[buzzinhornet]

I've said a number of times in the past that I'd love it if Pentax joined Micro Four Thirds - I think it would be an awesome camera. It would be better designed than either Oly's or Panny's cameras, and it would have the advantage of a HUGE lens catalog right off the bat - no more complaining about the lack of third party lens options. but so many Pentax folks scoff at this idea - so much so that this is the last time I'll mention it... There's so much negativity in Pentax Land when mirrorless comes up, it's almost as bad as the Canon and Nikon bashing!

I totally agree, making a new mount would be silly when there is already an established one open to them. They would do well in the body sales right from the start, if they can improve their live view performance.

[wed7]

I'd like to believe that the FF K-02 is in the works. ��

[barondla]

I totally agree, making a new mount would be silly when there is already an established one open to them. They would do well in the body sales right from the start, if they can improve their live view performance.

Problem is lenses are where the profit is. Bodies require updating constantly.
Thanks
barondla

Check out the Point & Shoot Contests in the Compact Camera forum. Enter #115. The Q is welome and all brands are allowed.

[Fenwoodian]

It would appear that they are still focused on lens design and manufacture for the K-1.

After that they should be looking at some new glass for their 645Z to compliment that great digital sensor and respond to some extent to the new Fuji medium format.

They are a small company and only have so many resources.

+1

I completely agree. As a small company, Pentax has limited resources and I would not want to see them stretched too thin by offering too many cameras. I recommend Pentax focus in four (4) areas.

Pentax as of late has been doing a good job on their full frame (1), and APS-C bodies (2). They should focus their limited R&D in these areas. They don't need a new mirrorless body, nor should they resurect the K01 or the Q lines.

Personally, I'd like to see Pentax drop medium format. I don't think they can compete with Fuji and Hasselblad in the medium format area.

They really NEED to get Zeiss and Sigma to again start offering their lenses in K mount (3). If that happens with the terrific K1 and the expected K3III I think Pentax's future would look pretty good.

Finally, it's been shown that K1 pixel shift images are better than images from the new Fuji GFX medium format camera - "when there is no subject motion". Pentax needs to find a way for pixel shift to handle motion much better (4).

---

Last edited by Fenwoodian; 07-12-2017 at 04:39 PM.

[lytrytyr]

nor should they resurect the K01 or the Q lines.

.
Lately I've settled in to using my Pentax Q7 camera with the outstanding 01 standard prime lens for my product photos.

?????

[Fcsnt54]

+1

I completely agree. As a small company, Pentax has limited resources and I would not want to see them stretched too thin by offering too many cameras. I recommend Pentax focus in four (4) areas.

Pentax as of late has been doing a good job on their full frame (1), and APS-C bodies (2). They should focus their limited R&D in these areas. They don't need a new mirrorless body, nor should they resurect the K01 or the Q lines.

Personally, I'd like to see Pentax drop medium format. I don't think they can compete with Fuji and Hasselblad in the medium format area.

They really NEED to get Zeiss and Sigma to again start offering their lenses in K mount (3). If that happens with the terrific K1 and the expected K3III I think Pentax's future would look pretty good.

Finally, it's been shown that K1 pixel shift images are better than images from the new Fuji GFX medium format camera - "when there is no subject motion". Pentax needs to find a way for pixel shift to handle motion much better (4).

Number 4 would be great. As much as people like to state that the pixelshift gives medium format quality, motion really prevents it from being true. But ill have to disagree with you on not being able to compete with either hassleblad or fuji in that arena. They are very similar, pentax really just needs to shave off some weight and offer updated lenses with weather sealing and it would bring them back in the spotlight. Even getting a larger sensor and updated lenses will help.

[serothis]

+1

I completely agree. As a small company, Pentax has limited resources and I would not want to see them stretched too thin by offering too many cameras. I recommend Pentax focus in four (4) areas.

Pentax as of late has been doing a good job on their full frame (1), and APS-C bodies (2). They should focus their limited R&D in these areas. They don't need a new mirrorless body, nor should they resurect the K01 or the Q lines.

Personally, I'd like to see Pentax drop medium format. I don't think they can compete with Fuji and Hasselblad in the medium format area.

They really NEED to get Zeiss and Sigma to again start offering their lenses in K mount (3). If that happens with the terrific K1 and the expected K3III I think Pentax's future would look pretty good.

Finally, it's been shown that K1 pixel shift images are better than images from the new Fuji GFX medium format camera - "when there is no subject motion". Pentax needs to find a way for pixel shift to handle motion much better (4).

I partially disagree.

The advantage to camera body R&D is that technology can be spread across the entire lineup.

For example. PDAF which is critical for mirrorless could be used for any other pentax body that uses live view (so all of them) .
A new image process developed for mirroless again, can be used for all the other bodies in their line up. Battery saving techniques again could be applied to all products in their lineup.

[CarlJF]

Check out the Point & Shoot Contests in the Compact Camera forum. Enter #115. The Q is welome and all brands are allowed.

I've checked but No interchangeable lens cameras as specified in the rules seems to disqualify the Q...

[barondla]

I've checked but No interchangeable lens cameras as specified in the rules seems to disqualify the Q...

Q is further down under special exceptions:


Cameras permitted (cameras listed as acceptable here supersede rules above):
Mobile phones, old and new, iPods, tablets, toy cameras.
Fixed-lens 35mm and smaller-format film and digital cameras (Fuji X100 and GR OK).
Interchangeable or fixed-lens 110film SLRs and Pentax Q.

Read more at: Point and Shoot Competition #115 - Vacation - PentaxForums.com

Thanks,
barondla

---------- Post added 07-14-2017 at 09:40 AM ----------

Perhaps Pentax should keep medium format, Q, and the FF and drop ALL the APS-c. APS-C is where they compete the worst. Doubt they will ever overcome canikons soccer mom legions. Joking, but it does make one think. Aps-c is the red headed stepchild format that would have never existed in the first place, except for Philips incompetence and price.

Thanks,
barondla

[Sluggo]

The advantage to camera body R&D is that technology can be spread across the entire lineup.

A good point. I think it also explains why Pentax doesn't, and shouldn't, telegraph all its moves way ahead of time (to everyone's frustration here of course). R&D work doesn't always go strictly where it is pointed; a new technique, a new algorithm, a new material, can always fling open a door that was off to the side. Given the level of Pentax's resources, I think they're smart to keep several general directions open rather than committing to pursuing this and abandoning that, and if they revive their mirrorless presence in the future, it will be because some combination of the right design breakthroughs and the right market seems to warrant it.

[Pioneer]

...Perhaps Pentax should keep medium format, Q, and the FF and drop ALL the APS-c. APS-C is where they compete the worst. Doubt they will ever overcome canikons soccer mom legions. Joking, but it does make one think. Aps-c is the red headed stepchild format that would have never existed in the first place, except for Philips incompetence and price.

Thanks,
barondla

A perfect example of the complete impracticality evident in many of these posts.

To date, Pentax has manufactured exactly one full frame digital, two medium format digital and four Q cameras.

Digital APS-c is their bread and butter and has paid the development cost for all of the above, not to mention contributed the lions share of technology implemented in those cameras. They are also very, very good at building these cameras.

Now we are recommending that they abandon completely their bread and butter line just because they are not the biggest camera manufacturer in the world.

What? You don't like Pentax? You want to totally put them out of business?

EDIT -

[CarlG]

And maybe abandon photo and pentaprisms and such for video and electronic viewfinders at the same time? Or maybe keep and develop profitable areas? I'm with you, Pioneer.

[Wasp]

I have to confess that the Fujifilm XE1 and XE2 look might nice. The Canon entry level EOS M10 is surprisingly cheap affordable as well, but not really in the same league as the sexy one.

There are several things that attract me to a MILC. One can use K mount lenses on them with a suitable third part adapter; M42 as well. Just about any other lens mount you can think of, for that matter. The downside to this is manual focus manual focus only.

They are quieter in operation than a DSLR. And they are more compact and attract less attention, which said to great great for street photography and photojournalism. Just how well it works out with a great big lens attached, I don't know. A smaller camera is more stealthy but something like an 85mm f/1.4 would probably give the game away. An SMC M 50mm f/1.4 on the other hand might be a lot of fun.

The greatest attraction of the K-01 also puts me off it. It has a K mount, but means that it has to be big. It looks huge and weird next to the Fujifilm e.a. I suppose a different lens mount would have incurred more R&D money than Pentax was prepared to invest.

Without a new lens mount (and lenses to go with it) to make it more compact, a new mirrorless Pentax will not cut it. If such a thing does see the light of day, will it be possible to do a K mount adapter that preserves all the lens automation goodness, including autofocus?

[boriscleto]

Without a new lens mount (and lenses to go with it) to make it more compact, a new mirrorless Pentax will not cut it. If such a thing does see the light of day, will it be possible to do a K mount adapter that preserves all the lens automation goodness, including autofocus?

Only with lenses that have KAF4 mounts. So a grand total of 1 right now. It will be 3 when the D FA* 50/1.4 & 85/1.4 finally ship.

[lytrytyr]

A perfect example of the complete impracticality evident in many of these posts.

Not at all. It seems that you missed the key word "joking" in @Barondla's post.

And the interesting point about the impact of the failure of the FF Philips sensor.
Luckily for us, it wasn't as catastrophic for Pentax (thanks to APS-C) as it was for Contax.