22codfish: The Pentax K-S2 is now listed as $499.00At that price, it will offer more and out-perform all the other brands; but that camera is not necessary to be included because the K-50 is still listed for sale.
The Pentax K-50 is listed as $306.00, not discontinued, pending the official announcement of the Pentax K-70, which will replace the Pentax K-50.
There should be a Pentax camera in this group.
The K-50 is indeed discontinued, according to the Ricoh Imaging's website. Even though one can still find it in stores.
Rest in peace.
Sunshine4784: Well, truth be told, Pentax is not that third party friendly. Right now, there's an issue that few sigma lenses are not compatible with K-1 which creates scratches. Base on their interview, Pentax didn't even let other companies about their new camera and K mount informations to support more lenses.
Yes you are. But it's pointless to continue since no force of this world could make you read that article, so I'll end the here.
On the contrary, it's the only explanation. They're not doing more K-mount lenses because they decided against it. They did countless K-mount lenses so far, the aperture mechanism is not a secret for them. The problem is not technical but economical. But since you're still ignoring the content of the article yourself tried to present as proof, you are intentionally trying to mislead.
Definitely a lie. There are too many cheap K-mount lenses (including Sigma) to make it a ridiculous lie. Besides, aperture levers are aperture levers, there's nothing to make only the Pentax ones utterly more difficult.Your insistence in ignoring the explanation forum the article is highly suspect, by the way.
That's a lie. K-mount lenses are not more difficult to make than e.g. Nikon ones; the problem is the volume.This is explained in the interview - did you actually read past "special parts"? Did you read the detailed explanation from the editor notes? "The problem for Pentaxians is that there just aren't enough of them, so demand for Pentax-mount lenses is small to the point that it's economically difficult to produce them, or at least to do so in a way that would keep Pentax users happy"
Pentax K require custom-made parts, and so does Nikon and Sony SLT. There's nothing special about them, other than that.
Yeah... right.Except that Nikon is also using mechanical linkage for aperture control (except in their latest lenses). And so does Sony, for their SLTs.As they're explaining in the article you're citing, it's actually about demand. Otherwise Sigma is technically able to make Pentax K lenses, as proven by countless such products.
Sure they had, about some VR patents.But I guess Sigma is otherwise telling Canon&Nikon, "hey, I don't like your new camera body shape as it interferes with some of our nonstandard lenses. Change it!" ;-)
I'd like to see some evidence that Canon and Nikon are involving Sigma into their camera development.
Joe Ogiba: Smart idea of Ricoh using the older 36mp Sony sensor to keep the cost well under $2K. Too bad Pentax did not have 4K video mode with H.265 like the Samsung NX1 to increase sales but it looks like most Pentax users are not interested .
It's not that bad :) especially if the CPU asks its neighbor, the nVidia board, to help ;-)But I get what you're saying.
Hmm... my PC has a Haswell Refresh i7, powerful yet outdated :)
What Joe won't say is that both Sony 4K-capable FF cameras are significantly more expensive than the K-1. Even the 12MP A7 II - the low resolution badly hurting its stills resolving power - is about $3000.Being interested in 4K video comes with a price tag.
Nice try... "Samsung NX1" as an example to be followed "to increase sales"? Really?Where is Samsung now?
Alex Sarbu: The images were updated, I took the ISO 100 RAWs and had a look. Much improved in the corners.The year 1999 lens is not so bad after all ;)
Yes, I'm sure - I have some of the old files.
But JPEG are useless, they have varying amounts of sharpening applied. I'm downloading the RAWs instead.
The images were updated, I took the ISO 100 RAWs and had a look. Much improved in the corners.The year 1999 lens is not so bad after all ;)
SmilerGrogan: How dare anyone blame LensRentals for supplying a bad lens? I have rented dozens of lenses (and bought a few) from them and all have been stellar. Look elsewhere if you seek someone or something to blame.
No, that's silly.Probably the LR sample is good enough for anything but pixel peeping/camera testing. I'm not familiar with the 77mm, but the RAW images sharpen up quite nicely and there's still a lot of detail in the center.Don't forget, we're talking about a 1999 portrait lens. There was no pixel peeping back then, only photography ;-)
paulpin: I am really put off by the absurd tilting screen....one has to question the marriage between Pentax and Ricoh who are both famous for questionable querks....being different for difference sake here........I have a sony a77 as well as two Pentax K's and always wish the A77 reversible(for protection)...and twisty bendy tilt screen was on the Pentax K's....I have serious concerns about the Pentax tilt design....hence not buying the camera unseen or untested.Perhaps it should have been designed by engineers instead of photographers(sic)
Nice try. But Pentax with the K-1 is the only manufacturer confident enough to demonstrate its Flexible Tilt LCD's sturdiness.
As a "Pentaxian" (what a joke... your allegiance is clear from your posts), are you even aware that Pentax no longer makes these silver painted, easy to scratch FA lenses you're talking about? It's more than a decade since those are out of production.Not that it says anything about the K-1.
Alex Sarbu: Silkypix, too - version 6.1.27:http://silkypix.isl.co.jp/en/download/ds6/
Unfortunately, it's not yet available from the European site... and if you have the EU version, you can't upgrade using the JP one.
Silly me... I wrote about DS 6 because that's what I have. But, obviously, DS 7 was also updated (v188.8.131.52), and so was DS Pro 7 (v 184.108.40.206).
Silkypix, too - version 6.1.27:http://silkypix.isl.co.jp/en/download/ds6/