[wed7]

I really like the ergo of my A7IV, reminds of my K-30 all the time. :P

[UncleVanya]

I really like the ergo of my A7IV, reminds of my K-30 all the time. :P

The a7iv is widely acknowledged by Sony users to be a turning point in ergonomics.

[wed7]

I agree with you, I have held an planned of owning a Sony a7iii for 5 years, I think I have procrastinated long enough as the UI of the Mark IV is a lot better too.

[Tony Belding]

Personally, I wish Pentax had kept the Q series going, and maybe given us a "Super Q" with an EVF. But I guess the Q is history and ain't coming back. A pity. That system was unique.


I have a Sony A7, A7R2, Pentax K-S1, and some time past have had a K-01 and K-S2.

That original A7 is remarkably small and lightweight. With a Samyang "Tiny Series" 35mm F2.8 lens, it could compete with the lightest and most compact 35mm film SLRs, like my old plastic fantastic Konica TC-X and 40mm F1.8 kit lens (a cult favorite lens that many also use adapted on the Sony). The A7R2 is somewhat bigger and heavier than the A7, but it also has more resolution, better ergonomics, IBIS, electronic shutter. So it's a compromise.

The K-S1, I believe, is the smallest and lightest DSLR that Pentax have produced. It's hefty compared with the A7, though. Maybe that's due to the pentaprism? You pay a price for the compactness. It doesn't have a tilt screen, doesn't have weather sealing, doesn't have a front control dial, and the ergonomics are. . . eccentric. The K-S2, K-70 and KF (all on the same chassis) are slightly bigger and heavier, but they have everything that was missing from the K-S1. So it's a compromise.

Also, the choice of a "normal" lens for any APS-C Pentax has several options with different tradeoffs. (Personally, I really wish for a new DA 28mm Ltd.) For me the K-S2 and 20-40mm Ltd were a great combo, but that's not the choice for minimum size.

[biz-engineer]

And what about back in the day, for instance when I bought my Pentax MX, when most 35mm SLRs had a flat back and a flat front, on either side of the lens mount?

Film SLR weren't designed for being comfortable to hold. Those bodies were designed to hold film rolls. Digital SLR required a chunky battery, the added handle "grip" was used to both as battery compartment and make cameras more comfortable to hold.

---------- Post added 17-05-23 at 09:50 ----------

I think the pattern is the same as with DSLR. They release bodies with different specs and different sizes.Like FI Nikon D3200, Nikon D850 and Nikon D6.When more functions are included and spec improves body size usually increase.Pentax K10D was larger than *ist-D, and K3 was larger than K5. So it is nothing new or exclusive for mirrorless.

Yes for sure you are correct. Now, have you watched the video of Mat Irwin where he's comparing various camera bodies with a lens mount, and talking about his fingers clinched between the lens and the camera body.

[Fogel70]

Personally, I wish Pentax had kept the Q series going, and maybe given us a "Super Q" with an EVF. But I guess the Q is history and ain't coming back. A pity. That system was unique.


I have a Sony A7, A7R2, Pentax K-S1, and some time past have had a K-01 and K-S2.

That original A7 is remarkably small and lightweight. With a Samyang "Tiny Series" 35mm F2.8 lens, it could compete with the lightest and most compact 35mm film SLRs, like my old plastic fantastic Konica TC-X and 40mm F1.8 kit lens (a cult favorite lens that many also use adapted on the Sony). The A7R2 is somewhat bigger and heavier than the A7, but it also has more resolution, better ergonomics, IBIS, electronic shutter. So it's a compromise.

The K-S1, I believe, is the smallest and lightest DSLR that Pentax have produced. It's hefty compared with the A7, though. Maybe that's due to the pentaprism? You pay a price for the compactness. It doesn't have a tilt screen, doesn't have weather sealing, doesn't have a front control dial, and the ergonomics are. . . eccentric. The K-S2, K-70 and KF (all on the same chassis) are slightly bigger and heavier, but they have everything that was missing from the K-S1. So it's a compromise.

Also, the choice of a "normal" lens for any APS-C Pentax has several options with different tradeoffs. (Personally, I really wish for a new DA 28mm Ltd.) For me the K-S2 and 20-40mm Ltd were a great combo, but that's not the choice for minimum size.

And Sony also introduced a really compact rangefinder style FF mirrorless camera a couple of years ago - A7C. So there are more options available if small size is a requirement.
Compact Camera Meter

[Rondec]

Personally, I wish Pentax had kept the Q series going, and maybe given us a "Super Q" with an EVF. But I guess the Q is history and ain't coming back. A pity. That system was unique.


I have a Sony A7, A7R2, Pentax K-S1, and some time past have had a K-01 and K-S2.

That original A7 is remarkably small and lightweight. With a Samyang "Tiny Series" 35mm F2.8 lens, it could compete with the lightest and most compact 35mm film SLRs, like my old plastic fantastic Konica TC-X and 40mm F1.8 kit lens (a cult favorite lens that many also use adapted on the Sony). The A7R2 is somewhat bigger and heavier than the A7, but it also has more resolution, better ergonomics, IBIS, electronic shutter. So it's a compromise.

The K-S1, I believe, is the smallest and lightest DSLR that Pentax have produced. It's hefty compared with the A7, though. Maybe that's due to the pentaprism? You pay a price for the compactness. It doesn't have a tilt screen, doesn't have weather sealing, doesn't have a front control dial, and the ergonomics are. . . eccentric. The K-S2, K-70 and KF (all on the same chassis) are slightly bigger and heavier, but they have everything that was missing from the K-S1. So it's a compromise.

Also, the choice of a "normal" lens for any APS-C Pentax has several options with different tradeoffs. (Personally, I really wish for a new DA 28mm Ltd.) For me the K-S2 and 20-40mm Ltd were a great combo, but that's not the choice for minimum size.

The A7 weighs 474 grams with the battery and the K-S1 weighs 558 grams with the battery. That's what, 85 grams difference? Looking at size comparison, they are pretty similar in size, but the K-S1 is deeper and has a pentaprism hump too. I do think the difference in weight probably comes down to quality of materials (the A7 is a camera that feels like it is mostly plastic) and IBIS (the A7 doesn't have it).

The Pentax K-01 weighs roughly the same as the K-S1 (561 grams) despite also not having a tilt screen or even an EVF. I own both it and the K-S1 and they both feel "solid" in a way that many entry level cameras from other brands don't (some might use the word hefty to describe this feel).

I guess I'm saying that Pentax makes design choices that make their cameras heavy for their size. A Canon T5 is 480 grams, but obviously it didn't have IBIS or a pentaprism. It also feels fairly cheaply made when you hold it.

[rpjallan]

Digital SLR required a chunky battery, the added handle "grip" was used to both as battery compartment and make cameras more comfortable to hold.

That started well before digital SLRs, let alone mirrorless. The Pentax Z-1 for example. Or even the SFX/SF1.

[Tony Belding]

And Sony also introduced a really compact rangefinder style FF mirrorless camera a couple of years ago - A7C.

I looked at that when it came out. I've never been into the rangefinder style, and some comments I've seen about the small EVF were off-putting. The old A7 body, aside from that EVF hump, is close in size and it weighs slightly less than the A7C.

[Fogel70]

I looked at that when it came out. I've never been into the rangefinder style, and some comments I've seen about the small EVF were off-putting. The old A7 body, aside from that EVF hump, is close in size and it weighs slightly less than the A7C.

I have A7 too, and I can agree the SLR type design is nicer, especially if using both DSLR and mirrorless.
I guess that it is iBIS on A7C that add some weight, making it heavier than A7.

The good thing with A7 is that is quite close in size and design as KP.
With FI grip and shutter button placement close to identical on them, and also both with similar tilt-screen design.
So I often find it easier to switch between A7 and KP, than FI between KP and other Pentax DSLR I have.

[Rondec]

I looked at that when it came out. I've never been into the rangefinder style, and some comments I've seen about the small EVF were off-putting. The old A7 body, aside from that EVF hump, is close in size and it weighs slightly less than the A7C.

I think the auto focus was relatively slow compared to today's models and the frame rate relatively slow as well, considering it was only 24 megapixels. Part of the reason that cameras increase in size is simply that they include more tech and you can only shrink them so much -- particularly when you add in body image stabilization.

[leekil]

And what about back in the day, for instance when I bought my Pentax MX, when most 35mm SLRs had a flat back and a flat front, on either side of the lens mount?

There's at the whole "classic film SLR" project by Pentax going now, but I think that there are many improvements over the classic flat-side SLRs, these days -- even a Super Program-style grip is a lot better than flat sides. And I think the DSLR-style dual wheels for shutter speed and aperture are the best controls yet, especially over the top-mounted shutter speed dial.

---------- Post added 05-17-23 at 06:25 PM ----------

Film SLR weren't designed for being comfortable to hold. Those bodies were designed to hold film rolls.

Why not both?

[Doormat]

Personally I think by the time Gen Z has aged all forms of image capture will be done via phones or something similar.
Stand alone cameras will die out, sales will dwindle to the point where it’s just not viable economically to mass produce standalone cameras anymore.
Yes there will be hardcore groups that are determined to keep it alive, a bit like large format photography 5x4 & 10x8. Yes we know the image quality is astounding but who the hell wants to faff like that? Gen Z will be saying the same thing in years to come when they find your K1 in the loft.

Like some of us have old box brownies or similar, your current best ever camera is sadly the next box brownie to gather dust.

[reh321]

Personally I think by the time Gen Z has aged all forms of image capture will be done via phones or something similar.
Stand alone cameras will die out, sales will dwindle to the point where it’s just not viable economically to mass produce standalone cameras anymore.
Yes there will be hardcore groups that are determined to keep it alive, a bit like large format photography 5x4 & 10x8. Yes we know the image quality is astounding but who the hell wants to faff like that? Gen Z will be saying the same thing in years to come when they find your K1 in the loft.

Like some of us have old box brownies or similar, your current best ever camera is sadly the next box brownie to gather dust.

Many in the US are like you {yes, I see you are from the UK}; recording only special events. Early in my life, though, I discovered that every moment is ‘special’ if we view life that way, and my motto is now “capture today before tomorrow comes and everything changes”. Unfortunately, we are not always told what will change, so I try to capture as much as I can. For example, my family moved here - to South Bend - in 1960. My parents spent the rest of their lives here, so I have seen some of the changes over time. The Public Library was building a new structure when we moved here - fortunately, I believe I do have a post card of it, because sometime when I wasn’t paying attention, they built a new building around it, and changed the appearance completely.

Likewise, we moved here from Illinois, a few blocks from the “Chicago, Burlington and Quincy” railroad, which used a style of locomotives they painted gray/red. Before I got around to recording those, they switched to a different style which they painted black/red/white. By the time I had adopted my motto, those locomotives were painted red/white. It turned out that the CB&Q was jointly owned by the “Northern Pacific” and “Great Northern” railroads, and when those railroads merged, a poll showed the most popular name they owned was the “Burlington” of the “CB&Q”, so the new railroad was called “Burlington Northern” - and painted those freight locomotives green/white. In recent years, the “Burlington Northern” merged with the “Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe” to form the “BNSF”, and those locomotives are now painted orange/green.

[biz-engineer]

Like some of us have old box brownies or similar, your current best ever camera is sadly the next box brownie to gather dust.

That is what came to my mind when I visited a store selling used cameras, medium format from 30 or 20 years ago until more recent model. Those MF camera systems costed a fortune 20 years ago because they were the latest best cameras to buy of the moment when they were new models, but now they cost nothing used because technology moved on and the cameras of today are smaller, faster and deliver comparable image quality.

But I am not sure if the smartphone will continue to improve to close the gap with cameras, and there is the problem that mobile phones are physically limited in terms of lenses, focal length. So, I am not sure if the standalone camera market will disappear, I'd rather think standalone cameras will continue to improve, albeit slowly, and will remain relevant and very expensive for a professional and semi-professional market.

Automobile manufacturers could be scared by the rise of electric scooters by gen Z. There is only one small problem with electric scooter, even with larger wheel and more powerful motors, they are still electric scooters... When gen Z grow older, they appreciate staying dry inside a real car under the rain. As people get older, their needs change. Among customers buying mirrorless cameras, a lot of them in their 30s are upgrading from a smartphone.