[Tony Belding]

I really wish there are an equivalent from Pentax as a small APS-C combined with the Ltd lenses would be fantastic. Has anyone heard any plans for this kind of thing?

It's called the K-01. You can find them on eBay. They work just fine with Limited lenses, too. I had one for a while, and although I eventually sold mine, it was a pretty solid camera that had some charms.

If you want to go even smaller, that's what the Q system is all about. Yeah, you'd have to buy some new lenses, but they aren't super expensive.

[reh321]

It's called the K-01. You can find them on eBay. They work just fine with Limited lenses, too. I had one for a while, and although I eventually sold mine, it was a pretty solid camera that had some charms.

If you want to go even smaller, that's what the Q system is all about. Yeah, you'd have to buy some new lenses, but they aren't super expensive.

In the nine months I've owned both a Q-7 and a K-30, I've used the Q-7 at least as much as the K-30, partly because often it's my favorite camera with me at the time {namely, the only camera with me at the time}. I've become convinced that I was right from the beginning - I would like a K-01 better than the K-30 if the K-01 had an EVF; I know people are tired of hearing about this "dead horse", but the simple fact is that when I take pictures outside, I need some kind of viewfinder, and even indoors, a viewfinder is more comfortable for me and enables me to hold the camera more steadily. Even though my Q-30 is only sixteen months old, and the K-30 less than a year old, I would probably buy a Q-S2 or a K-02 within six months or so if it had an EVF.

[kerttamm]

I'm really keen on the Sony a6000 but it means a whole new lens system (I'm not interested in adapters).

I really wish there are an equivalent from Pentax as a small APS-C combined with the Ltd lenses would be fantastic. Has anyone heard any plans for this kind of thing? Maybe everyone is just focused on full frame

---------- Post added 02-13-15 at 12:03 PM ----------

Err, I meant to say "Those" in the know...

Are you aware of such things as focal reducers? You can get one from Pentax K mount to Sony E mount for as little as ~65 EUR (no clue how horrible would be the quality for the cheapest Chinese copy one can find) and reasonably decent ones go for about twice of that. These are ofc "dumb" units without any electronics so only manual focus, etc etc. But you can actually use a full frame Pentax Limited on an APS-C size sensor while getting "almost" the full image coverage from it focused down to APS-C size. The catch is ofc it's fully manual

[The Squirrel Mafia]

I wonder what plans Pentax has for the Q series. I think it has really good image quality given the size of that 1/1.7" sensor. My wife wants one 'cause she thinks her K-50 is a bit too big & bulky. She loves that the Q-S1 is really small & has the option of switching lenses, but having only 4 "real" lenses (01, 02, 06, 08) kinda sucks. Needs more "real" primes, not toy lenses.

It's still a bit pricey too. A Q-S1 with the 02 & 06 plus the 01 & 08 at Adorama is $1,133.85. An Olympus E-PL7 with the 14-42, 40-150, 17mm f/2.8, & 25mm f/1.8 lenses is about $1,200. My wife & I still prefer the Q over the E-PL7, but then the bang for the buck factor & lens option comes up once again.

Too add some more insult to injury, a K-50 with the 18-55 & 50-200 plus the 35mm f/2.4 & the 50mm f/1.8 is about $710 from B&H. The K-50 obviously has better image quality, but it's also much bigger. Problem is that I have 2 K-50's & those lenses already. Hahaha!

Pricing the Q system is where Pentax really needs to get aggressive.

[normhead]

I'm really keen on the Sony a6000 but it means a whole new lens system (I'm not interested in adapters).

I really wish there are an equivalent from Pentax as a small APS-C combined with the Ltd lenses would be fantastic. Has anyone heard any plans for this kind of thing? Maybe everyone is just focused on full frame

---------- Post added 02-13-15 at 12:03 PM ----------

Err, I meant to say "Those" in the know...

This whole thought makes sense only for those who shoot with lenses bigger than the 40XS.

Zips Loxia 35mm ƒ2 for Sony FE 340 grams. Sony A6000 285 grams Total 625 grams.

Pentax K-01- 561 grams 40XS 51 grams total weight 612 grams.
Pentax K-S1. 558 grams.

And I bet the K-01 with the 40 or 21 ltd. fits in my pocket better

I'm not sure what you're asking of here, but whatever it is, you haven't shown you can't get it in a Pentax.

Unless you're talking that you can spend $1700 on an f2 sony lens instead of $200 on a 40XS.

You can do lightweight and small on Pentax.

So, I'm not sure what your point is.

Maybe you could be more specific about the exact configuration you're talking about, and what you want from it.

I often carry the K-01 and or 40XS / 21ltd in a coat pocket, while the K-3 is around my neck with a long lens on it.

But, I don't know Sony, is there a Sony combo that packs into a smaller space, that is lighter than a K-01 or K-S1 with a 40xs on it? After all, you really do have to have a lens on the camera to use it.

[Fogel70]

But, I don't know Sony, is there a Sony combo that packs into a smaller space, that is lighter than a K-01 or K-S1 with a 40xs on it? After all, you really do have to have a lens on the camera to use it.

For a more accurate comparison you might want to compare Pentax DA 40/2.8 and DA 21/3.2 with Sony 35/2.8 and 20/2.8.
The Pentax DA 40/2.8XS is 51g vs Sony 35/2.8 with 120g, and Pentax DA 21/3.2 is 134g vs Sony 20/2.8 with 69g.
Sony 35/2,8 is nowhere near the size of the DA40/2.8XS, but the front lens on both are probably in about the same distance from the sensor. Sony 20/2.8 is about the same size as DA 21/3.2.

Edit:
But IMO if you want to check what is possible pancake-wise on mirrorless it better to check what Samsung has done.
Samsung 30/2.0 : 85g : 62 x 22 mm vs DA 40/2.8 XS : 52g : 63 x 9 mm
Samsung 20/2.8 : 89g : 62 x 25 mm vs DA 21/3.2 : 134g : 63 x 25 mm
Samsung 16/2.4 : 90g : 62 x 24 mm vs DA 15/4.0 : 189g : 63 x 40 mm
Samsung 10/3.5 : 72g : 59 x 26 mm

[reh321]

I wonder what plans Pentax has for the Q series. I think it has really good image quality given the size of that 1/1.7" sensor. My wife wants one 'cause she thinks her K-50 is a bit too big & bulky. She loves that the Q-S1 is really small & has the option of switching lenses, but having only 4 "real" lenses (01, 02, 06, 08) kinda sucks. Needs more "real" primes, not toy lenses.

It's still a bit pricey too. A Q-S1 with the 02 & 06 plus the 01 & 08 at Adorama is $1,133.85. An Olympus E-PL7 with the 14-42, 40-150, 17mm f/2.8, & 25mm f/1.8 lenses is about $1,200. My wife & I still prefer the Q over the E-PL7, but then the bang for the buck factor & lens option comes up once again.

Too add some more insult to injury, a K-50 with the 18-55 & 50-200 plus the 35mm f/2.4 & the 50mm f/1.8 is about $710 from B&H. The K-50 obviously has better image quality, but it's also much bigger. Problem is that I have 2 K-50's & those lenses already. Hahaha!

Pricing the Q system is where Pentax really needs to get aggressive.

Part of the issue is that if you get 5 of us talking about this subject, you'll get at least 7 different opinions {so if Ricoh were to eavesdrop here for ideas, they'd leave more confused than they came.}

My personal opinion, which I state every time the issue comes up {like #17 above}, is that a modern camera needs a viewfinder if its going to compete with other cameras, let alone with cell phones. Pentax has shown no interest in EVFs {afterall, OVFs are their forte, even to the point of providing their name}, which basically dooooooms {there, I got that word in} Pentax MILC efforts. Yes, I do have a Q-7, and I do use it indoors with only the LCD, but I add a hoodman {or hoodman clone} to the bag if I expect to use it outdoors, and to me that is simply not a satisfactory solution. On several occasions I've said that normally I expect a camera to last at least five years, and I've had my Q-7 for only 17 months while I've had my K-30 for only 11 months, but I would feel compelled to get a Q-S3 with EVF within six months or so of its release and a K-03 {K-3 or similar packaged as MILC with EVF} within six months or so of its release. My budget might be in real trouble if Pentax released both a Q-S3 and a K-03 this year ... but I would be extremely surprised if they ever produced either of them.

As far as Q-mount lenses are concerned, the real issue in your comparison is the 08, which costs more than my Q-7 cost me {used like new via Amazon}. Wide angle is very hard to do at such a small mount, so I understand the pricing, but justifying that price is very hard none the less. I believe they would be much better off releasing a 00 {a ~4.2mm prime lens}, and it could be quite successful, and contribute to more "Q" sales as well, if they could get its price down to the neighborhood the 01 is in. Afterall, in the days of MF, we used very few zoom lenses other than telephoto lenses, so having 00 + 01 + 06 would be very similar to having 28mm + 50mm + 70-210mm in the days of film. I should probably add that my Q-7 came as a Q-7 + 02 + 06 kit, and I had to go all the way to a Japanese merchant to find any price, let alone a good price, on a 01 lens; apparently things are a little better in that area now, at least.

[Tony Belding]

My personal opinion, which I state every time the issue comes up {like #17 above}, is that a modern camera needs a viewfinder if its going to compete with other cameras, let alone with cell phones. Pentax has shown no interest in EVFs {afterall, OVFs are their forte, even to the point of providing their name}, which basically dooooooms {there, I got that word in} Pentax MILC efforts. Yes, I do have a Q-7, and I do use it indoors with only the LCD, but I add a hoodman {or hoodman clone} to the bag if I expect to use it outdoors, and to me that is simply not a satisfactory solution.

I had great difficulty using my K-01 out in the sunlight, and I bought a Hoodman to use with it. I no longer have the K-01, but I have my Q7 now, and I find that I don't bother with the Hoodman. I don't know if it's because the Q7's screen is better, or because I've adapted and learned to deal with the glare better, or some of both. (I've definitely started wearing more dark clothes!) I've found what I really miss more than an EVF when using the Q7. . . is a tilt screen. A tilt screen would encourage more experimentation with shooting from different viewpoints, and it can also make the camera more discreet to operate, since you can break out of the typical picture-taking pose when using it.

I'd still love to see an OM-D-like "Super Q" with an EVF and tilt screen. So, it would have to be larger and more expensive. . . I think that would be OK as long as it's an addition to the Q line rather than a replacement. Sort of like Olympus have both the PEN and OM-D.

As far as Q-mount lenses are concerned, the real issue in your comparison is the 08, which costs more than my Q-7 cost me {used like new via Amazon}. Wide angle is very hard to do at such a small mount, so I understand the pricing, but justifying that price is very hard none the less.

I have seen all the griping and grousing over the price of the 08 lens. "Oh, I'd like to have the 08 someday, but it's so terribly, terribly costly!" Yeah. . . I think you all need to get some perspective. Right now you can get a brand new 08 from B&H for less than $500. Or you can get a Fuji XF 10-24mm for about $1000, or you can get a Sony 10-18mm for $850, or a Panasonic 7-14mm (M4/3) for $700. . . Anyhow, I am a wide angle nut, and I have the 08 and love it, and I would rather be out shooting with it than sitting around griping over the cost.

I believe they would be much better off releasing a 00 {a ~4.2mm prime lens}, and it could be quite successful...

Of course I'd never object to more good quality prime lenses, which so many have been wishing for from the beginning.

[JPT]

I like the K-01 a lot and agree with normhead that you can build a very nice compact kit around it. The problem with the K-01 as a mirrorless solution is that it is no longer in production, and Ricoh has not made a follow up. For now it performs just fine, but there will come a time when I need/want to replace it, and there is currently no way of doing that.

The K-S1 is relatively light, but I can't help imagine how light a similar camera would be without the prism and associated paraphernalia. So my hope would be a camera that was based on the guts of the K-S1 but mirrorless. I wouldn't want a viewfinder built in. Leave it as an optional accessory for those who want it. I think the LCD should be improved, so make it a tilt screen and add that function on the K-1 to boost brightness. Keep it around 400g and $500. In other words make it an improved K-01, not a DSLR wannabe.

[monochrome]

I have a backup supply of 2 deal-priced NIB K-01's in the event my first one fails.

[Tony Belding]

I wouldn't want a viewfinder built in. Leave it as an optional accessory for those who want it.

I've never seen an accessory EVF yet that wasn't ugly and awkward. Which is not to say it couldn't be done better. . .

[JPT]

I've never seen an accessory EVF yet that wasn't ugly and awkward. Which is not to say it couldn't be done better. . .

I think it could be done better if they wanted to. How about having it slide on to the side of the camera, so that it effectively makes the camera a bit wider, rather than taller?

I thought about getting a spare K-01, but mine has been going strong for four years and shows no signs of failing. Fingers crossed that I won't need a spare.

[Nicolas06]

I like the K-01 a lot and agree with normhead that you can build a very nice compact kit around it. The problem with the K-01 as a mirrorless solution is that it is no longer in production, and Ricoh has not made a follow up. For now it performs just fine, but there will come a time when I need/want to replace it, and there is currently no way of doing that.

The K-S1 is relatively light, but I can't help imagine how light a similar camera would be without the prism and associated paraphernalia. So my hope would be a camera that was based on the guts of the K-S1 but mirrorless. I wouldn't want a viewfinder built in. Leave it as an optional accessory for those who want it. I think the LCD should be improved, so make it a tilt screen and add that function on the K-1 to boost brightness. Keep it around 400g and $500. In other words make it an improved K-01, not a DSLR wannabe.

A remark a KS1 without viewfinder would be in competition basically with an Olympus Pen basically in term of feature and performance... But the Olympus pen are much lighter/smaller/stylish. I can buy one Pen for 300€ (same price as KS1 in fact). But that mean this would be quite entry level product with most people using only the kit lenses anyway while obviously a K-02 would never approach the look, style and size of a Pen.

There 2 reasons I didn't buy a K-01 back in time, even when the price where insanely low. No viewfinder, no descent AF. I am after a product that could replace my K3 but would be under 500g and significantly smaller to use with the ltds. But if it take forever to AF and I need to hold it hackward that's no go for me.

So that at least PDAF sensor (the K-mount lenses except the single new 55-300 are not designed to perform well with contrast AF) and a viewfinder.

What I mean is that there isn't much money to make on mirrorless without viewfinder except appealing on style/size. But that's simply impossible with K-mount. If you want to be able to have street price above 500€/$ and make some money you need that viewfinder and decent AF performance.

On a side note, K70 is actually pionnering the PDAF on the sensor, so the only thing that Ricoh miss to make a K-02 is to master viewfinder technology. I don't hold my breath, but a K-02 or KS3 with an electronic viewfinder seems quite possible to me. Bundled with the ltd line, it is quite viable. To make it shine, have an XS version of the 21, 40 and 70, all WR, a collapsible 50-200 WR and quite importantly, review the 18-50 collapcible into a 16-50 with a sturdy system. Apparently the 18-50 is soso in that regard.

Have all of this and the K02 or KS3 would be a very good piece of kit !

[monochrome]

My personal opinion, which I state every time the issue comes up {like #17 above}, is that a modern camera needs a viewfinder

K-01 with an EVF + K-70 internals (KAF4 mount) . . . .

On a side note, K70 is actually pionnering the PDAF on the sensor, so the only thing that Ricoh miss to make a K-02 is to master viewfinder technology. I don't hold my breath, but a K-02 or KS3 with an electronic viewfinder seems quite possible to me.

and reissue DA Limiteds as PLM RE lenses with KAF4 mount (no screw drive) = K-02. It might have an ugly snout.

Seems like a lot of work, but that's essentially the requirement, unless they develop a complete new mount.

[biz-engineer]

A remark a KS1 without viewfinder would be in competition basically with an Olympus Pen basically in term of feature and performance... But the Olympus pen are much lighter/smaller/stylish. I can buy one Pen for 300€ (same price as KS1 in fact). But that mean this would be quite entry level product with most people using only the kit lenses anyway while obviously a K-02 would never approach the look, style and size of a Pen. There 2 reasons I didn't buy a K-01 back in time, even when the price where insanely low. No viewfinder, no descent AF. I am after a product that could replace my K3 but would be under 500g and significantly smaller to use with the ltds. But if it take forever to AF and I need to hold it hackward that's no go for me. So that at least PDAF sensor (the K-mount lenses except the single new 55-300 are not designed to perform well with contrast AF) and a viewfinder. What I mean is that there isn't much money to make on mirrorless without viewfinder except appealing on style/size. But that's simply impossible with K-mount. If you want to be able to have street price above 500€/$ and make some money you need that viewfinder and decent AF performance. On a side note, K70 is actually pionnering the PDAF on the sensor, so the only thing that Ricoh miss to make a K-02 is to master viewfinder technology. I don't hold my breath, but a K-02 or KS3 with an electronic viewfinder seems quite possible to me. Bundled with the ltd line, it is quite viable. To make it shine, have an XS version of the 21, 40 and 70, all WR, a collapsible 50-200 WR and quite importantly, review the 18-50 collapcible into a 16-50 with a sturdy system. Apparently the 18-50 is soso in that regard. Have all of this and the K02 or KS3 would be a very good piece of kit !

Looks like Ricoh do not actually offer what would be you ideal system, but others do. Have you had a look at Fuji or Sony?