[Rondec]

I know that on the Forum we are focused on viewfinders, but I have yet to be convinced that the "average Joe" cares about the viewfinder very much when he goes out to buy an ILC. Basically folks like that are looking for a camera that offers better image quality than their smartphone. Something that will do better in low light without flash or can use longer lenses so they can take photos at their kid's soccer games.

The whole EVF gives you the "results on the sensor" isn't true either. The EVF shows you what your out of camera jpeg will look like. That's all. But for anyone who shoots RAW and under exposes to protect the highlights, the end image is going to actually be quite different from what is shown in the EVF. Maybe I am just "too experienced" but at this point I don't really need the stuff that pops up in EVFs and like a cleaner interface with just basic exposure stuff showing. I know they are configurable, but if I'm going to configure it to match my OVF then what's the point?

---

Last edited by Rondec; 09-23-2018 at 06:31 AM.

[kayakfari]

I see mirrorless FF or APSC as a kind of leveling the field and (finally) allow third party and other (older and possibly resurrected names) to (re)enter the enthusiast camera market.
Compared to the complicated mirrorbox assemblies with dozens of moving parts, mirrorless has only one moving part - the shutter (ok maybe IBIS also). But the mechanical shutter can be eliminated and replaced with just an electronic one, so we could see cams with zero moving parts.

So it's a very simple box with a sensor, a mount and some computing circuitry. At that point anybody can make one, even a DIY snap together kit .. lol!

Sony has been very smart in realizing the huge profit potential with this but no doubt prices will come down with more competition. I wouldn't be too surprised to see Sigma, Tamron, Tokina etc branded cams soon along with a many other names. At some point, these things are gonna be cheap and ubiquitous like mobile phones. The lenses will be the key to any successful marketing campaign. What will differentiate each brand - lenses, features, ergonomics, UI and of course price!


So where does that leave PENTA prism X ? Let's face it, the K mount has had a long run, but the days of mechanical levers and couplings are over. The K mount along with the other ol'SLR mechanical mounts will live on mostly just in adapters. We've seen the signs over the years with the major lens brands not releasing new designs in K mount and Pentax has already put a toe into the all-electronic mounts if only with just one lens. I certainly hope that Ricoh has been working on a new system of their own. God only knows what else could they be doing all the time since they are not really releasing anything new for a long time already!

[reh321]

I know that on the Forum we are focused on viewfinders, but I have yet to be convinced that the "average Joe" cares about the viewfinder very much when he goes out to buy an ILC. Basically folks like that are looking for a camera that offers better image quality than their smartphone. Something that will do better in low light without flash or can use longer lenses so they can take photos at their kid's soccer games.

The whole EVF gives you the "results on the sensor" isn't true either. The EVF shows you what your out of camera jpeg will look like. That's all. But for anyone who shoots RAW and under exposes to protect the highlights, the end image is going to actually be quite different from what is shown in the EVF. Maybe I am just "too experienced" but at this point I don't really need the stuff that pops up in EVFs and like a cleaner interface with just basic exposure stuff showing. I know they are configurable, but if I'm going to configure it to match my OVF then what's the point?

I cannot answer this for those of you who use 'raw' files - I just know that there has been a steady leakage of professionals from Canikon to Sony, so they must see something there.

[Rondec]

I cannot answer this for those of you who use 'raw' files - I just know that there has been a steady leakage of professionals from Canikon to Sony, so they must see something there.

Some for sure.

I thought the biggest draws were the ability to use all sorts of lenses due to the short registration distance and the smaller size that some mirrorless cameras have. Recently mirrorless has some very nice auto focus options like eye focus, but that is certainly not present on all models.

That said, as has been demonstrated elsewhere, mirrorless are growing a lot faster in Asia than in either North America or Europe. It is a mistake to think either that there is a huge shift to mirrorless or that most pros are dissatisfied with their SLRs. Some people have to have whatever is on the cutting edge, but for most people, they just want something that gets the job done and SLRs are as good as mirrorless in that respect.

[reh321]

So where does that leave PENTA prism X ? Let's face it, the K mount has had a long run, but the days of mechanical levers and couplings are over. The K mount along with the other ol'SLR mechanical mounts will live on mostly just in adapters. We've seen the signs over the years with the major lens brands not releasing new designs in K mount and Pentax has already put a toe into the all-electronic mounts if only with just one lens. I certainly hope that Ricoh has been working on a new system of their own. God only knows what else could they be doing all the time since they are not really releasing anything new for a long time already!

I don't see any reason for Pentax to develop yet another mount .... the KAF4 is just fine. Personally, I believe the delay in releasing new lenses is related to their trying to develop 'perfect' premium lenses, like the new FDA* 50mm lens.

[i_trax]

I wonder why Pentax has not yet jumped the mirrorless bandwagon (or rather, jumped off after the K01), I feel they are digging their own grave...

CP+ 2018 interviews: The reign of the DSLR is almost over...: Digital Photography Review

I am so lucky to be with Pentax.
Pentax a day keeps doctor away, that's all what matters.
Do not worry, I have enough of them to keep me going forever.........
Enjoy your existence!

[GeneV]

Some for sure.

I thought the biggest draws were the ability to use all sorts of lenses due to the short registration distance and the smaller size that some mirrorless cameras have. Recently mirrorless has some very nice auto focus options like eye focus, but that is certainly not present on all models.

That said, as has been demonstrated elsewhere, mirrorless are growing a lot faster in Asia than in either North America or Europe. It is a mistake to think either that there is a huge shift to mirrorless or that most pros are dissatisfied with their SLRs. Some people have to have whatever is on the cutting edge, but for most people, they just want something that gets the job done and SLRs are as good as mirrorless in that respect.

Honestly, when you write a lot of the criticisms I’ve read you post, you sound like someone who hasn’t tried a quality mirrorless. An EVF isn’t perfect, but it is light years ahead of ground glass at showing you what you will get. Maybe it it isn’t for you right now, but have you tried it to see? I’m a 45 year Pentax user and I can’t see this ‘60s technology with multiple mirrors surviving more than a decade. There are so many advantages to having autofocus and viewing work on the actual image, folks that diss it remind me of TLR users in the 70s. Canon and Nikon are going there, and it is a shame Pentax gave it up after the K01.

[Tony Belding]

The whole EVF gives you the "results on the sensor" isn't true either. The EVF shows you what your out of camera jpeg will look like. That's all.

That's better than not seeing any indication of what you're getting.

But for anyone who shoots RAW and under exposes to protect the highlights, the end image is going to actually be quite different from what is shown in the EVF.

At the car show yesterday I dialed my Sony A7 up to +3 compensation to shoot a cabin interior, then I forgot to zero it afterwards. I fired off several shots of cars before I noticed. Later in Lightroom I was able to easily bring those images back down, highlights and all. The leeway when shooting raw on today's sensors is amazing. The rendering that I get in the EVF may not be perfect, but it keeps me somewhere in the ball park, which is all I need. (Also, I once had the same thing happen with a Pentax KS-2, and I was able to fix very over-exposed images in Lightroom. The main difference is that I had a lot more of them to fix, because it took much longer to notice my settings were wrong!)

Incidentally, I also shot a roll of Ektar through my great old Ricoh XR7 while I was at the show. It has the best pentaprism viewfinder that I have ever seen on any camera. It's huge, bright, and it has the diagonal split-prism and microprism focusing screen. Outdoors in the daylight with a fast lens (50mm F1.7) it's still a joy to use. However… There was also a concert indoors, and the Sony was the only sensible choice for that.

[cdd29]

Question, I admit I'm not familiar with and need to do research but isn't the Q series a mirrorless system? Yeah, not as good or notable as the K-01 but it's still mirrorless and current.

[reh321]

Question, I admit I'm not familiar with and need to do research but isn't the Q series a mirrorless system? Yeah, not as good or notable as the K-01 but it's still mirrorless and current.

Yes, "Q" is MILC .... but probably mistake to label it as 'current' - Pentax still sells them, but evidence suggests they've been selling out of stock for the past five years.

Yes, "Q" is MILC .... but probably mistake to label it as 'current' - Pentax still sells them, but evidence suggests they've been selling out of stock for the past five years.

I'm sure that is true, but so long as there is no comparable camera system being made it doesn't hurt them any to keep it.

It seems that small sensor technology kind of reached a plateau with the Q7. A new Q model with an improved sensor (and a native macro lens) might find a niche, but none of the camera makers seem to be interested in smaller cameras, even m4/3 cameras are getting bigger!

[Tony Belding]

It seems that small sensor technology kind of reached a plateau with the Q7. A new Q model with an improved sensor (and a native macro lens) might find a niche, but none of the camera makers seem to be interested in smaller cameras, even m4/3 cameras are getting bigger!

I'd love to see the Q series continue, as there are definitely improvements that could be made to it.

However, everybody's been hammering the mantra of "bigger is better" and full-frame mania.

[reh321]

I'd love to see the Q series continue, as there are definitely improvements that could be made to it.

However, everybody's been hammering the mantra of "bigger is better" and full-frame mania.

I am guessing it didn't live up to Pentax's expectations.

Instead of learning "MILC needs EVF", they learned "MILC not for us" from 'Q' family and K-01.

[Peter van Baarle]

I'm sure that is true, but so long as there is no comparable camera system being made it doesn't hurt them any to not officially discontinue it.


It seems that small sensor technology kind of reached a plateau with the Q7. A new Q model with an improved sensor (and a native macro lens) might find a niche, but none of the camera makers seem to be interested in smaller cameras, even m4/3 cameras are getting bigger!

Point is that the market for compact camera's is more or less demolished by the smartphone, that get better and better camera's with each version. The only segment where some money can be made is probably the enthusiast / prosumer market. Imho, that means viewfinder camera, either mirrorless or DSLR. I don't think Ricoh can afford to have two separate technology lines, serving the same segment, so they will concentrate on one only, i.e. DSLR. The future will see if that is a good strategy or not....

I don't think Ricoh can afford to have two separate technology lines, serving the same segment, so they will concentrate on one only, i.e. DSLR.

Pentax/Ricoh has 6 separate lines now, (Q, APS-C, FF, 645, GR, Theta) plus their industrial optics division (which may actually be bigger than their camera division.) Concentrating on only one cuts off the synergy between them, leading to a dead end. They can't afford not to have multiple approaches. The Q-mount is elegant and has potential to be utilized in many ways that phones and larger cameras cannot.