[Fogel70]

The problem with a K90 would be that it most likely be priced much higher than K70, as there are fewer entry level cameras sales today.
Ricoh can keep selling K70 at a low price as the return on investment on it was already achived years ago.

[zapp]

First goal, sell K3iii. This should take 1-2 years - supply shortage may add 1 year. Make sure K70 still sell fir entry level.
Second goal - two years later, introduce K90
Third goal - introduce K1iii two years after K3iii, maybe even before K90.

Maximize profit, concentrate on one serious r&d project…

[Henrico]

Any idea Ricoh still produces K70's? It would be interesting to know nowadays cameras are produced in a few badges (lots in stock) or more continuously "right in time". In case there are many still in stock, they start thinking for a replacement when the stock dries up.

And, what's wrong with the K70? For the price they are selling it it is a steal, a successor will cost serious more.

I think it is more likely there will come a downsized K3iii look alike for users who want to step up from broken pre K70 camera's (f.i. with stucked apertures) or less than 20 MP (noticeable improvement IQ).

[RobA_Oz]

I think that our notions of “entry-level” cameras require re-thinking. Smartphones with multiple cameras or even zoom lens are taking that space quite effectively, particularly as they also provide much better video than a stand-alone camera in a similar price bracket. Convenience trumps ergonomics, not to mention overall cost if you are considering a smartphone as an essential item, as it seems most people do.

Stand-alone cameras have to prove themselves much, much better at particular things in order to be even considered. I can’t see there being a successor to the K70. I can see there being a K-Pii at some point, but the shrinking camera market simply means component costs will continue to rise, putting further upward pressure on prices. I don’t think we’ve seen the bottom of the market yet. Canon and Sony are probably going to continue making some cheaper cameras, but probably as a low-end loss-leader, at least until they figure out that it isn’t worth their time and money.

[mtgmansf]

This is something I'd be very interested in. I have a K-3 and love the look of some of the new tech in the mark 3 but can't justify a full upgrade. Unfortunately, hearing some of the whispers coming out of Ricoh, I'm not sure they're interested in trying for an entry market anymore but it would be fun to get just one more.

What do others think about this?

Give me a mid-range Pentax aps-c with a flippy screen and the new k3III sensor, and I am in!
(will pay up to $1400!)

Keep the K70 as long as viable as an entry point. Weather-sealing a bonus - at low cost - for explorers, world travelers, and landscape shooters.

[nutz]

Leehaze1 pentaxian youtuber has a vid out talking about the possibility of a k90 coming soon. Posted on 2/21/22. He seems to think it's close to coming to market.
His video is "Pentax talk live chat K90 camera?".

[mikesbike]

As far as entry level. Pentax cannot compete on price. You can get a canon t7 with the 18-55 and 50-300 for $600.

The k70 seems to have more features (weather sealing being the most obvious). It is also at a higher price point. The challenges is getting the message to the consumer that there is value.

Exactly. The diminishing returns of technological progress has been reached quite some years ago, and in recent years has become critical, in terms of actually useful gain, such is the capability of these more recent designs. Then there's marketability, and the return on the investment of producing an upgrade, which would have to be adequately significant- but that may no longer be possible. Among APS-C DSLR models, the K-70 is still very competitive as an entry-level offering. Its 24mp sensor is close enough to that of the K-3 III as to produce images of comparable resolution, and image quality more of visible similarity than difference, with the same lens attached. All it needs is having a totally reliable solenoid so it will not develop the infamous aperture control failure.

The interest has been going towards mirrorless designs. Many very good DSLR lenses have been discontinued in favor of producing more lenses for mirrorless cameras. Of all DSLR designs, the KP remains supreme as a competing DSLR alternative to high-end APS-C mirrorless options. It would also still make the ideal mid-priced high-end compact Pentax DSLR model.

The K-3III would then continue as the Pentax APS-C DSLR flagship for those requiring its advantages, such as 2-card slots, higher fps burst shooting and attending faster AF with appropriate lenses, its superb VF, more numerous dedicated controls, and a more full-handed built-in grip.

[Rondec]

I think there is plenty of room below a K-3 III and above current K-70 specs for a new "entry level" camera. This will come with the caveat that it will be quite a bit more expensive than the K-70. If you need a camera body for 550 to 600 dollars, just go ahead and buy a K-70. Odds are good that a K-90 would be in the 800 to 900 dollar range -- entry level in the sense that it is the lowest tier camera that Pentax will offer, but not cheap by any means.

[loyalt]

This is something I'd be very interested in. I have a K-3 and love the look of some of the new tech in the mark 3 but can't justify a full upgrade. Unfortunately, hearing some of the whispers coming out of Ricoh, I'm not sure they're interested in trying for an entry market anymore but it would be fun to get just one more.

What do others think about this?

The cost of the K3 Mark III is definitely worth the huge upgrade that it is. I am so impressed with this model on every level, auto-focus speed, quality shots at very high ISO, the many options in camera for settings, the new Astrotracer firmware update, how it feels in your hand, etc. It is a commitment financially, but the benefits far outweigh the cost. If you are on the fence, I would highly recommend doing it, if you can afford it. I have used the K3 for years and love it. The K3 Mark III has blown me away with its quality and abilities.

[kypfer]

I see no potential for a direct "K-70 replacement" … it's a well-specified camera with an array of features and functions far in excess of anything most DSLR users are ever likely to need … the development costs have been recovered, the design concept proven, just keep making the camera and taking a profit
A "KP replacement", on the other hand, as a mid-range gap-filler between the K-70 and the K-3iii is possibly a concept worth considering.
Call it what you like, KPii, K-90, whatever … a decision would have to be made as whether to continue the "different" appearance and ergonomics of the KP, or revert to the more traditional appearance with a built-in grip.
Keep the high-end prism for the K-3iii (unless they're actually quite cheap to manufacture!) to leave space for either a built-in flash or GPS, probably stick with the smaller battery to keep costs down, tilting or fully articulated screen definitely, various other features and options to be decided, including whether to continue with the "old-style" menu system or move on to that as used in the K-3iii. This last will probably be defined by which processor is used.
Whichever way it goes, I don't see myself needing/wanting a camera update any time soon … unless it's a K-3iv with a 36Mpixel sensor or a reduced function K-1 at a "budget" price.

[Steve Beswick]

...
I thought the *ist DS for US$800 was a steal back in 2005 after saving for one to stay with Pentax when going digital. That's roughly $1100-1200 in today's money ...

I think you need to rethink this. $800 in 2005 is well past $2,000 today, maybe even past $3,000.

---------- Post added 03-08-22 at 09:25 AM ----------

You guys are missing the big picture here.

In business, you can either make profits on volume or on margin.
Pentax doesn't sell in enough volume, so it has to be margin.
There is no margin to be made on a freshly developed sub-$800 model.

[Thwyllo]

As far as entry level. Pentax cannot compete on price. You can get a canon t7 with the 18-55 and 50-300 for $600.

The k70 seems to have more features (weather sealing being the most obvious). It is also at a higher price point. The challenges is getting the message to the consumer that there is value.

But it's only 'value' if it's got features you genuinely need. In all honesty, what percentage of amateur photographers need weather sealing? I suggest the number is very small, so it has no real value to most of us.

I've happily used non-proofed Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Zenit, Panasonic, Sony and Pentax film and DSLRs in all sorts of weather and environmental conditions over 45+ years and have never, ever had a problem with any of them that was caused by water or dirt ingress, so why would I bother shelling out extra for weatherproofing.

[mtgmansf]

But it's only 'value' if it's got features you genuinely need. In all honesty, what percentage of amateur photographers need weather sealing? I suggest the number is very small, so it has no real value to most of us.

I've happily used non-proofed Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Zenit, Panasonic, Sony and Pentax film and DSLRs in all sorts of weather and environmental conditions over 45+ years and have never, ever had a problem with any of them that was caused by water or dirt ingress, so why would I bother shelling out extra for weatherproofing.

As someone who has even had weather-sealed equipment fail from moisture, snow, and sand, I doubt that you have tested the limits of your equipment by shooting in or exposing (accidently) your equipment to harsh weather or other (sandstorms, snow-flurries, high humidity jungle atmosphere, frosty conditions, etc.) At that matter, last year while hiking the steep Napali Coast, my own perspiration seeped into a weather-sealed, FF Nikon viewfinder and rendered the camera unuseable for two days, until carefully drying it out. Note, I keep often keep two cameras with two different lenses at my side, and not tucked away in a bag unless I know I will not be seeing anything interested for a long while or if the weather is deplorable. Also note, I use my Pentax aps-c cameras for the very harshest conditions, where I am willing to sacrifice a body or lens for some great photographs. (sadly Pentax has not obliged my desire for weather-sealed, wide-angle prime lenses in aps-c format!)

[tibbitts]

But it's only 'value' if it's got features you genuinely need. In all honesty, what percentage of amateur photographers need weather sealing? I suggest the number is very small, so it has no real value to most of us.

I've happily used non-proofed Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Zenit, Panasonic, Sony and Pentax film and DSLRs in all sorts of weather and environmental conditions over 45+ years and have never, ever had a problem with any of them that was caused by water or dirt ingress, so why would I bother shelling out extra for weatherproofing.

I'm not sure but maybe mostly or entirely mechanical film-era bodies might have been somewhat less sensitive to water intrusion than equally non-sealed electronic-era cameras. I have had a problem with my K-5 from water intrusion (despite having a WR lens on it at the time) but it mostly recovered from the salt water and has worked for several years now. With lenses I believe sealing is probably less of an issue due to various reasons but it's still a welcome feature, all else being equal.

[Wheatfield]

This is something I'd be very interested in. I have a K-3 and love the look of some of the new tech in the mark 3 but can't justify a full upgrade. Unfortunately, hearing some of the whispers coming out of Ricoh, I'm not sure they're interested in trying for an entry market anymore but it would be fun to get just one more.

What do others think about this?

I think anyone who is interested in Pentax "entry level" is going to be in for sticker shock when and if the next entry level camera comes along, since there no longer is an entry level market as people have come to think of it.