[creampuff]

And your post is different how?

Wow, do I need to justify my post to someone who is now an Olympus user who happens to be still lurking on a Pentax forum?

[RioRico]

Aha! FOOD FIGHT!

[monochrome]

Aha! FOOD FIGHT!

Now that people are actually getting their hands on the baguettes murder and mayhem is breaking out on threads all over the place.

[jogiba]

or Canon FD mount lenses or Nikon F mount lenses or Sony A mount lenses or Sigma SA mount lenses etc.

•PENTAX mirrorless body design is compatible with 25+ million PENTAX K-mount lenses spanning decades.

Pentax announces K-01 K-mount APS-C mirrorless camera: Digital Photography Review

Pentax DSLR cameras accept lenses from their full line of lenses, dating back decades. The only other manufacturer who can compete is Nikon, but Nikon doesn’t incorporate built-in image stabilization into their cameras.

http://www.niceladyproductions.info/post/16963045302/pentax-k-01-the-most-ki...-camera-pentax

---

Last edited by jogiba; 03-10-2012 at 06:08 AM.

[rparmar]

Wow, do I need to justify my post to someone who is now an Olympus user who happens to be still lurking on a Pentax forum?

Odd that you retreat when I simply reverse your question. Oh, and I still shoot with Pentax, too. Thanks for caring.

[pinholecam]

Yes, they need adapters, which cost something like 20 clams on the old internet. Big deal. Some of the adapters are so thin they are practically invisible. Saying that this renders the camera any less pocketable is FUD. The entire unit is still smaller than the darned K-01 is without any adapter.

The 2x crop of m4/3 cameras make most non-native FF/APS-C lenses too long to be regularly useful.
K24/2.8 becomes 48mm but looses most DOF possibilities. I'd rather just use the native 20/1.7.
50/1.4 becomes 100mm, nice for portraits, but its wide open performance is nothing to shout about esp. with the higher pixel density of a 16mp G3.
I'd rather just use the native 45/1.8.

So in the end, m4/3 goes better with native lenses for not much money (as lenses go).

Neither K-01 nor m4/3 is pocket-able unless I'm wearing a bike jersey or Bermudas


K-01 looks more and more attractive to me as a good APS-C MILC system. Right sized, not small sized for the sensor format.

[rfortson]

As a MFT user and a new K-01 owner, I'll chime in and say, yes you can get adapters to add all sorts of lenses to the MFT camera. The adapters are cheap if you want full manual operation, but they're not insignificantly small (not big, but they certainly add to the bulk). If you want full operation of the lenses as the lenses are designed, you'll pay $200-$300 for adapters with connections. I've never used them, so I can't comment on how well they work, but I assume they work fine. Of course, the draw of the K-01 for me is that I don't have to use any adapters and all my Pentax lenses work as designed on it. Even the ones without aperture rings (meaing all the DA series of lenses). So, that does make the K-01 the only mirrorless camera to work with their SLR line of lenses as designed without adapters.

With an adapter, I can put any lens ever made on any camera ever made, and if I have enough money, I can even engineer in the electrical contacts to make them work as designed. The K-01 doesn't need that.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Neither K-01 nor m4/3 is pocket-able unless I'm wearing a bike jersey or Bermudas

The only pocketable system camera is the Q. People can be upset about its sensor size, but that is the tradeoff that needed to be done in terms of pocketability. I doubt we'll ever see a pocketable system with a larger sensor than the Q.

[zxaar]

The 2x crop of m4/3 cameras make most non-native FF/APS-C lenses too long to be regularly useful.
K24/2.8 becomes 48mm but looses most DOF possibilities. I'd rather just use the native 20/1.7.
50/1.4 becomes 100mm, nice for portraits, but its wide open performance is nothing to shout about esp. with the higher pixel density of a 16mp G3.
I'd rather just use the native 45/1.8.

Exactly. This is why though m43 could take all those lenses, it is worse solution than APC for 35mm lenses. (APC in turn a compromise from FF).

Those who are looking at mirrorless for using all the millions of lenses ( :-D ), for them APC is much better than m43.


So again, m43 is the most pointless format:
1. Not small enough to be really pocketable, like Q.
2. Not large enough sensor to take advantage of tons of lenses available.
3. Lagging behind larger sensor cams on IQ.

[zxaar]

The only pocketable system camera is the Q. People can be upset about its sensor size, but that is the tradeoff that needed to be done in terms of pocketability. I doubt we'll ever see a pocketable system with a larger sensor than the Q.

System I doubt but the new Nokia has larger sensor. Which really indicate where things will end up in the future.

With sensors improving for those NOT needing shallow DOF, phone type cameras would make lot of sense than all the type of cameras we will be using. For DOF reasons though larger sensor cameras might stay as niche products. But this also means struggle for all the intermediate sensor size cameras.

In my opinion next 2-3 years are the best time for M43 manufacturers, then their decline will start and I am pretty sure 10 years on and m43 will be outdated mount. For those who are buying m43 for reasons of portablity will have no reasons to buy them. They can all carry a cell phone cam in pocket.

If FF sensors are affordable to make then the same fate might awaits APC also. (ie replaced by cell phone cams).

[pinholecam]

Exactly. This is why though m43 could take all those lenses, it is worse solution than APC for 35mm lenses. (APC in turn a compromise from FF).

Those who are looking at mirrorless for using all the millions of lenses ( :-D ), for them APC is much better than m43.


So again, m43 is the most pointless format:
1. Not small enough to be really pocketable, like Q.
2. Not large enough sensor to take advantage of tons of lenses available.
3. Lagging behind larger sensor cams on IQ.

I certainly won't go so far as to say its a pointless format.
Having used one (and still using), it strikes a fine point in balance to IQ/Size/Weight/Performance WITH native lenses.
IQ is good enough for most needs.
In fact its only weakness are JPG/sensor artifacts that will become more obvious when the file is subjected to more agressive PP.
Get it right, and its not an issue in most cases.


There really isn't a need to use those millions of lenses.
In fact most folks only really need 3-6 lenses.
Want is different from Need of course.


K-01 is an interesting new look at APS-C MILC.
Right sized and legacy lens support.
Pentax is the best positioned for this with their small primes and has played this to its strength.
It makes as much sense as m4/3 is, depending on a users needs.

[jogiba]

The Pentax K-01 is the first mirrorless camera that accepts a complete DSLR lens lineup.

Pentax Cameras - DSLR Reviews and Comparisons

[rparmar]

As a MFT user and a new K-01 owner, I'll chime in and say, yes you can get adapters to add all sorts of lenses to the MFT camera. The adapters are cheap if you want full manual operation, but they're not insignificantly small (not big, but they certainly add to the bulk).

Again, I must correct what are simple factual errors.

The basic mirrorless lens mount adapters do not require "full manual operation" of the camera. There is no need for stop down metering. There is no need for the green button kludge. Metering is automatic and precise.

The only thing you lose is auto-focus which many of us, hobbyists and pros alike, find insufficient in any case. I use manual focus with my 645, with my K20D, and with my PEN cameras. Because only I know where I want to focus, and by the time I tell the AF system I may as well do it myself.

The K-01 advantage over other mirrorless cameras is that you get full AF with K-mount lenses, for those who need it.

Second, the adapters are only as large as they have to be to provide the correct registration distance. This is the same distance already built in to the design of the K-01. On MFT (and likely other mirrorless systems) there is no size penalty for the flexibility of using any mount you want.

If you only want to use K-mount lenses (plus adapted M42 and 645) then the K-01 works a treat. If you want to use any other system lenses, try something else.

Choose the system you prefer for your photographic needs, but please do so without attempting to mislead others trying to make an informed decision.

[jogiba]

The K-01 also has AF and IS with fast 67 Pentax lenses when using the Pentax 1.7x AF adapter.

[creampuff]

Odd that you retreat when I simply reverse your question. Oh, and I still shoot with Pentax, too. Thanks for caring.

I'm not retreating, you're just butting in.