[pjalves]

Those of us with a significant investment in high quality, compact APS-C lenses, that have no need to use a full frame sensor (nor spend the extra money on it)

EDIT: ... and those who want to see the APS-C view taking up the whole of the optical viewfinder, rather than a smaller rectangle within it

Well, I guess my post was somewhat provocative, and yes, you've got a point. Nevertheless, I always resented Pentax's late arrival to full-frame and its over-investment on APS-C... Specially because some years ago I got tired of waiting for a FF and decided to sell my precious "SMC K 28mm f/3.5 Shift", and also because I could never get the right results from my A and FA lenses on my K-5...
If keeping an APS-C line is inevitable so not to upset its user base, then they should at least have only one model and forget about "entry-level". In other words, the camera lineup could be like this: a "K-3 III", a "K-2" (compact FF), and the K-1x (FF flagship with all the bells and whistles), and the 645, of course.

[BigMackCam]

If keeping an APS-C line is inevitable so not to upset its user base, then they should at least have only one model and forget about "entry-level". In other words, the camera lineup could be like this: a "K-3 III", a "K-2" (compact FF), and the K-1x (FF flagship with all the bells and whistles), and the 645, of course.

I'm all for a lean and efficient model line But we mustn't forget those who want or need a lower cost entry point into the brand, and those who wish to update their older cameras to something more capable without selling the farm. Ricoh / Pentax needs those customers just as much as it needs flagship buyers. It would be a risky strategy indeed to limit its market to those with the deepest pockets. I'd say we see at least as many new members who've recently bought a K-S2 or K-70 as those who've bought the K-1...

[revelstoked]

On one hand, it makes sense that the current users who filled out this survey don't care about video, as otherwise they may have already gone to another system.

On the other hand, if this accurately represents the current Pentax user base, then it's no surprise video updates have been as sluggish as they have been. It seems that Pentax is investing everything in the still image quality department.

That's called an echo chamber, and a slowly shrinking one. It's also a bit of a weak point. Everyone is working on image quality. Show me an SLR camera made in the last 3 years by anyone with "Bad" image quality.

[tvdtvdtvd]

I got tired of waiting for a FF and decided to sell my precious "SMC K 28mm f/3.5 Shift"

Well, that was silly. That lens is FF regardless whether you're shooting a Pentax FF or Canon, Sony, et al.

If keeping an APS-C line is inevitable so not to upset its user base

I feel it's more than that. Believe it or not, but not every photographer is waiting and wanting a big, heavy FF body.
IF, I could have a modern digital FF in an ME Super body then I'd be all for it, but as far as I can see that isn't a reality.

APS-C has established itself as a legitimate form factor. The digital sensor has come a long way and I am quite happy with
the performance of my K-3. Add to that all the benefits inherent in the smaller size; less expense, lighter weight bodies and
lenses, etc. I see APS-C as the perfect balance of affordability, portability and performance. Sure, it's 'less' than FF, then again
FF is less than MF, so if that's you're argument then you might as well get a 645. Horses for courses.

forget about "entry-level"

I'll go for that. I'll even do you one further; forget about multi-tiered FF as well. The K-1 is so feature rich yet so reasonably
priced I don't see any need to have an 'entry' level FF option.

[Class A]

Show me an SLR camera made in the last 3 years by anyone with "Bad" image quality.

There isn't one, but nevertheless accommodating for video often implies compromises with respect to still image quality.

Why accept any negative impact on IQ (e.g. caused by read-out speed requirements or continuous PDAF) if the camera is meant to be used for stills photography?

I'm not objecting to having some video capabilities as a byproduct, but I would most certainly not want a feature that I practically never use (and which is much better served by dedicated video cameras) to impinge upon IQ or even increase the price of the camera.

[MarkJerling]

I would most certainly not want a feature that I practically never use (and which is much better served by dedicated video cameras) to impinge upon IQ or even increase the price of the camera.

That would be my position, exactly!

[PiDicus Rex]

This is a K-mount/DSLR survey, which is Pentax's core business.

Then why is there no option to nominate the K-01 in the list of cameras?

[PiDicus Rex]

Another thought, is on the "Features you don't want developed",...

I think it's inherently foolish to phrase the question in that way, as it allows those with personal biases to push Pentax further away from what's needed to match the current marketplace, and the features their competitors are doing much better on, and hence leads directly to a smaller market share for Pentax.

Yes, video especially from my point of view - there is a crowd of people who continually complain about the cameras even having video features, and are under the false impression that having those features makes the bodies more expensive. Having the 'Not' question allows those people to bias the survey with deliberate intent.

I've stated it elsewhere, but I'll repeat for clarity - the Video shooters don't ever complain about the quality of the Still features we also use, but we are bombarded by comments deriding us for desiring a quality of functionality in video that at least matches the quality of the still performance.

[Scintilla]

Was there an "APS-C fast normal lens" (in the 28-35mm range) on that list somewhere that I just missed?

[elvinhaak]

In the lens list where we had to select the 3 most wanted items, I think several sublists are scrambled, putting aside
---------- Post added 02-27-2018 at 01:08 PM ----------



No offense but either your comment is for fun, or you must realize your needs are outlier in comparison with mainstream pentax clients right?

Well, I guess that the survey should be able to ask for everyone, also for the non-mainstream clients of this moment...
Maybe just be able to type your own wishes in the survey (not just a click-list) would accomadate that?

If you want a survey to make products availlable maybe to new customers, the question is getting wish-based and not based on what is already in the pipeline, production based.

By the way, I use my DSLR for filming most often, but I think it is okay, it needs no new things. Maybe when the formats change in software which is generally used in video-editing, Pentax should give updates for the bodies so we can select the new format.
Maybe with a subset which you select on a computer-program and lets you download the 'Rom' that fits your wishes the most on your camera.

[sbh]

Regarding video, as far as I know, one of the main limitations is read-out speed and processing power. Improvements here would also benefit for still photographers. I remember how Tony Northrup complained that the K-1 was too slow for fast-paced portrait shoots. I can't say that I disagree.

Although I don't shoot as fast as he does, I often see myself looking and waiting for the images to appear one by one, especially when tethering. With Pixelshift things get really slow.

Speed is the weakest point imho. Faster processing + USB 3.1 would be an improvement for the entire system (including power supply via USB while tethering). But I am also aware that it would make things more expensive and eat into battery life.

[MartinVisser]

What I miss on the K-1 is the correct focus length when using a zoom above 135mm and a flash. I have an 70-200mm zoom. But the Metz flash always gets a maximum of 135mm instead of the correct focal length if above 135 mm is zoomed. The Pentax flash zooms don't go higher (Metz goes to 200mm), so Pentax seems not to be caring to solve this for non Pentax flash users with a higher zoom possible. So this is a point I missed in the survey!

[pjalves]

Well, that was silly. That lens is FF regardless whether you're shooting a Pentax FF or Canon, Sony, et al.

I don't know about silly, but it was unfortunate indeed. You see, back in 2007, when I sold the lens, I could not afford a mirrorless full-frame camera and from Pentax we only had their reps stating they were "looking into/researching FF"... And that FF only saw the light of day 9 (!) years later, in 2016, as you're certainly aware.

My only argument here is that Pentax over-invested in APS-C, as good as it may have become. Now they must keep that segment alive, thus draining their limited resources both in R&D and manufacturing. Those resources could be better utilized on a "compact FF". The K-1 is feature-rich and is reasonably priced... for a flagship "pro" camera. But I don't need one (and many like me, I imagine). I am sure they can build a FF K-P sized camera with less "pro" features and exclusively dedicated to stills. Yes, I am also one of those who doesn't care about video on a photo camera...

Anyway, I don't think the Japanese care about any of this, so... Let's see what the future holds.

Best regards

---------- Post added 2018-03-01 at 11:12 ----------

I'm all for a lean and efficient model line But we mustn't forget those who want or need a lower cost entry point into the brand, and those who wish to update their older cameras to something more capable without selling the farm. Ricoh / Pentax needs those customers just as much as it needs flagship buyers. It would be a risky strategy indeed to limit its market to those with the deepest pockets. I'd say we see at least as many new members who've recently bought a K-S2 or K-70 as those who've bought the K-1...

Yes, all brands need more users, but I personally sense a tendency from this industry to increase prices overall and focus on "top-quality"/niche gear where the big profit margins are. For most of us, photography is a passion and/or a hobby. But for those Japanese Corporations (or "exclusive"/"select" European brands), it's all just a business, and as smartphones replace proper cameras for so many people, driving SLR sales down, I guess photographic equipment will only be more expensive and product lines more "tight" in the future...

Best regards, Pedro.

[tvdtvdtvd]

I personally sense a tendency from this industry to increase prices overall and focus on "top-quality"/niche gear

Yep, this is indeed where the market is going. The low end is completely gone, gobbled up by the smartphone. The middle ground
is eroding fast as smartphones become ever more capable. The high end will most likely always have a place for dedicated gear
focused on maximum performance, but as you note this will affect the ability for hobbyists to enter the hobby. Fortunately, there is
and always will be a market for secondhand gear, so hobbyists of the future will likely have to contend with a used flagship camera
rather than buying a new entry level or mid-tier pro-sumer body.

It's not all bad. Look at the huge surplus of very cheap film era gear that is currently available for anyone wanting it. It's reasonable
to imagine that the next couple decades will provide the same surplus of used digital gear as many not so serious photographers give up
their dedicated equipment and go solely with a smart device. At the same time, those smart devices will continue to improve, to the
benefit of everyone. (I am impressed with the capability of my Iphone 6 and use its camera quite frequently. Prior smart devices
fell short of expectation, but the Iphone 6 has replaced my need for a P&S. If I have to make a compromise with portability, I would
much rather have a multipurpose tool for the job, ie smart device, than a dedicated P&S camera, everything else equal.)

[Clarity]

one feature I would love to have is uncrippled hdmi output and competitive video functionality. This seems to be mostly a software thing since people developed these things using magivlantern on older canon bodies that lacked these functions.

In general Pentax needs to up their game in the software department. I don't use or like fuji cameras but one thing they have done right is fixing a lot of issues using firmware. When was the last time Pentax ever seriously did something really worthwile with their firmware? It's mostly minor bug fixes and compatibility for newer accessories and lenses.
They sure know how to make great hardware but the software really could use some improvements.