[photoptimist]

Yes, I addressed those - they buy a Canon with a kit lens

LOL! Good thing the majority does not control the market -- we'd all be forced to use Canon Rebels with a kitlens!

Its pretty common on the internet to stumble upon EVF eye strain issues or headaches. Even tho it is not common for people to have those. Of all the photo gear users i know (know them alot) only I have issues with EVFs... so info on the internet seems greatly exaggerated? Or it is that only older people have issues with EVFs?

The exact percentage isn't clear but it is linked to susceptibility to motion sickness (which is actually worse when younger). The data I've seen (for VR motion sickness) ranges about 25-40%.

Most of the photogear users I know use DSLRs and the majority of camera buyers are still picking DSLRs so that segment of the photogear users may not even know if they have issues with EVFs until they buy one.

I greatly disagree with this statement. Design decisions are not made for the niche buyers.
Market research shows mirrorless sales will grow and DSLRs sales will shrink - thats why major players are battling in mirrorless arena...

But niche users do drive decision making! The majority of people never buy an interchangeable lens camera and yet camera makers don't listen to them. Camera makers still make cameras for the niche subgroup of consumers who do buy ILCs. The majority of ILC buyers never buy a prime lens and yet camera makers still make primes for the niche subgroup of camera buyers who also buy primes.

When a camera maker sets out to design a 300/2.8 lens they don't ask "what does the majority want" (answer: a cheap, small, zoom) they ask "what does the high-end telephoto niche-user want."

Market research about future technology adoption is often wrong for two reasons. First, if you ask people "do you want cool, techno widget XYZ" they say yes! But when it comes time to click "buy it now" they say no. Second, market research is usually funded by marketing and start-up people who desperately want evidence that their new toy will sell billions. Market research firms know they'll sell more $5,500 market reports if they say "the new thing will win."

Weren't 3-D TVs and Blue Ray supposed to win????

[BigMackCam]

Design decisions are not made for the niche buyers.

With respect, I disagree. Some manufacturers - Nikon, Canon, Sony etc. do indeed seem to target the mass market, covering all possible bases with their products, and I'd probably agree that some of their design decisions are targeting a very wide selection of potential buyers. But then you have Leica, Hasselblad, Phase One and others who design very much for niche buyers. Ricoh / Pentax is a little different, yet clearly a niche player. Given the limited scale of its R&D, manufacturing, sales and distribution, it can't hope to compete in the mass market against the "big boys". It can, however, focus on an established niche of committed enthusiasts, plus a small handful of professionals, and look to tempt enough new buyers based on the type, quality and pricing of its products. There's money to be made there, for sure.

Market research shows mirrorless sales will grow and DSLRs sales will shrink - thats why major players are battling in mirrorless arena...

Maybe so... in the short term, at least. But if an established niche is large enough to support a manufacturer's activities and result in acceptable profits for a relatively low risk profile, does that matter? I suggest not, but I guess we'll see

That aside, I can't help but think that mirrorless cameras will experience more-or-less similar growth then retracement to rangefinders and (D)SLRs. They've not been around as long, and the market segment is really only maturing around now...

[Trickortreat]

Most of the photogear users I know use DSLRs and the majority of camera buyers are still picking DSLRs so that segment of the photogear users may not even know if they have issues with EVFs until they buy one.

But camera sales figures say the opposite - most new buys are mirrorless...

But niche users do drive decision making! The majority of people never buy an interchangeable lens camera and yet camera makers don't listen to them. Camera makers still make cameras for the niche subgroup of consumers who do buy ILCs. The majority of ILC buyers never buy a prime lens and yet camera makers still make primes for the niche subgroup of camera buyers who also buy primes.

Misunderstood you there - was talking onl< about people who actually do buy ILCs

With respect, I disagree. Some manufacturers - Nikon, Canon, Sony etc. do indeed seem to target the mass market, covering all possible bases with their products, and I'd probably agree that some of their design decisions are targeting a very wide selection of potential buyers. But then you have Leica, Hasselblad, Phase One and others who design very much for niche buyers. Ricoh / Pentax is a little different, yet clearly a niche player. Given the limited scale of its R&D, manufacturing, sales and distribution, it can't hope to target the mass market. Instead, it can focus on an established niche of committed enthusiasts, plus a small handful of professionals, and look to tempt enough new buyers based on the quality and pricing of its products.

Was talking in general - most people are into mirrorless these days so manufacturers make mirrorless...

Maybe so... But if an established niche is large enough to support a manufacturer's activities and result in acceptable profits for a relatively low risk profile, does that matter? I suggest not, but I guess we'll see...

Thats a path Leica took. We all know pros and cons for the end user about that path...

[BigMackCam]

Was talking in general - most people are into mirrorless these days so manufacturers make mirrorless...

That's a pretty bold and sweeping statement. Is it backed up by stats that you could point us to, or is it merely an assumption? I'm not trying to call you out or trip you up here... It's a genuine question, and I'd be interested in the numbers. There's a certain flurry of activity around new mirrorless camera models, that's for sure, but there remain an awful lot of established DSLR users. I respect your assertion, but I'd need to see numbers to assuage my doubts. Of course, 60% vs 40% in favour of mirrorless would count as "most people", as would 51% vs 49%. Neither suggests a big problem for DSLRs. 90% vs 10% might... hence why the numbers are important. And, given the point I made around rise and retracement of a technology that's only just reaching maturity, I'd be awfully cautious about concluding that "most people are into mirrorless these days"...

Thats a path Leica took. We all know pros and cons for the end user about that path...

There are risks in committing to any market, mass or niche, for both manufacturer and end user. Leica's still around and going strong, as are its loyal followers... weathering some ups and downs, but still here. Hey, the big boys like Nikon and Canon are having a hard time too. Ricoh / Pentax has a fairly limited stall set out, so at least the risk management aspect is strong. If it continues to service its niche well (and I think it could improve there in a few ways, but still...), it should do OK. We Pentaxians might not get much of what we want, when we want it... but when it arrives, it's generally very capable, high quality, and awfully good value for money

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 05-23-2019 at 02:33 PM.

[Wasp]

Let me say that I am very disappointed by this news. One of the uses of an EVF is to aid in manual focus. One of the USPs of Pentax is the wide range of historic K mount lenses.

The focusing screens in modern DSLRs are designed to make el cheapo kit zooms look good, not for actual focusing. Although most recent Pentax bodies have the ability to change focusing screens, Pentax will not sell you one with a proper split image focusing aid. Now they won't do anything with an EVF either.

That USP is not much of a point, it seems...

[GXAlan]

I've rarely seen a post that left me so cold in terms of finding a single thing I can agree with.
Make bodies for other people's lenses as a business plan? Really?
.

No. Pure subversion and marketing of your own lenses.

1) We know that Pentax coatings make the D FA 24-70 beat the Tamron and the D FA* 50 beats the Tokina.

2) While Pentaxians like OVF, clearly there are people who love or benefit from EVF, it’s like training wheels.

3) Pentax does not develop sensors so a partnership that leads to lower cost sensors in a DSLR lineup is advantageous.

——
$900 for D-FA* 50
$1300 for L-FA* 50
$2500 for L-FA* 70-200

So for existing E or L mount they can get Pentax mount stuff as an upcharge. People see the difference on the gear they like, they start to say : man, I wish I had access to Limiteds but it looks like I need to K mount glass, etc.

2) While you may not want an OVF, some people may. If Pentax only made lenses and not a OVF body, it wouldn’t make sense for showing how someone could learn photography on EVF and get good enough to use OVF.

Pentax’s JPEG processing is actually brilliant if you don’t use the defaults (stuff like extra fine sharpness and the high and low key adjustments).

This also lets Pentax win competitions. Mindshare and press opinion. “this is a great body with awesome ergonomics, but we wish there were more lens options”

People want options whether justified or not. Journalists and especially gear review sites like options.

3) if they partner with Sony
- since we are helping you with another E mount body that we are also paying a license for, let’s talk about our sensor pricing. Otherwise we will go to Panasonic/TowerJazz and L-Mount.

Reverse negotiation with Panasonic.

[BigMackCam]

Let me say that I am very disappointed by this news. One of the uses of an EVF is to aid in manual focus. One of the USPs of Pentax is the wide range of historic K mount lenses.

The focusing screens in modern DSLRs are designed to make el cheapo kit zooms look good, not for actual focusing. Although most recent Pentax bodies have the ability to change focusing screens, Pentax will not sell you one with a proper split image focusing aid. Now they won't do anything with an EVF either.

That USP is not much of a point, it seems...

With respect, it seems awfully premature to be so disappointed and write off the development before we've seen it implemented

Who's to say that the CDAF functionality won't be usable when focusing manually? That could be more accurate than any split focusing screen. Of course, this might not be a part of the proposed development - but it equally might be. Personally, I'll be saving my own (proportionate) enthusiasm or disappointment until I've seen what it can and can't do.

Is there any reference material confirming how modern DSLR focusing screens "are designed to make el cheapo kit zooms look good", or is that an opinion (perhaps valid, but nonetheless an opinion)? I've always assumed - but only assumed, mind you - that DSLR focusing screens were designed with AF lenses in mind and, primarily, to support metering technology in the viewfinder module... But I'm keen to be corrected on that by evidence...

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 05-23-2019 at 02:19 PM.

[Mistral75]

But camera sales figures say the opposite - most new buys are mirrorless...

(...)

Err... no. Most new buys are still DSLRs according to CIPA shipment data:

• 2018: 6,620,999 DSLRs vs 4,138,798 mirrorless cameras (1.6:1)
• 2019Q1: 972,015 DSLRs vs 754,964 mirrorless cameras (1.3:1)

[normhead]

Err... no. Most new buys are still DSLRs according to CIPA shipment data:

• 2018: 6,620,999 DSLRs vs 4,138,798 mirrorless cameras (1.6:1)
• 2019Q1: 972,015 DSLRs vs 754,964 mirrorless cameras (1.3:1)

And not only that, with the huge user base of users like myself from the years when DSLR were the only show in town, the user base for DSLRs will even be more impressive. Personally, I have 3 DSLRs and a mirrorless Q.

[surfar]

2019Q1: 972,015 DSLRs vs 754,964 mirrorless cameras (1.3:1)

So 43% of new shipments as opposed to the 39% in all of 2018.

---------- Post added 05-24-19 at 09:04 AM ----------

I'd be awfully cautious about concluding that "most people are into mirrorless these days"...

Its true,phones dont have a mirror!(even though you can see yourself on a bright day).

[BigMackCam]

Its true,phones dont have a mirror!(even though you can see yourself on a bright day).

Ah, but you know that's not what we were talking about The conversation, as I understood it at least, was comparing DSLR vs MILC

[surfar]

comparing DSLR vs MILC

Those old things?

Have you just re-ntered after that Moon voyage?


Phoners are doing 5x Optical zooming,10x hybrid(but not in trUmSpAland

[monochrome]

I think more DSLR users may switch to MILC once Canon and Nikon come up with APSC. Some of my friends use D500. They do not want FF. Once Nikon comes with APSC they may hop on to MILC.

Use of the expression “ hop on to” frames the entire argument.

[monochrome]

It's funny how people who spend their time looking at a TV version of the world through their viewfinders think that those who prefer looking at the real thing are detached from reality...

Thread winner.

[monochrome]

You seem to think that Ricoh exec cant make a mistake in their prediction. It wouldn be the first. And even bigger companies went down because of some "great business info".
Besides, im pretty sure they only said it to calm their current users and investors. Nothing else.

Empty, vacuous chatter unless you can cite sources and give examples.