[barondla]

We all know Pentax almost nailed a mirrorless design using the K mount. Basically if they would have made the body (not lens mount) thinner, added a proper grip, and EVF they would have been mostly home. We might hear some gripes about size, but truthfully most mirrorless cameras aren't small.

The final gripe is the wasted space of the mirror tunnel. The space is required to use K mount lenses at infinity. The fix came to me while studying the Pentax 645 DFA 25mm lens (equivalent to 20 mm on ff). It has 40.5 filters that slip into the lens. No 100mm + filters to buy for the giant front element. To be fair the Arsat 645 30mm fisheye also has rear mounted filters.

So place 3 slots on the left side of the mirror box. Opposite the grip. These slots allow filters to be swapped in and out. The ir blocking filter could even be moved off sensor. Pop the ir blocking filter out and replace it with the ir filter. Instant ir conversion.

There could also be nd filters, a special pola filter, etc. Even get Cokin or Hoya involved with filter manufacturing. This would be great for enthusiasts. Turn the mirror tunnel space into a plus. Mirrorless with their special lenses might be a little smaller, but not for wide-angle shooters. Those huge filters take up lots of room.

Thanks,
barondla

[kypfer]

Interesting concept … not sure about the filter slots though, possibly too much opportunity to introduce dust onto the sensor
Bit of a "rock and a hard place" really … retain the Pentax K mount, with all the bulk overhead of the now disused mirror box, or start from scratch and produce a slimmer (less thick) body, with a newly designed and manufactured range of lenses to fit, then try to compete in an already over-crowded marketplace. To encourage existing Pentax users to buy, there'd also need to be a fully-coupled lens adaptor at a "sensible" price. Charging a three-figure sum for a metal tube with a few contacts in it is a non-starter, as has been demonstrated in the past!
Presumably, by making the body slimmer (narrower), you'd anticipate using a smaller battery, with the associated loss of capacity

[wkadruje]

I guess if they designed it with the same mindset that I kept reading about in the k3-3 notes (engineered for handling and usability) rather than making it a "designer" piece, that (to me) seemed more like a collectible than a camera they wouldn't have a chance of marketing Pentax as a DSLR/ Pentaprism company Honestly I loved that time when they seemed to have money to burn on projects such as this one or Q-mount and note care about what the competition is doing.

[Not a Number]

Why not have the sensor able to move forward towards the mount? It would make adapting other mounts much easier. One of the reasons many people want mirrorless bodies. It might mean giving up shake reduction though.

[Rob-48]

addition of an EVF would have done it for me.
I would have kept mine, even after having to glue the mode dial back on, and even with the heat from the battery.
Now, i have a Kp, (with larger hand grip), so i fear that the ship has sailed.
But, a K-02 may appeal to a new generation of users.

[rr1736]

Had they made an EVF and a grip the KO1 would have been a success. It is not two late for Pentax to move forward with a KO2 and it would be a good move. Saving the lens mount would ensure Pentax users would buy it. The depth of the camera body is really not that big of a deal

[DWS1]

I don't think we'll ever see it. With all emphasis on the optical view finder in the K3iii, Ricoh seems to have doubled downed on Pentax as a DSLR.

[Rob-48]

I don't think we'll ever see it. With all emphasis on the optical view finder in the K3iii, Ricoh seems to have doubled downed on Pentax as a DSLR.

i fear this may be correct!

[kypfer]

Had they made an EVF and a grip the KO1 would have been a success. It is not two late for Pentax to move forward with a KO2 and it would be a good move. Saving the lens mount would ensure Pentax users would buy it. The depth of the camera body is really not that big of a deal

Had they fitted an EVF on the K-01 they'd have ended up with something like a lightweight K-5, but with focus-peaking … hardly worth the effort I would have thought
The whole object of the K-01, in my view, was as a design exercise. A visually striking camera that happened to be capable of excellent photographs, in the right hands.
As soon as you start bolting on an EVF or altering the grip or whatever you're detracting from this design ethic.


Just my tuppence worth - YMMV

[barondla]

Had they fitted an EVF on the K-01 they'd have ended up with something like a lightweight K-5, but with focus-peaking … hardly worth the effort I would have thought
The whole object of the K-01, in my view, was as a design exercise. A visually striking camera that happened to be capable of excellent photographs, in the right hands.
As soon as you start bolting on an EVF or altering the grip or whatever you're detracting from this design ethic.


Just my tuppence worth - YMMV

I was thinking they would build the EVF into the body and keep the rangefinder form factor.

The filter slots would seal, just like the drop in filters do on their pro lenses.

This wouldn't be a K-5 copy because it would have an EVF.

Thanks,
barondla

[GUB]

Why not have the sensor able to move forward towards the mount? It would make adapting other mounts much easier. One of the reasons many people want mirrorless bodies. It might mean giving up shake reduction though.

Or conversely having a 2nd mount nearer the sensor and, coming standard with the body, a fully smart K mount adapter to that. Swap it out for other lens families.
Also why not an accessory EVF that clipped on top.

[kypfer]

I was thinking they would build the EVF into the body and keep the rangefinder form factor.
The filter slots would seal, just like the drop in filters do on their pro lenses.
This wouldn't be a K-5 copy because it would have an EVF.
Thanks,
barondla

There's not a lot of space on the back of a K-01 to put an EVF, unless the screen was made smaller. The top right-hand corner is the only free space and that's where my thumb goes! A body that thick is hardly "rangefinder form factor", I can drop a Zorki 6 with a 28mm or retractable 50mm lens fitted into my pocket easily, not so the K-01, even with it's 40mm "pancake".
Wasn't thinking about sealing the slots, moreso the likelihood of the filters carrying "foreign bodies" onto the sensor … a little bit of fluff can go a long way to ruining a picture when it's in the wrong place
It wouldn't be a K-5 copy 'cos it still wouldn't have a whole bunch of features

[larryaustin3]

Would you make it APS-C or full frame? When the K-01 came out it was $800. An $800 full-frame K-02 would be the cheapest full-frame camera on the market. Canon is rumored to be coming out with a full-frame R camera in that price range. Call me biased, but I believe Pentax could do it and do it better without cannibalizing sales of the K-1.

[CedrusMacro]

If they marketed it on the ability to do FF with a host of 1st party made adaptor mounts for old lenses I would be seriously interested. But wishful thinking

[aaacb]

There might as well be lens adapters fromSLR to mirrorless that accept filters, kind of like drop in rear filters for long lenses. Not sure if these exist though