[surfar]

(The so praised best DSLR of all times Nikon D850 sells for around 3500EUR/USD)

U$2250 in Australia new OR from U$1370 used.

---------- Post added 08-21-22 at 12:00 PM ----------

What Price You are Ready to Pay for KP Successor?

For the same form factor ZERO, but if they change the shape so it feels good then around 11-12-1250 U$ is probably close to the limit.Providing the screen is tillable and it has UHs 2 and 4K that records for a decent amount of time(not 7mins).Obviously it includes the BSI sensor and AF of K3mk3.

[rvandenbrink]

You don’t need a top LCD, bigger battery, better queue, ad nauseum for general purpose photography.
My KP is great for general purpose photography.
The K-3iii is specialized for action. for those cases where certain capabilities are needed.
Almost every time I use my KP I wish it had the K-3iii’s focusing - I have used the KP’s ‘flippy LCD’ only once in the 3-1/2 years that I have owned it.
I suppose I should offer to make a {even-up} trade.

added: I see above you say you already have 2 KP’s - so you already have a “general purpose” camera - so for what particular purpose do you need a K-3iii??? In what particular cases do you still need a K-3iii??? What particular improvement in the KP and how much more would you be willing to pay for it. This thread is taking about how much we would be willing to pay for particular improvements in the KP. I have already stated many times that I would be willing to pay up to $1K for a KP or K-70 that would focus likes the K-3iii does.

On the K3 not being a "general purpose camera"

Agreed, the top LCD has no appeal for me. I also don't need a longer-life battery or a bigger buffer for my style of shooting, but I'll gladly take it :-)
However adding more features I think makes the K3iii a better general purpose camera, as now it has much better AF, especially for a moving target which I'll take every day of the week. And just because I wouldn't use a longer battery life and so on doesn't meant that those features aren't useful to most other people.

However, the flipping screen on a KP is a must-have for me. I'll often go for a lower perspective, and that screen feature means that I'm not laying down in the mud when I do that. It also means I can shoot over a fence or other obstruction, which happens quite a bit too.

If they rolled a KPii, or a K3 mark IV, or even a K1 mark III that had all of these things (with more pixels but the same or better dynamic range and ISO range) I'd buy it tomorrow. If I had to leave out something, I'd leave out the top LCD, I don't see myself using that very often, but that's just me.

I'd love a new KP model, but I'm betting the next thing we see will be a new K-1, it's due for some sprucing up

[mikesbike]

the existing KP is a great camera which does everything I want for my photography, and so I bought another - as a backup and for different uses.

I feel the same, as to an APS-C model.

---------- Post added 08-21-22 at 08:18 PM ----------

so you wouldn’t purchase another KP if it had the focusing of the K-3iii?

I wouldn't if that were the only advancement. The AF of my KP is already an improvement over previous models, and works well enough for my needs. Maybe especially with screw-driven lenses. I noticed a significant improvement in AF speed and sureness with my older screw-driven DA HD 55-300 f/4-5.8 WR on my KP. Not saying the K-3 III, especially with PLM lenses, is not yet better. But I don't even have a PLM lens, nor do I intend to get one. I don't often do fast action shooting or burst shooting, for which the K-3 III is particularly designed. Another K-3 III with an articulating screen would not do it for me. But I do understand the appeal of the K-3 III for those who are interested in these uses and in a large right-hand grip, 2-card slots, etc. and want the pull-out screen. So maybe a K-3 IIIn will become a reality. But this is a bulkier camera and weighs a quarter pound more than the KP.

The KP was designed as a compact model of very high caliber with many features and conveniences, and being of top build quality with excellent controls. Hard to find a compact model of such high-quality build outside of APS-C mirrorless, against which the KP is the only DSLR capable of competing. This aspect is one of the KP's most special attractions for me. A KP II preserving this design, features and all, but with an updated BSI sensor for even better low light performance, perhaps a stronger built-in flash, and even better AF, maybe even adding optical DOF to the top controls, might induce me to add one of these to my existing 2 KP bodies. But I'd not part with any of them!

I consider the KP at $900 USD to have been a great price for what it is. I got mine for less, and think of that as a bargain for a camera of such class. Such a KP II at $1,000 USD, or even $1,200 would be fine. I would not hesitate to buy one.

[Jonathan Mac]

On the K3 not being a "general purpose camera"

The K-3 isn't a general purpose camera? It worked well for me as exactly that for over seven years...

[martin42mm]

If it is just a KP with a new sensor, I do not see much point in upgrading from KP.
I'm perfectly happy with KP and I will probably not replace it until it is worn out.

But I believe price on a new KP would be approx $1500. And the price on K70 replacement in the range of $1000 - 1200.

Amen to that!

[donaldslevine]

I have a KP and K3iii. The KP is my basic everyday point and shoot. When I want to get creative and have a bigger camera to balance with some of my bigger (heavier) lenses, I pull out the K3iii. Basic shooting is the KP with a DA 18-135. I've also started shooting film for the first time since 2006 with my old Contax N1 and the Zeiss 24-85 and 70-700. The 70-300 Zeiss lens is bigger and heavier than my KP with the 18-135 LOL.

[grcolts]

Well, I would rather see an updated K70 without that dreaded aperture failure threat. I like a fully articulated screen as opposed to the flip up one.

[Just1MoreDave]

I think Ricoh's problem is the K-3 III. When the KP came out, it could carve out a mid-tier spot because the K-3 line was pretty old. It was discontinued not long after the KP release. So the KP could have better features than the top-tier camera which was obviously on its way out. The K-3 III isn't old enough yet to be in that position. Improve just four or five things on the KP and a reasonable consumer will not see many reasons that the top-tier camera is worth paying say $500 more for. Usually the top-tier line makes more profit so that's not smart. Time will solve this; eventually the K-3 III technology will be outdated and they will have invented SAFOX Ultimate or something else.

[martin42mm]

I think one of the stand-out things that has marked the change from film to digital has been the apparent anticipation for the next 'improved' model, rather than concentrating on the merits, or coming to grips with the quirks, of the current models.

Remembering back in the days when the Spotmatics were first introduced, followed by the SPII with added hot shoe that many photographers appreciated ( although on-camera flash has always been a no-no to me). Marketing consisted of a 'cut price' SP500 that was slightly cheaper than the models with 1/1000 top speed, although in reality of course, it had that speed, it just wasn't marked! Eventually market demand did lead to the need for open-aperture metering with the F model, and then of course the K bayonet. But I cannot recall ANY of the 'what camera would we like to see from Pentax/Minolta.Canon/Nikon etc.next ' discussions. We just got on with using what we had to the best of our ability to take photographs, and when the next model came along, it was almost treated with suspicion since most photographers loved and had become accustomed to what we were already using. A good illustration is that many Fleet Street cameramen who used the non-TTL 'S' cameras, such as the S1a, S3 etc. didn't all suddenly rush out and buy the Spotmatic when it was introduced. This was because many had already become used to estimating exposure from experience ( I still do the same by testing my memory aginst my camera's meter) or using hand-held Westons , and because if the camera developed a blind problem through heavy use the newspapers' repair departments could pull the pre-Spot cameras apart very quickly to access the blinds, something not as straight-forward with the later camera because of the different mirror-cage design and wiring for the meter.
The point I'm trying to make is in this digital-camera era we seem to be in danger of always chasing the next 'big thing' instead of just using what we have to the best of our abilities and take photographs. Sensors have already reached the stage where they are capable of producing image quality that is equal to or greater than we could ever have achieved with 35mm film, with far more flexibility than we could have ever imagined with sensitised emulsions-there are those who can remember 12 ASA B & W and 25 ASA slide film. the clamour (?) for even greater numbers of megapixels seems self-defeating to me since this leads to increased interference between photo-sites, and therefore even more processing power to reduce this. I'm not dismissing progress, but perhaps we should appreciate what we have first before worrying about 'what next'. I was perfectly happy with my K-S1, until the solenoid issue arose. Yes, I did fix it, but in the interim I bought the outgoing KP. I'm not looking for anything else because it gives me exactly what I want from a camera, be it digital or film. Some will argue is that if we don't demand new cameras the companies will just stop making them, but how much of the profit from the current models then gets swallowed up in developing the next one, to the detriment of their profit-base, yet endlessly driving the 'what's next' chase?

[noelpolar]

mmm.... the build quality (KP, K1, K3 etc) and slow moving nature of any real technical improvements these days..... sorta makes these cameras 10 year ownership propositions for lots of us (ie Pentax users).... so.... other than silly disposable income splurges for no real reason.... I'm pretty unlikely to drop money on a new KP.... no matter what it offers.... (I own one already). I'm quite happy with it's current capabilities (original KP) as it sit's within the pentax range.

[martin42mm]

mmm.... the build quality (KP, K1, K3 etc) and slow moving nature of any real technical improvements these days..... sorta makes these cameras 10 year ownership propositions for lots of us (ie Pentax users).... so.... other than silly disposable income splurges for no real reason.... I'm pretty unlikely to drop money on a new KP.... no matter what it offers.... (I own one already). I'm quite happy with it's current capabilities (original KP) as it sit's within the pentax range.

Absolutely, and much more succinctly put than I did!

[mikesbike]

Well, I would rather see an updated K70 without that dreaded aperture failure threat. I like a fully articulated screen as opposed to the flip up one.

It seems the later production K-70 batches have the modified solenoid, and now have this problem solved. The K-70 is such a good performer and with very good features, it still demonstrates superiority against competitors in its class.

I have never thought of the K-3 III and the KP as being an either/or choice. They are too different. The K-3 III should not have been seen as a replacement for the KP, nor the KP as a replacement for the K-3 series type of camera. Each concept addresses particular sets of needs better than the other concept. The K-3 III is especially good for certain sets of needs, while the KP is the better choice for other sets of needs. Of course there are areas of overlap.

---------- Post added 08-29-22 at 01:21 AM ----------

mmm.... the build quality (KP, K1, K3 etc) and slow moving nature of any real technical improvements these days..... sorta makes these cameras 10 year ownership propositions for lots of us (ie Pentax users).... so.... other than silly disposable income splurges for no real reason.... I'm pretty unlikely to drop money on a new KP.... no matter what it offers.... (I own one already). I'm quite happy with it's current capabilities (original KP) as it sit's within the pentax range.

I agree with this also. However, even though having two KP bodies, there are some upgrades that would tempt me, especially since I see how easily this design concept was dispensed with, and would then feel even more secure to also acquire a 3rd upgraded body before this unique camera type would again disappear! I put both of my KP bodies to good use.

[Paulo]

I would pay up to 1500USD easily. Looking at other bodies in other systems it would not be very high price. But this is only theoretical discusion. I'm pretty sure that KP II will never be made. Having in mind shrining market return of investement in such a product would be very low (if any). Too high risk for Ricoh business.

[martin42mm]

I would pay up to 1500USD easily. Looking at other bodies in other systems it would not be very high price. But this is only theoretical discusion. I'm pretty sure that KP II will never be made. Having in mind shrining market return of investement in such a product would be very low (if any). Too high risk for Ricoh business.

I can't see it being much of an investment risk for Ricoh. Fundementally the KP is fine, and wasn't available for long enough to justify it's withdrawal, or make the most of the original investment. So all they need is add whatever bells and whistles demand ( and that includes this forum) has suggested would make it a success and put it into production.

[Paulo]

Theoretically yes but I can imagine situation when the new KP kills sale of K3III.