[Nakedgun]

So, it's going to be the Pentax C?

Ah, yes the K-C. Why not?

[reh321]

Yes. At the rate they've been putting out new lenses for the K mount, setting up another mount for a mirrorless camera seems impractical.

There is absolutely no reason against making a K-mount MILC.

[Sandy Hancock]

There is absolutely no reason against making a K-mount MILC.

....apart form the uncomfortable fact that their last venture into that niche was a bit of a flop.

[Mark Ransom]

....apart form the uncomfortable fact that their last venture into that niche was a bit of a flop.

Yes, it was a flop if you're talking about the K-01. But if you analyze a little deeper, the reasons for it being a flop have nothing to do with it being mirrorless.

• It was designed by someone who valued form over function - and the form was very polarizing.
• It didn't have an EVF which is generally considered to be essential for mirrorless.
• The initial price was too high for what it was.

If you're talking about the Q, the sensor was simply too small. I was never going to have any faith in it no matter how many satisfied customers it had.

[Sandy Hancock]

Yes, it was a flop if you're talking about the K-01. But the reasons for it being a flop have nothing to do with it being mirrorless.

• It was designed by someone who valued form over function - and the form was very polarizing.
• It didn't have an EVF which is generally considered to be essential for mirrorless.
• The initial price was too high for what it was.

All true. But the memory of that sort of failure sticks.

[Not a Number]

Some of the appeal of MILCs is the short flange distance. This allows using a large number of other mount lenses with glass-less adapters. Staying with the K-mount means you wouldn't have this advantage. I suspect part of the reason that many Pentaxians, who needed FF for their work, went to Sony prior to the announcement of the K-1 was that they could, to some extent, still use their K-mount lenses (how's that for a run on sentence).

What the could do is keep the design of the K-mount (flange shape, contacts, lever and screwdrive) and cut the flange distance say by 25mm. Call it SKAF (Short K mount AF). Provide a KAF 25mm extension tube for use with existing K-mount lenses. Whether or not the engineers could fit powerful enough motors in the reduced space is another matter. Worse comes to worse they could make it KAF4 only without screwdrive and lever. Just put an aperture ring on the adapter/extension tube.

[Wasp]

Yes. At the rate they've been putting out new lenses for the K mount, setting up another mount for a mirrorless camera seems impractical.

It would be easy to do a converter for those new fangled lenses with their built in focus motors. Older screw mount AF lenses, not so much. But it is time to move on. One of these days the K mount will celebrate the half century mark!

[ffking]

One of these days the K mount will celebrate the half century mark!

Well, Nikon have nearly made 60 years with the F-mount

[Zooland]

Silver anniversary version of {name of current flagship DSLR here}, or perhaps a special edition of the 645Z.

Do you think there’s a 645z replacement or just a special cosmetic edition?

[monochrome]

Do you think there’s a 645z replacement or just a special cosmetic edition?

There will be a new 645 camera using the new technology they’re building for the next APSc flagship.

[Edit for clarity]: EVENTUALLY there will be a new 645. I have no idea what is coming for November but it is getting along to pre-announcement time.

[Adam]

Do you think there’s a 645z replacement or just a special cosmetic edition?

For the anniversary, I'd be willing to bet something cosmetic- or perhaps even a respin of a classic camera.

[ZombieArmy]

I honestly hope that Ricoh does go ahead with the hybrid finder approach at some point. To me it's the best of both worlds that'll allow for the benefits of mirrorless without giving up the K mount.

For me personally I could never go full mirrorless since I frame a lot with my camera off looking for great photo opportunities. Going to an optical viewfinder only helped my photography.

[Mistral75]

I'm not so sure a Pentax camera will be launched on or before the 100th anniversary.



The origin of the above: a comment on PetaPixel

Sigma is Giving Up on the Pentax K-Mount to Focus on Mirrorless Lenses

by Jen Carrigan 'Writer & Editor. Pentax shooter. Landscapes, mostly.'

JenPhotographs - Embark on a wild adventure with Jen

Jen (@jenphotographs) • Instagram photos and videos

[pete-tarmigan]

Yes, it was a flop if you're talking about the K-01. But if you analyze a little deeper, the reasons for it being a flop have nothing to do with it being mirrorless.
[LIST][*]It was designed by someone who valued form over function - and the form was very polarizing.

I thought I read a quote from the designer that he designed the K-01 the way he did because he valued the opposite. He does not want to burden the design with non-essentials.

[redcat]

Mirrorless is the future, Sony is ahead of the game and Canon/Nikon realize that and jump onboard with their own ones, Pentax can still have a piece of the market if they release a body + adapter for all the old K-mount lens, a new mount can be done later. After using eye-focus on mirrorless I see very clearly why other brands need to rush, eye-AF is just sooo good, no more focus+recompose or manually choosing focus point... Hurry up Ricoh/Pentax, 100th anniversary is just perfect for a big shot like a new MILC !!!