[normhead]

Yes, I understood exactly what you were saying. But you already have a great dynamic range on KP for example and landscapes are taken at ISO 100 most of the times and you need to pixel peep images to tell a difference in image quality between KP and K1 at ISO 100. And again, what happened to "the better the gear the less irrelevant images are"? You bought K1 II after you bought K1? If the answer is yes, then please don't tell me about how infected I am because I bought the EOS R.

Great by Canon standards, not by Pentax standards. No one cares that you bought an EOS R. We care that a guy who doesn't understand our purchasing decisions thinks he's the guy to give us advice and keeps at it.

By the way, for some reason i seem to be capable of knowing I don't want 105 1.4 without actually looking at one or even thinking about one. Photographic experience is like that. An experienced photographer always knows what his next lens purchase will be. It's a lot more efficient than just trying everything out unless you have a lot of free time.

People put lenses they love in my hands, out doing what I do. That's all I need. As I said, on this site, all the experience guys here rejected Canon. They clearly have a different mindset about what's important in photography than you do. If that isn't your starting point, you're in the wrong place. Honestly, if someone wants to put a 105 1.4 in my hands, I'll say "no. Not ,my kind lens." You honestly think I need to go out and check it out to know that?

Wandering around camera stores trying everything out is probably the most useless waste of time you could ever imagine. So is wandering around the web. It's shooting experience that should determine your next lens. Not a blind investigation of everything out there. But as I asked before. What do you think of a D850 with a 500mm f/5.6E ‘super-telephoto’ . You try everything out right? Because that's your credo. How do you know you don't like it if you haven't tried it?

After all you are the "you gotta try it to know what you're missing " guy. Or is try everything "just for Pentax shooters?"

By the way, how do you like the DA 150-450 on a K-1ii? How do you know you wouldn't like it if you haven't tried it? Or how ab out a DA 55-300 with a K-P. For guy who doesn't even make the meagerist efforts to understand modern Pentax gear, you have lot of nerve telling us we aren't exploring things. We are... just not the things you think we should explore. You're missing out on the DA 55-300 rated best in class by number of outlets, you didn't try it did you? How do you know you wouldn't like it? The DFA 50 1.4, also rated best in class, did you try that?

Let me guess, no?

The hypocrisy is astounding.

You tell Pentax users what they need to do and know when you don't know beans about Pentax and what their shooters might be interested in, because you're coming from a different place. For most of us the first question is going to be "what's it like as landscape camera, hows the DR." If you were one of us you'd know that. You have completely different values.

My guess based on past experience is going to be "Canon, still not good enough." No one, not even yourself has suggested different , at least not that I've seen.

Trying out a lens on camera that doesn't meet minimum standards is a waste of time.
Trying out a lens just because it's there, if it's not meant for your style of shooting is a waste of time. I'll do it if I don't have to go out of my way for it. But I've never bought a lens based on someone putting it in my hands. For an experienced photographer they realize there's more than one way to accomplish any photography goal, and that they probably already own something that will do what they want.

---

Last edited by normhead; 09-15-2019 at 09:09 AM.

[biz-engineer]

But you already have a great dynamic range on KP for example and landscapes are taken at ISO 100 most of the times and you need to pixel peep images to tell a difference in image quality between KP and K1 at ISO 100.

The Kp was released after the K1. I had sold all my apsc lenses for the K1, I wasn't going to buy a Kp and apsc lenses again. I bought the K1 II for a different reason, not the one you think, because I am fully satisfied with the K1, it has several option to improve image quality beyond the native IQ of the Sony 36Mp sensor, so I plan to keep the K1 system for many years... the Canon full frame thingy isn't an option for me, the only way forward for me would be a Phase One 150Mp, that kind of gear literally blast anything Canon does for the high volume of the mass market. I don't believe spending money on another FF system would make any meaningful difference, and the test charts in IQ just confirm what I believe. So, I settle with a K1 system, problem solved, I know it well, and I use it, I focus on image content no gear distraction.

[Dan Rentea]

How do I know? Experience and an engineering background.

This was the answer I was looking for. Thank you. I agree with most of what you said, but you have to consider that you mentioned 2 things that not everybody have: experience and engineering background. Those 2 things helps in making an educated decision, even if up to a point it's still guessing... Renting/borrowing the new Pentax 50mm f1.4 and compare it to an old 50mm f1.4 or f1.8 lens can make you pay the money for the new lens or keep the money and buy the old version or the f1.8 version, depending also on what you shoot and on other things also.

One other good example is the old limited vs. the new HD limited lenses. Some people prefer the old ones like the DA15mm limited lens due to the beautiful starburst which is not as good on the HD version of the lens. Right here you already have an option... Same with all the other lenses that you can try if they are available and see which one is right for your needs. If you only have a grocery in your town, you can't tell if there are better ones and you will go to the one which is available. If there were 2 of them in your town, placed one next to the other, you can make a direct comparison on service, personnel, quality of food, etc. Then you will know for sure which one is better for you.

---------- Post added 09-15-19 at 03:31 PM ----------

Great by Canon standards, not by Pentax standards. No one cares that you bought an EOS R.

Sorry, but this topic is called Canon mirrorless and when I said I bought an EOS R I was responding to someone who wanted to know which was my decision after I tested EOS R and EOS RP. If the subject is not of interest for you, then why did you bothered to intervene in the discussion?

We care that a guy who doesn't understand our purchasing decisions thinks he's the guy to give us advice and keeps at it.

As long as all your comments say exactly what I wrote in the previous comment regarding your needs, then forgive me that I only said the same thing as you did. Next time don't tell people your needs and I won't have anything to say about.

By the way, how do you like the DA 150-450 on a K-1ii? How do you know you wouldn't like it if you haven't tried it? Or how ab out a DA 55-300 with a K-P. For guy who doesn't even make the meagerist efforts to understand modern Pentax gear, you have lot of nerve telling us we aren't exploring things. We are... just not the things you think we should explore. You're missing out on the DA 55-300 rated best in class by number of outlets, you didn't try it did you? How do you know you wouldn't like it? The DFA 50 1.4, also rated best in class, did you try that?

By the way, do you talk about exploring things while you haven't used neither of the gear you mentioned? Really? You talk about Pentax 150-450mm but you didn't use it, you talk about the D-FA 50mm f1.4 but you never used it and you said more than once that is not a lens for you because you have an old 50mm lens. You talk about KP, but you never used one and you said that is not a replacement for you for K3. I mean, really? Between you and me, I think you didn't explored what Pentax has to offer, not me. At least I had the chance to shoot a few times with K1 and the trinity of lenses. It's not my fault I can't find a KP to rent in Romania because I do like to try it.

By the way, for some reason i seem to be capable of knowing I don't want 105 1.4 without actually looking at one or even thinking about one. Photographic experience is like that. An experienced photographer always knows what his next lens purchase will be. It's a lot more efficient than just trying everything out unless you have a lot of free time.

By the way, you said the same thing about the 28-105mm lens when it came out. You said you expected a 24-105mm lens and you also said you wanted an f4 lens because at f5.6 it's not good enough. Then you saw that people love it and the reviews about af and optical performance are great and you changed your mind and bought one. What happened with your experience back then?

As I said, on this site, all the experience guys here rejected Canon. They clearly have a different mindset about what's important in photography than you do.

Again, the lens choices has nothing to do with Canon, Sony, Nikon, etc. It has to do with choices for Pentaxians or for the ones who become Pentaxians. How many times do I have to say this? Why do you guys talk about choices of a better K1 in terms of fps or in terms of buffer and why are you talking about the need of f4 zoom lenses in your case as long as someone that comes and say that having choices helps you make the right decision is the bad guy?

Wandering around camera stores trying everything out is probably the most useless waste of time you could ever imagine.

Ah, so if I have choices when comes to go out and have fun with doing what you suggested above, to explore new things and different cameras/lenses is a waste of time. That's a good one.

It's shooting experience that should determine your next lens.

That's why I go out and shoot a lot, because it's fun to try new lenses and see if they can replace the ones I have. I don't know if you realized already, but I speak only about the gear I use and I have shooting experience with. I can tell you everything I know about K-5 II, K-3 II when comes to wildlife, portraits and corporate events and I can tell you a little bit about K1 when comes to overall shooting experience, but only with the trinity of lenses and only when comes to portraits and some indoor low light events. Shooting experience comes from using gear as far as I know, not from reading internet reviews and talk about lenses you never used.

What do you think of a D850 with a 500mm f/5.6E ‘super-telephoto’ . You try everything out right? Because that's your credo. How do you know you don't like it if you haven't tried it?

If I was shooting landscapes and wildlife, D850 would have been my camera since it was released. It's the most balanced camera today in my opinion and worth every money if you are serious about photography and you have the budget. The only thing worth mentioning is that a D850 needs a guy with a proper technique due to the demanding sensor and some good lenses also.

---------- Post added 09-15-19 at 03:39 PM ----------

The Kp was released after the K1.

Selling your full frame gear and go for KP will still leave you with some money.

I bought the K1 II for a different reason, not the one you think, because I am fully satisfied with the K1, it has several option to improve image quality beyond the native IQ of the Sony 36Mp sensor, so I plan to keep the K1 system for many years...

The same thing I say when comes to why I bough the EOS R and I keep my 5D Mark IV also. The point is, you also bought the latest Pentax camera even if you had K1. The reasons behind your decision is not my concern, as long as you don't blame me for buying the camera I bought, for my own reasons and needs. And the other point is: you had an option: to buy another K1 or to buy a K1 II. And this is a good thing, which is what I said in the first place.

the Canon full frame thingy isn't an option for me, the only way forward for me would be a Phase One 150Mp, that kind of gear literally blast anything Canon does for the high volume of the mass market. I don't believe spending money on another FF system would make any meaningful difference, and the test charts in IQ just confirm what I believe. So, I settle with a K1 system, problem solved, I know it well, and I use it, I focus on image content no gear distraction.

Why does everybody still insist about this nonsense about changing the system, to Canon, Nikon, Sony whatever? I was talking about options inside your current system, not about you or anyone here switching to Canon. I wouldn't buy a Canon myself if I were a landscape photographer. So please stop with this Canon debate as long as it's not about that. I know it's the perfect way to avoid the real discussion, but still...

[Rondec]

Then why are you shooting with K1 and not with a k5, K3 or with a KP? It's because you have the choice to buy a better camera, which is K1, for landscapes? Right? Hm... I thought it's irrelevant the gear since Rondec is pushing the discussion to unlimited budget and you're pushing the discussion to gear that is irrelevant if you want to have a much more credit for your images. A Pentax K5s, a K3 or a K1 is cheaper than a K1 and they all have already a great dynamic range. As soon as K1 came out and also the new lenses, you and Rondec bought them (except Normhead who bought only the camera, not the trinity lenses). And Rondec bought also the K1 II and I think you also. Come one Biz-Engineer... you're selling cucumbers to the gardener here...

I think you know the answers to these questions. The only lens that I purchased since the K-1 came out is the DFA 15-30. I already owned the DFA *70-200 and DFA 24-70. My wife shoots weddings and needs the ability to shoot f2.8 and was already using those lenses on APS-C. So it wasn't exactly an expensive proposition. When the K-1 II came out, she had already decided she wanted a second full frame camera and decided to go with it versus another K-1. So now you know why I own the gear I own. I already owned a bunch of full frame lenses when the K-1 came out -- the before mentioned DFA zooms, FA limiteds, DFA 100 macro (most purchased used). It wasn't a hard decision. Selling my gear to go with a different brand, particularly some of the high end lenses that Sony and Canon are offering would be a pretty expensive proposition. You can forgive me if I don't sell my K-1s and Pentax lenses to rush out and buy a Canon RP and 24-70 f2 lens.

As far as APS-C versus full frame, the big improvement is in dynamic range for my style of shooting (landscape). I still do shoot some with my K-3, but mainly when I want to use a lens like the DA 15 which isn't a full frame lens.

As to whether you have to shoot a particular lens to know if you need it or not, you do and you don't. That is to say, you have an idea of what framing you get with a particular focal length and the depth of field you get with it. You can see plenty of images on the interwebs that will tell you about bokeh and things like that. Camera bodies are a bit different because ergonomics are something that isn't easy to judge without actually handling the body to see if you fit with it.

[biz-engineer]

When I purchased the K1, I already had the DFA150-450, the Tamron 70-200 f2.8, the Tamron 28-75 f2.8, and the DFA100 macro WR. So going full frame was the price of the K1 which was about 30% cheaper than the D810 at the time (the introduction price was even less than $2000, and Ricoh increased the price to $2100 a few months later). The first thing I immediately noticed with the K1 was how low shutter speed I could still get sharp images with SR enabled, it was a bump in perceived SR performance compared to the K3. I purchased the other lenses with a part exchange against my apsc glass, K5, K3 and K200D. I dropped my DFA100 macro on the floor in 2017 (about a year later), and the front filter exploded together with the front element of the lens, I did not replace it. But the DFA150-450 I used since 2015 is still working like new, along with every other DFA lens I own. Also for me, I never had GPS , astro-tracer, and pixel shift on the K3, and the K1 had those features, I enjoyed astrotracer that allowed me to see the milkyway that I could barely see with my own eyes. Switching to Sony, Canon or Nikon would have been more expensive and I would have needed to buy an additional astro-tracking gear, which would still be the case today if I switched to Canikon or Sony.

[Dan Rentea]

I think that I wrote more than 6 times that no one said anything about switching from Pentax to Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. Your latest responses involves again the switching thing which has nothing to do with this discussion.

@ Rondec, you admited that some people can get amazing deals by buying a gently used 5D Mark IV instead of a 6D Mark II. Right? And I said that it's nice to have this option.That's an option that has nothing to do with Pentax, but it's good for Canon users. What this has to do with switching from Pentax to Canon? None. It has to do with having more choices in general, which is good for us, the buyers. That's why I further said to Biz-engineer that I hope Ricoh will release more lenses and cameras so that photographers can have more options to choose from instead of buying just what's available right now. Because not everybody wants and needs the trinity lenses, but some people buy them because there aren't other options: f4 zoom lenses, wide angle prime lenses, etc. I remember a discussion where some people said that they still don't buy the 15-30mm lens due to weight and they are hopping for a 20mm prime lens for landscapes. These are all options that are needed and you all talk about them all the time, but when I remind you about them it's not ok and you go to the usually "switching to Canon" route. And the proof is in this topic where every time I say that the discussion is not about switching to Canon, all of you say that switching to Canon is not good, it's expensive, etc. Guys, it's not about Canon, or about Nikon, Sony, Fuji. Here, I said it again.

And Biz-engineer tells me that my body is infected by the Canon marketing because I bought a mirrorless camera that is usefull to me. How comes he knows exactly what he needs and what he wants and in the same time he knows what my needs are and he knows that I'm a Canon marketing victim? Have I ever said that to him, that he is a marketing victim of Ricoh because he has K1 and yet he also bought a K1 II? Or that all the guys who paid 500$ to upgrade their K1 to K1 II are marketing victims? No, I never said that because I understand the importance of having options. You know it too, but it's more fascinating a discussion where Pentax has to "fight" with other manufacturers rather then talk about options and how lenses and cameras can improve your general shooting experience without switching to other brand.

[Rondec]

I think that I wrote more than 6 times that no one said anything about switching from Pentax to Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. Your latest responses involves again the switching thing which has nothing to do with this discussion.

@ Rondec, you admited that some people can get amazing deals by buying a gently used 5D Mark IV instead of a 6D Mark II. Right? And I said that it's nice to have this option.That's an option that has nothing to do with Pentax, but it's good for Canon users. What this has to do with switching from Pentax to Canon? None. It has to do with having more choices in general, which is good for us, the buyers. That's why I further said to Biz-engineer that I hope Ricoh will release more lenses and cameras so that photographers can have more options to choose from instead of buying just what's available right now. Because not everybody wants and needs the trinity lenses, but some people buy them because there aren't other options: f4 zoom lenses, wide angle prime lenses, etc. I remember a discussion where some people said that they still don't buy the 15-30mm lens due to weight and they are hopping for a 20mm prime lens for landscapes. These are all options that are needed and you all talk about them all the time, but when I remind you about them it's not ok and you go to the usually "switching to Canon" route. And the proof is in this topic where every time I say that the discussion is not about switching to Canon, all of you say that switching to Canon is not good, it's expensive, etc. Guys, it's not about Canon, or about Nikon, Sony, Fuji. Here, I said it again.

And Biz-engineer tells me that my body is infected by the Canon marketing because I bought a mirrorless camera that is usefull to me. How comes he knows exactly what he needs and what he wants and in the same time he knows what my needs are and he knows that I'm a Canon marketing victim? Have I ever said that to him, that he is a marketing victim of Ricoh because he has K1 and yet he also bought a K1 II? Or that all the guys who paid 500$ to upgrade their K1 to K1 II are marketing victims? No, I never said that because I understand the importance of having options. You know it too, but it's more fascinating a discussion where Pentax has to "fight" with other manufacturers rather then talk about options and how lenses and cameras can improve your general shooting experience without switching to other brand.

I don't recall mentioning the 6D II, although I might have. I thought I was saying that if enough people switch to RP and R cameras, that there might be increasing amounts of mildly used SLR gear coming on the market, which will push the prices down. If I owned a 6D and had the option of buying a new Canon R for 2000 or a used Canon 5D IV for 1600, I'd probably choose the 5D IV.

As people switch to MILCs and sell their SLR gear, it may make SLRs more appealing, at least in the short term.

Overall, I think I have been clear that the main reason to switch to MILCs is for the glass, but being as I can't afford the nicer glass I think I'm best staying with where I am at.

[Dan Rentea]

I don't recall mentioning the 6D II, although I might have. I thought I was saying that if enough people switch to RP and R cameras, that there might be increasing amounts of mildly used SLR gear coming on the market, which will push the prices down. If I owned a 6D and had the option of buying a new Canon R for 2000 or a used Canon 5D IV for 1600, I'd probably choose the 5D IV.

As people switch to MILCs and sell their SLR gear, it may make SLRs more appealing, at least in the short term.

Overall, I think I have been clear that the main reason to switch to MILCs is for the glass, but being as I can't afford the nicer glass I think I'm best staying with where I am at.

Just go a few comments back and you will see that you said 6D II. But it doesn't even matter if it's a 6D, EOS R, EOS RP, etc. Even from this comment of yours you see that there are several options for Canon users who want to buy a camera that will suit their needs. It's so wrong to have similar options when comes to cameras or lenses for Pentax? Yes, Pentax photographers deal with what they have, they are happy with their Pentax gear (which is a very good thing), but they also say that a certain lens would be nice to have or that a camera with a faster speed of writing files to memory cards would be great. These are needs that if they're going to be put into practice by Ricoh becomes options for Pentax buyers. This was all about from that very first comment of mine, not about switching from Pentax to Canon.

I wonder how many people would sell their K1 if Ricoh will launch a K1 mirrorless at the same price of K1 II, but with 10fps, a big buffer and improved video capabilities. The arguments about why they switch should be very juicy.

[Rondec]

Just go a few comments back and you will see that you said 6D II. But it doesn't even matter if it's a 6D, EOS R, EOS RP, etc. Even from this comment of yours you see that there are several options for Canon users who want to buy a camera that will suit their needs. It's so wrong to have similar options when comes to cameras or lenses for Pentax? Yes, Pentax photographers deal with what they have, they are happy with their Pentax gear (which is a very good thing), but they also say that a certain lens would be nice to have or that a camera with a faster speed of writing files to memory cards would be great. These are needs that if they're going to be put into practice by Ricoh becomes options for Pentax buyers. This was all about from that very first comment of mine, not about switching from Pentax to Canon.

I wonder how many people would sell their K1 if Ricoh will launch a K1 mirrorless at the same price of K1 II, but with 10fps, a big buffer and improved video capabilities. The arguments about why they switch should be very juicy.

Assuming it would require a new mount, have few lenses and screw mount lenses would probably not auto focus, even with an adapter, I think it would be a tough call to switch. At most you would see people add one to their existing K mount cameras.

[Dan Rentea]

Assuming it would require a new mount, have few lenses and screw mount lenses would probably not auto focus, even with an adapter, I think it would be a tough call to switch. At most you would see people add one to their existing K mount cameras.

I do hope not to see marketing victims if this will happen at CP+ in 2020 and Ricoh will come up with a K1 mirrorless.

[clackers]

I do hope not to see marketing victims if this will happen at CP+ in 2020 and Ricoh will come up with a K1 mirrorless.

It is an extraordinary turnaround from you, Dan, you used to say gear doesn't matter, your pair of humble Canon 6D Mk IIs did everything, new products can't give better pictures that people will be able to tell in a double blind test, a single AF point was enough for most buyers with correct technique, and that subject/skills/concepts mattered - now you're hawking mirrorless like you're Jason Lanier.

At least he's being paid to be a marketer!

[Dan Rentea]

It is an extraordinary turnaround from you, Dan, you used to say gear doesn't matter, your pair of humble Canon 6D Mk IIs did everything, new products can't give better pictures that people will be able to tell in a double blind test, a single AF point was enough for most buyers with correct technique, and that subject/skills/concepts mattered - now you're hawking mirrorless like you're Jason Lanier.

At least he's being paid to be a marketer!

Really? Luckily for me, all I said is written and can be verified without any much effort.

Let's take it step by step:

1. When did I said that I'm interested in image quality and that mirrorless will provide that? I was and I still am consistent and say that in terms of image quality there aren't bad cameras released in the last 5 years. I also said that there are certain photographers that can benefit of the high resolution cameras like K1, D850, A7R IV, but for the majority of people even a 16mp is enough. I also said that even the 26mp resolution of RP is more than enough for me, but I didn't buy it because the EVF is worse than the one from EOS R and I still have some headaches from EVFs. So the "new products can't give better pictures that people will be able to tell in a double blind test" is valid and it what I always said and say the same every time people talk about image quality.

2. Af - I said and I keep saying that if you know what you are doing, for the majority of situations you don't need more than a 6D in terms of Af. I also said that I bought 5D Mark IV as an upgrade from 6D mostly for fps and for the configuration of the menu and buttons that helped me get the images I want with the bird that made me start shooting wildlife, the Kingfisher. I also said that I can make any camera work for me and I can get the same results with a low specs camera most of the times like others shooting with better cameras, with the mention that for certain situations I may need more time to get those results. And last time I made this affirmation was here, right in this topic. Remember the images and videos of Erik Valind with the model doing jumps in the desert and I said that I can do the same with K1 or with 5DsR, but that I would probably need extra 2-3 hours to get those results given the complexity of the scene and the slow fps of those cameras. Same with EOS R. I said that I can shoot any kind of subject with 5D Mark IV, but for portraits the eye af of EOS R and the af points placed all over the sensor helps me get the shots faster. And I also said that 5D Mark IV is better for wildlife than EOS R which has some lag in viewfinder when comes to keeping fast birds in the frame. For static birds, EOS R is super fast to focus if you use lenses with 2x TCs due to af points sensitive to f11 vs 5D Mark IV which has af points sensitive to f8. If you look at all my comments from this forum, I always said the same thing, that if there is something that I would like from mirrorless, it's the eye af. I always said regarding Sony mirrorless cameras that they have a lot of marketing behind their eye af and tracking and in reality they are not that great. I said that the latest firmware update for Sony mirrorless made the eye af and tracking very close to what they advertised initially. Guess what? All youtubers and influencers that said the eye af and tracking of Sony cameras is perfect suddenly changed their opinion and started to say that before the latest firmware update Sony cameras had troubles in picking the right eye and keep the subject in focus. Basically what I said was true. So yes, I was consistent regarding this affirmation of yours "a single AF point was enough for most buyers with correct technique, and that subject/skills/concepts mattered".

3. Talking about paid photographers and internet reviewers - you posted a video here with a Canon shooter with 18 years of experience in shooting with Canon that said EOS R it's disappointing. Watch the video again because I don't know if it's a video to laugh about or to cry about. And let me tell you why:

- he is a landscape photographer
- he knew from the very first day that EOS R has the same sensor as 5D Mark IV because Canon said it at the press event

He took the camera to shoot landscapes for a week, he said that the camera worked flawlessly but he is disappointed because in his opinion EOS R is a smaller 5D Mark IV with a single slot card. I mean, really? He needed a week to realize that for landscapes he basically had the same camera giving the same sensor used in 5D Mark IV? I said I bought EOS R for eye af and silent shutter. These 2 things helps me get the same images I did before, but a little faster. I never said I get better images in terms of image quality and as you know, I don't give a ... when comes to dynamic range or ISO on any camera. My cameras are set to TAV and Auto ISO where ISO can go up to 12000 if the subject photographed require such high ISO. It's the limit I shoot at and I'm comfortable with the results.

Regarding my last comment which was the one regarding the CP+ and Ricoh mirrorless, it was sarcasm to Biz-engineer who doesn't need cameras with better specs because those cameras will make his images irrelevant.

[biz-engineer]

Regarding my last comment which was the one regarding the CP+ and Ricoh mirrorless, it was sarcasm to Biz-engineer who doesn't need cameras with better specs that will make irrelevant images.

If Ricoh releases a mirrorless camera, it'd better be a significant step above the K1, not like a K1 without mirror like Canon did with the EOS R which is basically a 5DIV without mirror and a different bayonet mount so that RF lenses can't be used on a 5DIV. People complain about Pentax not releasing new models often, but when do Canon improve their cameras, every decade? It took Canon how many years to add 8Mpixels to their 5DII wow?

[clackers]

If Ricoh releases a mirrorless camera, it'd better be a significant step above the K1, not like a K1 without mirror like Canon did with the EOS R which is basically a 5DIV without mirror and a different bayonet mount so that RF lenses can't be used on a 5DIV.

Absolutely agree, BE, other companies can insult their customers by making weaker versions of their DSLRs but Ricoh should instead do the right thing by theirs.

We went through all this before with the K-01, which was an inferior, more costly K-30. And that's why it failed as a product, a mere curiosity piece ("Look! It's mirrorless!") to anyone else other than a handful of fans who were (and still are) charmed by it!

[Dan Rentea]

If Ricoh releases a mirrorless camera, it'd better be a significant step above the K1, not like a K1 without mirror like Canon did with the EOS R which is basically a 5DIV without mirror and a different bayonet mount so that RF lenses can't be used on a 5DIV.

Come on, who are you're fooling? First you say you don't need a camera with lots of features and specs because it will take away your credit as a photographer, then you say that you only upgrade to medium format which basically will make your images even more irrelevant due to high quality of medium format cameras and now you come with this significant improved specs for the Pentax mirrorless camera. Basically, you "scream" in this topic that you need high level features to produce good images (15 stops of dynamic range, astrotracer, medium format cameras, high specs Pentax mirrorless camera etc.) but when I say it's nice to have options you tell me that you need basic gear because you want to produce good images by putting effort in them and not get a camera that does all for you. In other words, you bought one of the best cameras in the market for landscapes due to features build in, which is K1, and you say about the ones using cameras that for landscapes are far away in terms of features from K1 that are marketing victims because they put a lot more effort than you to get good landscape images. Nice one!

You talk about significant steps above K1 and yet, you bought K1 II while having K1. This K1 II must be a hell of a improvement over K1...

And as usual, you keep moving the discussion to Canon because others can't wait to support you in such a debate...

Since this discussion started, a single person took the time to provided me a valid comment with arguments without doing the ussual Pentax vs. Canon vs. Sony vs. Nikon circus. That guy was Photoptimist, which I thank to for a normal response. So, it seems that a normal discussion it's doable if people wants that. But it's more fun to move the discussion on the dark side...

---------- Post added 09-16-19 at 06:54 AM ----------

other companies can insult their customers by making weaker versions of their DSLRs

Since you like talking about EOS R, let me ask you something. How much time did you spend shooting with 5D Mark IV and EOS R so that you came to the conclusion that EOS R is weaker than 5D? I'm asking because if you just have this opinion based on the internet articles and videos from influencers, then let me remind you that the same guys who say that EOS R is worse than 5D Mark IV also say that K1 is not a great camera and Ricoh is living in the past. Why do you think that I always say that I value the user experience more than I value lab tests and charts or youtube videos? So, tell me, how much time did you spend in making the test that convinced you that EOS R is a worse camera than 5D Mark IV? Because for me it has all I need from 5D Mark IV and it has 2 additional things that I find usefull: eye af and silent shutter. If video were a thing for me, then it would have been 3 things because on video side EOS R is also better than 5D. Not to mention that EOS R is 1000$ cheaper than 5D when it was launched.