New Pentax K-1 full frame DSLR camera teaser

A new update on the upcoming Pentax full frame DSLR camera was published online today together with two new (small) sample photos:

D FA 24-70mm F2.8ED SDM WR: for well-depicted, fine-detailed images
28.01.2016 NEW

The HD PENTAX-D FA 24-70mm F2.8ED SDM WR lens has a 17-element, 12-group optical construction featuring three ED (Extra-low Dispersion) glass elements, one anomalous-dispersion glass element, and three aspherical elements. It delivers high-contrast, high-resolution images with extra-fine details across the image field — from the center to the edges — while effectively compensating for a variety of aberrations.

When mounted on a PENTAX 35mm full-frame digital SLR camera body, this lens can be used as a standard zoom lens, with a zoom ratio of approximately 2.9-times, covering focal-length ranges from ultra-wide angle to standard. It captures unique, eye-catching images with an exaggerated perspective and a wide depth of field, making it ideal not only for sweeping landscapes, but also for confined indoor scenes with limited depth. Its weather-resistant structure prevents the intrusion of water into the interior. When coupled with a weather-resistant PENTAX 35mm full-frame digital SLR camera body, it creates a dependable, durable imaging system that performs superbly even in the rain or mist, or at locations prone to splashing water.

Via PentaxRumors

This entry was posted in Pentax and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • CinderedMonkey

    Seems like a winner…if it was named Nikon or Canon. Too bad the Pentax brand is so ignored. They make amazing cameras.

    • Marco –

      You should say this to samsung….

      • Kunzite

        We’re used to be told that Pentax is doomed. For decades.
        In the meantime, other systems come and go… 4/3, NX… which interestingly, were once deemed as “the future”. Pentax remains.

        • Pentax actually gain market share in Japan compared to 2015 – see the BCN ranking post from yesterday.

        • Mk.82

          4/3 come and go?

          Sorry, but 4/3 system is up and running, increasing the market share over Sony in mirrorless segment and going over others in video etc.

          4/3 format (system) didn’t go anywhere, it only got a new bayonet in m4/3 form from the 4/3 bayonet.

          Same system, different bayonet. Compatible to legacy bayonet.

          • Kunzite

            That is incorrect; the bayonet is a central part of a system, what makes the products (cameras and lenses) works together.
            M4/3 lives on, but the 4/3 system is dead and buried; Olympus announced the last 4/3 camera in 2010, and last 4/3 lens in 2008. The 4/3 was touted as a proper replacement for those obsolete, made-for-film cameras. I rest my case.

        • PhilK

          Well they were doomed… which is why Ricoh bought the company. 😉

          • Kunzite

            Well, Ricoh bought “the company” (actually what was left from the old Pentax Corporation’s Imaging Systems Business division, after Hoya) to save their own camera division. :-p
            A doomed camera division cannot save another; yet Pentax did.

          • PhilK

            Thanks for reminding me that Hoya preceded Ricoh in the Pentax savior role 🙂

            Ricoh as far as I can tell could completely eliminate their photographic division without much impact on their corporate performance. Among other things they are the largest office equipment supplier (eg copiers etc) in the world. Bigger than Canon.

          • Kunzite

            Are you doing it on purpose?

            Pentax Corporation was profitable in 2006 and didn’t need any ‘rescue’.
            Hoya almost destroyed Pentax Imaging Systems Business. They bought Pentax Corporation effectively through a hostile takeover (having support from one of Pentax’ major shareholders), being interested only in the medical division. Pentax Imaging Systems was downsized, top engineers fired, product development basically halted.

            Ricoh rescued Pentax Imaging Systems from Hoya. They didn’t had to; but they did it and that was all they bought from Hoya. In other words, Ricoh was interested specifically in Pentax IS, and in turning around their own underperforming camera division.
            Theories that Ricoh could eliminate their camera division are contradicted by their actions.

          • PhilK

            If by that you mean “Are my fingers typing out mysterious texts onto my keyboard without the cooperation of my brain”, the answer would be no. I simply recall that at the time of the Hoya/Ricoh transactions, Pentax had been struggling in the consumer marketplace for quite a while.

            Now Hoya very well may have been primarily interested in Pentax’s medical division, as I suspect it was the only part of the company making much money then, and quite possibly subsidizing their floundering retail camera business.

            The fact that Ricoh kept Pentax’s camera division does not refute my point that the lion’s share of Ricoh’s corporate profit is not coming from the retail camera business, and getting rid of it would not likely have much impact on the health of the company.

            Article from the Wall St Journal on the Hoya merger which unfortunately only shows the first sentence or two due to the paywall, but that is enough:

            “Pentax Abandons Merger With Hoya, Revealing Split”

            (April 11, 2007)

            “The actions reveal a split within the company and leave open the question of how Pentax plans to survive independently amid competition with rivals like Canon Inc.”


            Obviously I’m not the only person who believed that Pentax’s competitive prospects were not that great at the time.

            Looking for historical financial results, I don’t know the best place to find what I want but this should do:

            ‘Head Office is Not for Sale’ — Pentax Unveils Financial Results, Mid-term Plan

            May 14, 2007
            Kouji Kariatsumari, Nikkei Electronics

            Pentax Corp. has announced the mid-term management plan for FY2007-2009 and financial results for the year ended in March 2007 (from April 2006 to March 2007) […]

            “The Imaging System Business Division that sells digital SLR cameras enjoyed favorable sales growth. The Division made operating income of ¥3.1 billion, coming back to profitability from a 1.2 billion deficit logged in the same period last year.”

            So Pentax’s Imaging division lost about $11M USD for the 2006 fiscal year, though it did bounce back for the 2007 fiscal year. Not exactly a rosy, smooth-sailing financial picture.

            2006 was the year Konica-Minolta sold their camera division to Sony, Leica got a new majority shareholder, and Nikon stopped producing most film cameras. Lots of upheavals that year.

          • Kunzite

            That’s the opposite of intentional – whatever you’re doing, your brain is participating.

            Yes, Pentax Corporation’s board tried to resist the deal made by their CEO (whom they forced to resign) and Hoya’s. They couldn’t gather enough support to oppose their biggest (?) shareholder though. I don’t know what you think it’s proving – for me, is that Pentax Corporation’s board did not believe they needed to be “saved”.

            Yes, Pentax Corporation was profitable (returned to profitability), thanks for confirming that. I agree with them underperforming on the camera market most of 2016, they dragged the *istD series for too long – however they had a plan: the amazing K10D and lots of new APS-C lenses (including high-end DA*s).
            So what Hoya forcibly bought was a profitable company which started to do well on the camera market, too. And they proceeded to methodically destroy Pentax Imaging Systems, by attempting to artificially grow margins through cost cutting.

            You are calling Hoya a “savior”; they’re almost the exact opposite. I say almost because they didn’t kill Pentax IS, instead looking for a buyer.

  • purenupe1

    I like the idea of the knob giving access to those settings (wifi, HDR etc) versus being menu driven

    • CHD

      So what you are saying is you like the knob. Sorry, my 12 yr old humor could not resist.

      • Zos Xavius

        He likes knobs lol

        I couldn’t resist either. 🙂

    • PhilK

      I don’t understand how that works – what if you want to enable both “grid” and “HDR”? It’s a strange control.

  • Originaru

    The body desing, button position, handling, etc of Pentax are the best in my opinion.

    • Hoang Pham

      IMO, all they need is a stick for AF point control, then they’d be perfect.

    • Zos Xavius


  • Sebastien

    More 128 teasers to come before its release. And at that time, most people will switch to mirrorless…

    • Jeffry De Meyer

      Those people are called photography fashionistas

    • CHD

      Can’t help but think most people don’t even care about this camera anymore, with the exception of the diehard Pentax fans everyone else moved on years ago.

      • Kunzite

        Obviously you care, but for the wrong reasons.

        • CHD

          Nope…I give zero f&cks

          • Kunzite

            Sure. You can’t even be bothered to post here.

          • CHD

            Sure I can, just to annoy twits like you

    • Glorfindelrb

      21 days to go.

    • SimenO

      Why do you think mirrorless is the one size fits all solution? DSLRs have been stably outselling mirrorless by a 2:1 factor for the past three years for various reasons. I don’t see why peoples preferences should change. Both have strengths that cant be replaced by the other.

      • Sebastien

        I was just kidding. It seems to me that Pentax is teasing us for this FF for months!

        But, we know that Canon/Nikon are working hard to build a new serious FF mirrorless system. And if those products are properly designed, I think it could interest a lot of people. This market is still new.

        If Pentax wants to build a new system, they could have put their effort into a new mirrorless system, and then be ahead of Nikon/Canon in that segment, instead of trying to survive into the FF DSLR market, already saturated.

        • SimenO

          Why should a small company like Pentax (this particular camera department of Ricoh) use enormous ammounts of effort to go into a much smaller market? That doesent make sense.

          I guess FF DSLR are currently outselling FF mirrorless by a factor of 10, but thats just a wild guess. Developing a new mount and starting from scratch developing lenses is an overwhelming task. Even Sony whit its financial muscles struggles to do that.

          As I said further up here, I don’t mind Pentax making a mirrorless EVF model using the existing K mount system, as long as they still makes OVF models too.

          Bottom line, going for an entirely new system just doesn’t make sense.

  • Yan Li

    The whole idea of making a new FF DSLR system from scratch in the year of 2016 is just stupid. Seriously. If it was a FF mirrorless, Pentax maybe can win some marketshare, since the FF mirrorless market doesn’t have other players other than Sony.

    • Kunzite

      Two big fails with your posts:
      1. Pentax is not starting from scratch; they are expanding the long-established K-mount system into DSLR territory. They have users (WE requested the FF, and quite insistently), they have lenses (some FF even in production). And APS-C users with FF lenses.
      2. Pentax going mirrorless would mean starting from scratch(*), which completely defeats your point.
      And a smaller one:
      3. There’s no guarantee that competing with Sony would be easier than competing with Canon and Nikon. If anything, Sony might be more willing to engage into a price war which Pentax/Ricoh cannot afford.

      (*) unless it’s a K-mount mirrorless, which doesn’t make sense either.

      • SimenO

        Pentax already went into the mirrorless territory with two systems, three sensor sizes and five cameras. I would not mind them making a APS-C or even FF mirrorless with K mount and EVF, as long as they still make OVF models too. A unique function would be to use the empty mirror box for storage of a retractable lens. Of course they would use a different designer then Mark Newson.

        • Kunzite

          Sure they did; however both the Q series and the K-01 were low effort, comparatively with a competitive large sensor (APS-C+) mirrorless product line.

          The K-01 in particular was very poorly received (it wasn’t a bad camera though), which makes me wonder why people are asking Pentax to repeat it, only in a much more expensive product.
          Well, it wasn’t exactly a failure either; Pentax even made another batch (the blue one) due to popular demand for the home market.

          The concept is suited for a “one off” product, something to test new technologies/concepts. It is not a long term solution for mirrorless; that would means they would always have to fight with that unnecessary (in a non-reflex) space between the mount and the sensor.
          What you call “unique function” would be a kludge (and it won’t work with any of the current lenses anyway). If you need special lenses, why not introduce a new mount?

          I’m sure that, when they’ll be ready, Pentax will add another mount to its portfolio.

          • SimenO

            Yes, the Q was low effort, and had mixed reception. I just mentioned it because it shows Pentax does have mirrorless cameras. Too bad its often ignored because its well built and advanced for a camera that size. Although there is a few things I think could create more attention to the series. Even smaller cameras and lenses, Wifi and a small rangefinder.

            K-01 has poorly received mainly because of design and lack of viewfinder. I would like a K-02 with black and silver retro style, EVF and slim body (large indent between mount and grip front, and equally slim at the other side of the mount).

            I disagree about the mount. A special retractable kit lens would not be usable on other K mount cameras, but the mirrorless camera using it, would be compatible with all existing K mount lenses, thus having the advantage of huge lens availability right from the start. The retractable kit lens would make this camera as compact as its competitors with their kit lenses, without loosing the lens availability advantage.

            An alternative is to make a new mount and deliver the first cameras with an adapter to K mount while building up a decent native lens selection.

          • Kunzite

            The Q was quite well received in its home market, making into BCNRanking’s top 10 mirrorless for a few years.

            I’m not sure those were the only reasons the K-01 failed. Even the design, I found it OK; I’m concerned people would simply find another excuse, if Pentax ever dared to make something slightly different. For Pete’s sake, the K-01 was bashed for being yellow (despite black being also available), and the K-S1, for having LEDs (despite serving a functional purpose, and even if you can deactivate them).
            So I don’t see them trying it again, with a high risk project like a FF.

            What exactly do you disagree with? 🙂 There’s a trade-off between not having to develop an entire new lens line-up, and having to live with that empty space inside your now-mirrorless-cameras and with K-mount’s mechanical constraints. Short term, the first option wins; longer term, it’s the second.

            Yes, that’s what they’ll (probably) do. Not now though (they’re busy with the K-mount), but with the DSLR market still going strong there’s no hurry. And not with a FF, but – like everyone else – with a higher volume APS-C, gathering an user base before going for more expensive options.

          • SimenO

            I disagreed with “What you call “unique function” would be a kludge (and it won’t work with any of the current lenses anyway).”

            Using K mount for a second mirrorless camera would work with existing lenses and it wont be a kludge when the mirror box is used for lens storage (collapsed kit lens) and this space is necessary for tele lenses made for shorter flange distance as well. I don’t think its a bad idea compared to creating a new mount and an adapter to K, its just an alternative way of doing it. Some advantages and some disadvantages.

          • Kunzite

            “It won’t work” as you won’t be able to collapse those lenses inside the mount. That can be only with special lenses. Make enough of them (because you want a compact mirrorless system, right?) and you’ll start wondering why you didn’t make a new mount.
            And collapsing the lens inside a SLR mount, on a mirrorless camera – that IS a kludge.

            Probably you know this, but Pentax had the idea of making special lenses for the K-01, which protruded into the camera (in the empty space where usually there’s the mirror). One such prototype was displayed, around the time they presented the K-01.
            Maybe it was due to K-01 being poorly received, but we never heard about that again.

          • SimenO

            I didn’t know about that prototype. I didn’t want to base a whole system on that idéa, just one or very few special lenses for the mirrorless K models only. In other words, not a thorough mirrorless system but aimed at a few sporadic mirrorless models, like the K-01 was.

            Of course existing lenses wont be squeezed into the empty mirror housing. Thats too obvious for debate.

            I agree the adapter idea is better for a thorough mirrorless system, if Pentax wanted to make something like Sonys NEX series to go along with the K series. I personally don’t like the idea as it would consume to much money and effort to keep both. Almost like both Sony found out with their alpha mount and Olympus with their 4/3 mount.

          • Kunzite

            That was the idea, see here:
            It’s #4, or image 6 of 7 (where you can see the protruding tube).
            The K-01 was launched with the 40mm XS, but that lens works on DSLRs.

            Yes, that’s why I was wondering what were you disagreeing with 🙂 My bad, I wasn’t clear.
            The point being that you’ll have to break compatibility anyway.

            If they will want to go large sensor mirrorless, IMO it’s unavoidable (AFAIK they don’t have such plans for now, and they’re definitely busy with the K-mount).
            If they want to make another one-off product…

          • SimenO

            BTW, any idea what is happening to PF?

          • Kunzite

            He’s dead, Jim.

  • TheRealestInDaHood

    I see a wall…and a Pentax logo headed for it at 200 mph. Seal this, Pentax

    • Cynog

      The way Pentaxes are built – goodbye wall!

  • Licheus

    I’m almost sure this camera was intended to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the K-mount. Too bad it didn’t manage to make it last year…

    • SimenO

      I’m quite a number fetishist, but I don’t want Pentax to rush forward a camera before its ready just to please number fetishists.

  • the truth hurts

    god, pentax should just release this already or atleast show full on pictures and details of it. how many cameras have come out already and been released out of the blue since pentax announced this camera like a year ago.. and they keep just showing corners of it in black and white “teasing”.. by the time it comes out no one will care.. every will buy the new nikon d500, xpro2, olympus pen-F, for god sakes, canon just was like hey guys, here’s our new 1-D, … tada.

    • Kunzite

      You never saw a teaser campaign? All manufacturers are doing those… and they never put full resolution samples and technical specs. Instead, we have silhouettes and partial details and other things so you can’t really make sense of it until the official announcement.

      Btw, the Nikon, Fujifilm and Olympus you’re mentioning will most likely still not be available on the market when the Pentax will be announced. And Canon said nothing like “here’s our new 1-D”; there are only rumors (perhaps leaks about a new EOS flagship.

  • Back to top