I think the next camera will have it, but it probably won't be a K-3 III replacement. The K-3 III is the closest thing Pentax makes to a do-it-all camera.
But I can see Pentax thinking, "An APS-C camera has to be small to be competitive"Įven though I don't care for the feature myself, I think it should have been added to this model. The Fujifilm XH2 is the only other camera that might be close in size when it comes out. The K-3 III is already bigger than any other current APS-C camera (although OMDS makes that EM-1 X thing), so they didn't want to add any more thickness.
#CANON MF 210 PAGES PER MINUTE FULL#
If it is not physically smaller than a full frame camera, what does that do to the appeal? I think size (slimness) was a bigger motive than cost reduction.
I also think that they see the difficult in marketing APS-C cameras in 2022. So they had a precedent of paring down a product to essentials and being very successful. They might have annoyed a few people, but they gained a lot more customers. The result there was a major hit (by Ricoh standards) and certainly a better seller than the predecessor. Specifically, they did not add a tilt screen, they removed the flash and they removed a few buttons and dial settings. In that case, they pared back some features to focus on the essence of what they intended the camera to be. I think this is partly because of the experience they had with the GR III.
0 kommentar(er)
