached to the camera.

07-21-2021, 10:19 AM - 1 Like	#38
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by Pål Jensen I find that I hardly need the screen on the K-3III Other's uses may vary. One good reason for using a flip screen. You don't have too lie in the mud. Kneel maybe but not lie. For this use, the flip screen is essential, but not everyone does this. The focus assist on the flip screen lets you position your DoF perfectly. To date, that's not available through the viewfinder.

07-21-2021, 11:25 AM	#39
DonV Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2017 Location: Near Charlotte NC Photos: Albums Posts: 693	Originally posted by mtkeller Honestly, people need to get over the lack of a tilting screen. The camera is excellent. ImageSync finally works properly and is more flexible than a tilting screen. The compromises required to add a tilting screen would not have been worth it. Honestly, this is just your opinion and it is great that you are fine with the lack of the tilt screen; but please don't presume to dictate what others need or want in a $2k camera body. JMHO. ---------- Post added 07-21-21 at 11:28 AM ---------- Originally posted by Pål Jensen The viewfinder is so great that using the screen for composing or focusing (except for astro/very low light work) seems a waste. In addition AF is accurate and fast and I can still bend my knees and back if needed.... Quite right the screen is really helpful for astro pictures, and for low angles. Good for you that you can still bend and flex and lie on the ground if you wish, I can't - or won't - as I may not be able to get back up!

07-21-2021, 01:54 PM	#40
Jonathan Mac Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 10,897	The K1 is due a refresh of some sort, if only to get the features for using manual lenses that the K3 III has.

07-22-2021, 05:15 AM	#41
JPT Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Tokyo Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,821	I think. we'll hear something about it next February at CP+ 2022. It doesn't make sense to have the FF camera trail the K-3 III for too long. There are a whole host of obvious upgrades to be made by just bringing across tech they have already made. Presumably it will be rather expensive though.

07-22-2021, 09:02 AM	#42
ehrwien Site Supporter Join Date: May 2016 Posts: 2,782	And didn't a lower tier camera accompany (like within a year or so) many newly released top tier cameras? Hoping for a K-70/KP hybrid as a successor of those with the KP's aperture motor instead of the K-70's solenoid based aperture control, with fully articulating screen of the K-70, new sensor and accelerator of the K-3 III, one card slot, D-Li109 battery, don't know about af and fps, electronic shutter like was added to the K-3 III right now, body/grip shape like the K-70 perhaps. I think the new viewfinder would be too expensive for that level. Give it a pop-up flash instead. Price it around the KP's level.

07-22-2021, 09:48 AM	#43
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by JPT I think. we'll hear something about it next February at CP+ 2022. It doesn't make sense to have the FF camera trail the K-3 III for too long. There are a whole host of obvious upgrades to be made by just bringing across tech they have already made. Presumably it will be rather expensive though. The 645 line is in serious need of an update. And I'm more in favour of a K-P mk ii than a really expensive FF. The Fuji GFX 100s is eating Pentax's lunch. But hey, everyone's different.

07-23-2021, 12:19 AM	#45
kanyck Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2021 Location: Saint-Petersburg, RU Photos: Gallery Posts: 61	Originally posted by mtkeller Thinner body (front to back) is what creates more eye relief. Still missing the point... how body size is connected to eye relief?