Srsly? The New Pentax

I have to admit I was shocked when I found out the price of the new Pentax.

For those of you not following along with DSLR news (more and more people, lately), Pentax has introduced a newly designed camera that unfortunately has an iteration naming convention because of where it falls in the lineup. And an awkward iteration it is—the K-3 Mark III, or K-3 III. I gather that should be pronounced kay-three-three. Pretty soon Porsche will get to the 911th version of the 911, I guess. I would love there to be a Porsche 911 Mark CMXI. (That's the roman numeral for 911 as you've probably guessed.)

But it's not a refresh, not the old model warmed over. It's all new.

Some intriguing improvements
What's so special about it? Well, I've not seen one, but according to everybody's go-to site for nutz 'n' boltz, Amazon's DPReview, it has a new sensor. An MB sensor. That stands for mo' bettah, which as far as I can tell is how every new sensor is trumpeted on release. Or 90% of them anyway. Maybe I've become inured to marketing hype.

The best glass pentaprism viewfinder ever on an APS-C DSLR. Okay, they've got my attention.

MB autofocus. Goes in the "I'm jaded, show me" bin.

MB IBIS. Okay, that tweaks my GAS a tad too. Wouldn't take much to beat the SR (shake reduction) in the old K-20, but then, that came out in April of 2008, Grandpa. (I was around back then, sonny!)

Big honkin' battery that lasts forever. I admit that this always appeals to me.

All-new, better, longer-lasting (300k actuations) shutter. Okay; like the sound of that.

There's video-y stuff. Don't care, don't care.

The camera looks the absolute business. Reminds me of the Jeep Gladiator somehow. Or the new Bronco. I am not supposed to care how a camera looks, but of course I do. This has always been a strength of Pentaxii; they tend to look like cameras are supposed to look.

It's Ricoh's flagship APS-C DSLR. DPReview thinks it's clear that a lot of genuine clean-sheet engineering effort has gone into this camera, and that is worthy of some respect unless and until we find out differently.

Maybe I should check that out
So I was just thinking, hmm, I used a lot of Pentaxes a decade ago, I should really catch up with them and see what they've been up to recently, maybe I'll request one for review. It can't cost that much, right? It's got a fixed viewing screen. As in, doesn't articulate at all. You know, like Grandpa's DSLR. Hey, at least you won't have to fret about flip-up vs. flip-out.

But then I got grumpy. I caught myself thinking, bah, they'll probably want fourteen or fifteen hundred for it, the way things are going these days.

Then I looked.

Two grand.

TWO GRAND?!? What? Seriously? That's the exact same price as a brand new in-the-factory-sealed-box K-1 II! Full frame, half again as many megapickles, fancy hydraulics all over the viewing screen so you can contort it however you want it K-1 II! That one. It's three hundred dollars more than a Fuji X-T4! That's like John Starks trash-talking Michael Jordan. Same price as the pro Nikon D500! Same price as the full-frame Sony A7 Mark III! Help, I can't stop typing !'s!

Corporations are not actually people, so they cannot actually lie around in the rec room feeling sluggish and useless and puffing one too many joints, but: Ricoh must be high.

Two grand.

Down boy
Well, calm down, hoss. I need to stop applying my price sensitivity level to cameras. It's a bad habit. And it's dumb. There are plenty of people out there for whom the difference between $1,200 and $2,000 for a camera body is not especially meaningful.

Pentaxes look the way cameras are supposed to look.

It occurred to me when I was contemplating the meaning of Erwin Puts's work and relationship to Leica yesterday that my primary allegiance isn't to brands, it's to the people who use the brands. Just because I've only ever owned one Canon doesn't mean I don't like Canon, because I think of Josh H. and Tom B. and all the people I know who have shot with and loved their Canons over the years. My primary attitude toward Leica doesn't link directly to the corporation or even the legend or the lore, it links to Jay B. and Jack M. who both love their very different Leicas. The meaning of Nikon isn't "what do you think of the D850," it's "just think of all the great work that's been done with Nikons by so many different people over the years" from Eve Arnold to Galen Rowell to Peter Turnley.

I haven't always liked Ricoh. (They stiffed me for $2,500 worth of advertising when they bought Pentax. Just said, nah, we're not honoring that, go stuff yourself. Refused to pay the bill.) But I've always really liked people who use Pentaxes. They're the nicest people. It's the users that matter, not the name on the top plate.

So I should just chill out. Two grand means it's out of my price range; it doesn't actually mean it's too expensive.

Here's the K-3 Mark III at B&H. So tell me, how do we feel about the concept of a "flagship APS-C DSLR" in April of 2021, in the era of full-frame mirrorless? Does it feel a little like "most popular mid-size sedan" in the era of SUVs and pickup trucks?

Mike

Book o' this Week:
Accidentally Wes Anderson, the group-sourced book of the Instagram trend, endorsed by the director. Go read about it! <—This is a portal to Amazon; also available at the Book Depository for global delivery with free shipping.

Original contents copyright 2021 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Speed: "Broadly speaking, camera buyers come in two flavors—those that are already in the system and those that are new to the system. Low prices are designed to lure newbies while high prices are designed to net those with a bag full of lenses who don't want to start from scratch. Exception that proves the rule...useful new features and outstanding performance can demand a premium from everyone. A friend and life-long Canon user sold everything (Canon DSLR plus a bag of heavy lenses) and spent a boatload of money for small and light Sony mirrorless products. His chiropractor was the loser."

John McMillin: "Yes, it's a fearsome price. I paid that much for the K-1 when it came out, and was happy to do it, because other FF options were considerably more. For me, the big draw of FF was getting a full-sized OVF again. This new K-3 III promises a view almost as big, and possibly brighter. It will certainly be faster than the K-1, which suits itself to leisurely contemplation of the scene while the buffer writes to the card. So it will be a more versatile camera, for sure.

"The image quality difference between the two doesn't concern me; I can barely tell my K-1 photos from those of my old K-3 (v.1). Good enough is good enough. As with your truck analogy, we're all awash in excess capacity, with pickups that are too tall to load easily, sporty cars too powerful to ever drive hard, and cameras so rich in detail capture that we need to enlarge to ridiculous sizes to find any differences between them. There is something satisfying about doing the job with less, of having just enough and using it fully.

"The key spec I'm waiting to learn is just what the crop option does on the new K-3 III. The K-1's three-way crop gives me fast access to normal, 1.5x [? I don't know what this means —Ed.] and the classic, elegant 1:1 aspect ratios. I suppose the K-3 offers only a square crop, but if it gives 4:3, the artistic choice, I might sell my Micro 4/3 gear and take the plunge. But in a year or so, when prices have declined due to discounting."

Michael J. Perini (partial comment): "It is just so late to the party. I wish them well."

Steve Biro: "This is Pentax trying to do with DSLRs what Leica did with rangefinders. Leica could not compete with modern cameramaking, so they focused on their heritage at increasingly bespoke prices. And now Ricoh is taking a page out of that playbook. I fully expect the replacement for the Pentax K-1 II to be even more money. I wish Ricoh good luck but I'm not sure that it's going to work. They need a lot of conquest sales because the traditional Pentaxian (and I was one for a very long time) is a skinflint."

robert e: "I think the sticker shock is that much greater because Pentax used to be the value brand for the savvy student or amateur. Seems to me that pro-build SLRs are a niche market at this point, so shouldn't we expect niche prices? The price tag may be more harbinger than outlier. I imagine pentaprisms and mechanical shutters aren't getting any cheaper to make, especially at best-of-breed level. 'Why?' is a different question, and perhaps more salient, but not one I can address.

"The thing I miss most about DSLRs might be decent battery life."

Bill Skones: "Milking the faithful with deep pockets. They almost all do it, and Pentax needs to do it. The price of the Pentax KP dropped almost 20% in the nine months from when it was introduced to the following holiday season. It's probably true most enthusiasts don't need a camera costing more than $1,200 and many would be fine with one costing half that. But every manufacturer needs premium, high-margin products, and for Pentax that includes an APS-C DSLR. I plan to buy a K3 III, after the price drops some if I can stave of the GAS. I like the appearance, operation and handling of Pentax cameras. Hope you will get a review copy and let us know what you think. Of course that would not be time well spent on your part, since it would not interest most readers or get many click-throughs to purchase."

Bill Pearce (partial comment): "If the difference between $1,200 and $2,000 is trivial to you, it's god's way of saying you have too much money."

Alex Sarbu (partial comment): "For me the difference between the $1,200 and the $2,000 camera is very meaningful: the $1,200 one would not give me what I want. Yes, the $1,200 camera would be 'cheaper' but it would be money wasted; the $2,000 one looks like a more cost-effective option (YMMV)."

Zyni Moë: "Think someone at Ricoh realises the end is coming and is trying to extract last profits from declining sales: GR III price was also much higher than GR II."

David Dyer-Bennet: "I guess maybe for an APS-C $2k is expensive. Nothing I've looked seriously at in 10 years has been that cheap, though, certainly isn't today."

Andrew Kochanowski: "You know I'm your Pentax guy, though this comment is late. I must have missed this yesterday.

"The K-3 III was obviously designed just for me. I can't wait to get one. I also think it's a pretty good move for them. With all the talk of DSLRs dying, I think I saw that they still accounted for half of all interchangeable lens camera sales last year. Half is a lot.

"I'd put the $2k price tag in perspective. They aren't going for the working press pros or the sports shooters who already have all the Nikon and Canon gear they need. They are going for the age 45+ amateur and occasional pro who grew up with film SLRs and who know how nice a proper SLR feels. They are selling a premium product like Leica at a still-significant discount from the Leica price of entry. I think the target audience can afford $2k, and think the price point is not a barrier at all.

"I've had the K-5, the K-3 and the KP since 2015 or so, and lemme tell you, they all feel great. Their viewfinders are nice and bright, and I can only imagine how nice the K-3 III will be. They get great battery life, even the smallish KP. If you care about such things (and boy, I do) the rubberized, knurled, and positive tactile feel knobs are great. All of them feel dense, like you're holding a chunk of magnesium covered in nice fake leather (because you are).

"The only knock against these that I ever really saw was the AF. I'm not a sports shooter, and imagine that you'd want the best tracking you could get if you were, but for me, on the street and doing candid stuff, the AF was fine. The new one is supposed to be far better; we'll see."

Comments

[Rob L.]

I've seriously considered a K-1, as a high megapixel, full frame counterpart to my Fuji gear that makes casual astrophotography easier sounds cool...but between the camera, and the lenses, it's too much money for too little return. The K3/3 feels like it might be the last great Pentax, a Grumman Bearcat of cameras - fantastic performance, but a footnote operationally. And it looses the internal GPS that makes Pentax's nifty astrotracer work, so it's of zero interest to me - but it's a nifty option for someone with a boatload of Pentax glass.

[c.d.embrey]

So tell me, how do we feel about the concept of a "flagship APS-C DSLR"

I don't believe in flagships. If I was interested in an APS-C camera I'd buy a bottom-of-the-line Full Frame Canon RP, and use it with EF-S lenses and an adapter. Sells for <$1,000.00. If I later decide to step-up to Full Frame, all I have to do is use Full Frame lens 8-)

[Edd Fuller]

I shot Pentax, both film and digital for 35+ years. I loved the brand and when my K5 was ready for an upgrade, I waited. The K3 didn't offer enough to motivate me. I wanted to stick with APS-C as the sweet spot in sensor (and file) size, so the K1 did not appeal that much, plus I had some nice APS-C glass that would have to be replaced if I went full frame. So I waited.

Finally, after weighing the cost of switching systems, the Fuji XH1 with battery grip was offered at fire sale prices, and I made the switch. It was a decision I expected to regret when Pentax finally came out with the new APS-C flagship, but at $2000, not tempted and no regrets.

I miss Pentax. The XH1 is great in so many ways, but does not fit my hand the way the K5 did. Mirror-less accommodates my failing eyesight much better than a DSLR, so I am happy. Goodbye Pentax--too much, too late.

[Andrew]

It's probably a perfectly fine camera, a great one in fact, but not one I'd buy in 2021. Were I to go with APS I'd go with Fuji. In any case, it's gotta be mirrorless in 2021.

I love the Ricoh GR III and I've long wished Ricoh would produce more compact mirrorless options. The GXR was great, but a failed concept.

I have to wonder who would buy the K3 this year? I think you're right on the price; lots of competition and other compelling options.

[AN]

https://petapixel.com/2010/12/03/ridiculous-pentax-k-r-robot-edition/

“Pentaxes look the way cameras are supposed to look.”

Fully agree.

[KeithB]

"The best glass pentaprism viewfinder ever on an APS-C DSLR."

Probably the last one, too.

[Stan B.]

Like every other camera these days, I'm sure it's quite good. Definitely not the best looking or most popular, but good. Although the difference between $1,200 and $2,000 for a camera body doesn't matter to... Leica buyers, it sure does to most everyone else, like say...
Pentax aficionados.

[Mark Rouleau]

Re: price. It's not like they can make it up on volume.

[Tullio Emanuele]

OK, I am going to comment on this one two (2 in a row, that is a record for me). Fully agree with your comments with one addition. One glaring problem with this camera is the relative lack of specifically designed lenses for the APS-C format. Problem common to every other brand except Fuji.

I have a Pentax Mx and ME super ( since late 70’s) with 3 Pentax lenses 35 f2.8, 50 f1.2 and 200 f4. Plus a wonderful Tamron 90 f2.5 macro. I use the old lenses with adaptors on a Sony a7r iii or Fuji x-pro 3.

There are a lot of Pentax lenses around, but most are for full frame. Pentax even re issued the limited series recently, again for full frame.

Does this make any sense??

[Benjamin Marks]

I tend to agree, Mike. My eyes start watering at around the $1,300 mark. I own a K-5 and a K-1 and think they get a lot of things right in those models. In general, camera makers are in a bit of a jam, aren't they? They have to keep the hype going in order to convince customers to upgrade every year or two, but they sort of seem have a ceiling on a per unit cost. In addition, you have to spread those new-camera programming and design costs among a finite number of units sold, and your overall number of units sold is shrinking year over year. Kinda makes you wish there were simply chip upgrades that you could drop into a camera like the film of yore . . .then you could charge for the chip upgrade without swapping out the whole rig. But of course, Moore's law works against you here, even if the camera engineers could make it possible. Your whole chip architecture is going to change every three or four years, so you might was well change all the IC's in the camera. Phooey. Glad I am not in that business.

The difference between cameras and computers is that with computers, more processing power is always a good thing, but with cameras, once you are at "good enough" your customer base thins out quite rapidly. How many folks, for instance, are really going to go for a 100 m-pixel camera when they are already at 35-50? And heck, they had me at 12 mp . . .

[Albert Smith]

"...that my primary allegiance isn't to brands, it's to the people who use the brands..."

I understand. Back when I was a Leica shooter (film), one of the darlings in the Leica world was David Alan Harvey. On the various forums we'd all discuss how he could do entire assignments with an M6 and a single lens (his "Cuba" book is 100% 35mm Summilux). It was something to try to emulate, and we'd all try the minimalist thing.

Later, he switched brands and the image that they used in the news release that he was let go from Magnum for possible sexual improprieties was of him out on the street with a Fujifilm X-T2 and the 27mm pancake lens.

So, one of my influencers used two of my brands and models, uh...never mind.

[Bill Pearce]

Mike,

I'm sorry to be catty, so blame it on my cats. But really, if the difference between $1200 and $2000 is trivial to you, it's gods way of saying you have too much money.

[Christopher May]

I think we're going to see more carving of niches with commensurate price tags in the coming years.

Much of the internet is abuzz with the coming DSLR demise. Canon's recent announcement that it was discontinuing several popular and/or high profile EF lenses (40mm f/2.8 STM, 60mm f/2.8 EF-S, 70-200mm f/4L IS II, 85mm f/1.2L, and 200mm f/2L) is a pretty good sign of their intent with regards to DSLR production. Nikon seems to be on track to issue a few more DSLRs but it's not hard to imagine them dropping DSLR production to really start pushing the Z lineup in the not to distant future.

I think Ricoh Pentax is sticking a flag in the DSLR ground and saying "this belongs to us." That kind of makes sense to me. There are still a lot of folks who appreciate an optical viewfinder. Pentax's history of backwards compatibility is a boon here, too. DSLRs that can use vintage glass will definitely be appealing to a number of users.

The problem shows up when one realizes what that number is. I don't know what it is but it has to be small. Niches always bring premium pricing. Sometimes very premium. Witness the price for a Leica MP or an M-A. There's enough demand to keep making them but they come at a cost. I think that's what we're starting to see with the K3III and its pricing.

I think we're likely to see more of this, too. If JIP is to turn the old Olympus into something profitable, I think they're going to have to really start pushing the size advantage of m43. Look for the same kind of price premium. The $7500 150-400mm is probably a good reference point for this. It's a specialty lens that offers a tremendous size and weight advantage for what it is/does but it comes with a big price tag because it's targeted to such a niche market (backcountry birders and wildlife shooters, I guess?).

With Canon/Sony/Nikon starting to really duke it out for the full frame mirrorless market, I could see other manufacturers also looking for niches. Panasonic has always had a leg up with regards to video oriented stills cameras and it doesn't seem like a big stretch to see them keep pushing that. Fuji has picked an interesting strategy by avoiding the full frame market and splitting their systems into APS and bigger than full frame. Leica will always be Leica.

The last bastion of DSLRs seems to be a good niche for Ricoh Pentax. I wish them luck and hope that they can find a way to make it work.

[J WILLIAMS]

Selling to a very small audience obviously.

They need to stay relevant but that's not going to do it. Not sure if this is even possible but here's my idea on how to make a DSLR relevant in the mirrorless world. First contact Fuji and find out if you can buy whatever tech they use to combine an optical and electronic VF. If it were possible to have the mirror in the up position and display an LCD panel in the VF that would actually be kind of cool.

Of course you'd need to have good focus in live view which I have no idea what Pentax has in that department. If they don't have good live view AF then they have to get in touch with Canon and buy their DPAF technology.

If they keep at it I'm sure with enough money they can make this camera relevant.

[louis mccullagh]

Harvey photos full screen from Cuba book.

https://www.davidalanharvey.com/cuba3

[MarkB]

It's always about the people you associate with the brand, isn't it? Circuitously related to the Pentax K-3-3-3 (I joke, but then I own 5 Pentax cameras and 15-some K-mount lenses, so St. Penta will absolve me)... anyone remember that Sigma makes cameras, too?

Back in the day, Sigma was the bottom-tier lensmaker of bargain plastic tubes and strange-mount cameras. Then the founder's son (Kazuto Yamaki) took over... and today they make some of the best lenses available for any mount. Also some quirky cameras with those "Foveon" sensors.

IIRC, the SD1 was originally priced at $9,700 and got plenty of notice for it, but few buyers. Yamaki-san humbly repriced it as the SD1 Merrill at just above $2k, and even today they still make Foveon cameras (at a loss) as an homage to their founder.

IMHO, Pentax knows they are only selling to the faithful at this point, and also that if they priced it within reason, no one else would take notice anyhow. If anything, they got you to write about it! ;)

[Michael J. Perini]

I'll bet the new Pentax is a really superb camera, and imagine someone finally fixed the APS-c DSLR Viewfinder and made it an asset rather than a compromise.......but it is just SO late to the party.
I wish them well.

[Dan Khong]

Pentax is inspired by the performance of Bitcoin.

[Daniel]

"Corporations are not actually people,"

Ever since Citizens United, the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision allowing unlimited corporate and union spending on political issues, Americans have been debating whether, as Mitt Romney said, “Corporations are people, my friend.” Occupy Wall Street protestors decried the idea, late night comedians mocked it, and reform groups proposed amending the Constitution to eliminate it. Today, however, the Supreme Court endorsed corporate personhood — holding that business firms have rights to religious freedom under federal law. Not only do corporations have rights, their rights are stronger than yours.

[Steve Blader]

Pentax has some great DA limited lenses - 15mm, 21mm, 35mm, 40mm, 70mm, 20-40mm. All small jewels. I was thinking of pre-ordering the K3 III, but wound up ordering a KP yesterday from Adorama for $696, roughly a third the price of the new iteration of the K3. That being said, I could still see getting the new K3 in a year or two if the autofocus and everything else about it really lives up to all the pre-release publicity. There's a lot to like about Pentax, at least for me.

[John Krumm]

Early reports are that the AF is much improved, which has been the primary complaint for a number of years. I looked at some high iso sample images comparing them to the K1 II and surprisingly they looked better. But really the only thing that made me a little frustrated using my K1 was inconsistent focus, so if they have that fixed, I think they should be sitting pretty. Can't wait for the $3500 K1 III : ).

[Jon Schick]

Well I for one am much more interested in this than a FF mirrorless. APSC hits something of a sweet spot for me in terms of image quality vs portability, especially when you factor in the ridiculously large lenses that come with FF nowadays; not interested in carrying a bag full of those, but a small bag with a few well-chosen DA Limiteds is a much more tempting proposition. Pentax build and handling is generally excellent, I care not about video, and yes please to a decent viewfinder and battery life. I think people need to get used to Pentax being a small scale boutique manufacturer now; the Leica of dDSLRs but not quite with the red dot tax. I hope it works for them as they’re a much more innovative manufacturer than they are given credit for, and know how to make cameras that just feel great when you use them.

[John Shriver]

Considering that they improved compatibility with pre-Pentax-A lenses, and they have a small lens line-up, I suspect that they need to make more money on camera sales because they won't make as much on lens sales as Canon and Nikon. Can't just "break even" on cameras to make money on lenses.

While I'll wait for the next K-1, I can hope that the K-3 III and K-1 III will use a focusing screen that's better for manual-focus lenses, taking advantage of light gain elsewhere in the finder system.

The praise for the K-3 III finder reminds me of what I love most about my Pentax LX -- the finder.

[Robbie Corrigan]

It's €2299 or ($2730) if you pay VAT and taxes like we do in the EU. The way I look at it is this, I have a K-3 that has given me 7yrs of faultless service and a K-1 that must be 4yrs old now and again faultless service and enjoyment. So paying a few grand that will enhance my system of 10 Pentax Star or Limited grade (excluding a couple of macros) lens is a no brainer to me. I get a wider usable ISO range, faster burst rate, an enhanced HyperProgram mode, an OVF that is almost equal to the K-1's OVF, get to use the same batteries (must be 5th generation for me now), and AF that can handle a bit of movement and an improvement in focusing on black cats in coal bunkers :)
My 70-200 will feel like it can reach a bit further, my macro's can have a bit more DOF, and I get a 50‰ improvement over the K-3 in fps. I also get to understand the new control system that elements of will migrate to a K-1 III
I'll get the premium version in black, the grip might help balance the DFA* range better (zoom especially) but a K-3 III, sans grip, elegant leather strap, FA43 and a fresh spring morning having a wander about Paris draws a very stylised visual whilst remaining photographically inclined in my minds eye.

[Kye Wood]

Genius.
Simply genius.
Kudos to the person at Ricoh who magicked up the idea of a silly retail price. Now people will be talking about their new camera, thinking about their new camera, and then? They drop the price. By 30 percent?

It didn't work out for Sigma with their Merills of course. LOLZ!

[Dan Boney]

I ordered the K3-3 today, when I first saw the price I was stunned a bit, too - fully expecting it to be no more than $1,500, and then thought I’d just get a KP at the reduced $696 pricing but there was a run on those when everyone saw the K-3 release... Even so, I get it - Pentax knows they only have a sliver of a declining camera industry so they might as well offer a premium product to those remaining few takers. It’s the overall package with the gem of the Limited lens set that makes it a unique experience, including the 20-40mm (30-60mm eq) “variable normal” that you’ve written about before... And quite frankly, I’m getting overwhelmed at staring at so many electronic screens these days, getting hard to even buy a car anymore without a dash full of ‘em so I for one will be glad to have one of the last great OVF experiences in my camera.

[Kye Wood]

ANECDOTAL GENERALITY ALERT -
I look at cameras on ebay. A lot. Yes, it's an illness. Anyway. As a seasoned gear watcher, I'm of the opinion that Pentax DSLR 'gear' is the most used gear there is. It's normally in pretty crap condition. Which is good. It means that they get worn out, so to speak. Given how well they're screwed together, that's no small feat.

Only loved gear gets worn out. The most clapped out guitar your have is the one you played to death, because using it gave you the most rewarding sound. Get where this is going yet?

Some people still buy Porsches because of how great those cars once were (compared to their peers in the market). And so it is, lest we forget that the Pentax K10D is still lurking in older enthusiasts psyche. Tank like build. Angelic ergonomics. Unique ISO-shift mode. Great viewfinder. And a shutter sound like two pirates clashing cutlasses. Think "KAR-CHIINNK-UH!". And weather proof. Great colour signature too.

2021. The year of the nostalgic? Why not. It's only money. Buy something you love.

[Al C.]

Question is, does it still have the little green button? On a serious note, 820 grams?

Still got my K20D. But have moved on to mirrorless. Once used to exposure (comp) correctly reflected in the EVF there's no going back no matter how good the pentaprism.

[Bob Johnston]

They will need to ask a lot of money because they will sell very few of them. Additionally it must be expensive to make an slr compared to a mirrorless camera. I remember the days when to own a Pentax was to be up there with the best, and they were lovely cameras. This will probably be their last slr. Let's hope not their last camera.

[Bruno]

The K3 Mk. 3 is certainly a great camera. It's for Pentaxians. That's a rare group nowadays. I like the feeling of a Pentax in my hands, the haptics are much better than Nikon, Canon or Sony imho. For the rest, especially AF performance I prefer to use one camera for a long time and get to know it's flaws and powers. Any camera has this.

I still have and use a K3 Mk. 1. I did not upgrade when they omitted the internal flash. I normally use an external flash, for sure. But for travel and nature photography I like to reduce weight and rather take a third lense than a flash, so having the internal one is better than having none ... This means, the new K3 is nothing for me.

[Alex Sarbu]

For me the difference between the $1200 and the $2000 camera is very meaningful: the $1200 one would not give me what I want. Yes, the $1200 camera would be "cheaper" but it would be money wasted; the $2000 one looks like a more cost-effective option (YMMV).
Let's think about it: Nikon's 153 points AF was simultaneously introduced with the $2000 D500, and the much more expensive D5; the previous 51-points AF was introduced on the D300/D3 cameras. For $1200, the best Pentax could do was SAFOX 11...
How about the new viewfinder? That high refraction glass pentaprism proved challenging to process, and that tells me 'expensive'.
How about the thoroughly reworked mechanics, and the new high precision coreless motors? (they help the AF as well)
I don't see how Pentax could've included all that and much more, and slash the price almost in half. While Fujifilm is allowed the $1700 X-T4...

So, Mike, before complaining that Pentax built a flagship camera instead of a mid-level one, take a look at what's inside!

[Colin Odenbach]

Great topic and comments as usual on TOP.

Here are my inflation-addled two cents.

I can empathize with your price sensitivity, Mike. Full disclosure: I am so cheap that I have never bought a new piece of gear. I got into MF SLRs 15 years after AF came out. My first (and still-current) DSLR is a D300 I bought in 2017...you get the idea.

The purchasing power of our dollars basically hasn't moved in the last 40-45 years. That got me thinking about the cost of the top-of-the-line Pentax from 1978, the K2DMD. Without the motor drive or data back (which both really should be included for the closest feature comparison and would more than double the price) the K2DMD sold for $1,525 USD at Competitive Camera adjusted for inflation($369 in 1978, body only). That was with zero weathersealing, no IBIS, no AF, an ISO range of 8-6400, 2 fps max frame rate, and a shutter designed for 50K cycles...

An earlier commenter noted that Pentax historically was a value brand and that the typical Pentaxian was a "skinflint". I fully concur, but would add that today this "average" Pentaxian is now over 65 and likely has enough disposable income to afford a $2G DSLR, at least according to Ricoh ;-).

And that to me explains the initial pricing. Ricoh looks at the K3-III as the equivalent of a D500 (even though we all know the AF won't be as good; Pentax has been at least two-generations behind top AF performance since the 1990s). And I would bet that the build quality and weathersealing, not to mention IQ, will be as good or better.

The thing is, Ricoh is not looking to get D500 owners to defect, they are looking at the "average" Pentaxian, today as niche as it gets. This will likely be the last DSLR for most of them. What's a few hundred more for the most capable Pentax SLR ever made to this point, and likely the last, barring a final K1 iteration. And if that's still too much, wait 6 months or a year for the inevitable price drop.

To me, Ricoh's biggest "mistake" is labelling this mostly new design as a K3, which draws more attention to the previous model and its $1100 USD price. They could have went with K2, pulling on those nostalgia strings a bit harder ;-) and also emphasized all the advancements with this model rather than allowing for the natural comparison with its predecessor.

Looks like they have been hitting the hookah harder lately like you said, Mike.

Take care everyone and be safe.

[Willem]

The camera makes it very easy to use K- and M-glass (no more a green button: all in the release button). The OVF is better. There's a touchscreen. AF is far better. More shots per second if you want that. Great IBIS. ISO is far better: improves on the K-1 II. Ricoh made it a small but highly capable camera, and rethought every aspect of it to make clear that it's a flagship. That comes with a price tag.
Moreover, it is expected that the K-3 will be differentiated from the future K-1, that has a flip screen. Action vs Landscape.
My only question was: should I wait for the new K-1 that will no doubt inherit most of the improvements, or should I drop for this K-3.

[John C]

Who the heck is Rob L who knows what a Grumman Bearcat is? That made me smile.

You never know what you'll come across on this blog.

Signed: Someone who saw Bill and Corkey fly together.

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

The kay-three-three. Reminds me of my favourite limerick:

The was an old lady named Parr
who took the three-three to Forfar.
"For", she said, "I believe
it is likely to leave
far before the four-four to Forfar."