[Rondec]

I own a K1 and a SONY a7III. The SONY focus is much faster and accurate than the K1, not to mention the SONY's tracking ability. I'm happy with both cameras, they each serve purposes specific for my needs.

But that's not a feature of mirrorless, it is just a negative on Pentax's current implementation of auto focus. I imagine a D850 or D750 even would keep up with your A7 III's auto focus just fine.

As far as the initial question, biz-engineer is right, the only mirrorless likely coming this year is the GR III. I think it will be well received, but of course, it isn't an ILC.

[zapp]

If we see a Pentax dslm something else has to go.
It is not about yes, no, reasons, but simply about priority and resources available to Pentax.

[photoptimist]

I seriously doubt that mirrorless will dominate for the same reason that VR (anybody remember CyberSmith?), 3-D movies, and 3-D TV have utterly failed to dominate despite heavy promotion by "the big guys." Heavy advertising and cool technology can't overcome the fact that a significant percentage of the population feels some degree of discomfort watching these things.

What I'd love to see is a hybrid VF -- an EVF visible in the eyepiece when needed (pre-shot or post-shot review) and an OVF at all other times.

[Rondec]

I seriously doubt that mirrorless will dominate for the same reason that VR (anybody remember CyberSmith?), 3-D movies, and 3-D TV have utterly failed to dominate despite heavy promotion by "the big guys." Heavy advertising and cool technology can't overcome the fact that a significant percentage of the population feels some degree of discomfort watching these things.

What I'd love to see is a hybrid VF -- an EVF visible in the eyepiece when needed (pre-shot or post-shot review) and an OVF at all other times.

Maybe the future is a VR compatible camera with accompanying blue tooth headset. You could certainly get way more feed back than is available in your standard electronic viewfinder...

[biz-engineer]

I seriously doubt that mirrorless will dominate for the same reason that VR (anybody remember CyberSmith?), 3-D movies, and 3-D TV have utterly failed to dominate despite heavy promotion by "the big guys." Heavy advertising and cool technology can't overcome the fact that a significant percentage of the population feels some degree of discomfort watching these things.

Mirrorless will possibly be hurting more the camera sector than doing good. When the mirrorless models of 2018 won't sell so much as expected (too much R&D on too many competing models), it will give another reason for those big companies not to invest further in the development of camera products. Change of lens mount is also a disruption for customers, without bringing real benefit: some customer will upgrade , but it will put off a lot of customers who otherwise would still have enhanced their dslr. Tried to artificially build a need with a new tech that bring no clear benefit is a tricky thing to do, in the past such attempts have failed many times.

[reh321]

Am I the only one who read the post before responding to it?

The OP clearly was asking about a MILC {Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera}, often abbreviated "Mirrorless" - as you clearly understood in the post just before this one
Lenses on the GRiii are not interchangeable - in fact, some vendors list GR family in their "point-and-shoot" section.

[CarlJF]

What are the chances of Pentax announcing an enthusiast level mirrorless this year? Something that can compete with the likes of Sony A6xxx or Fuji XT series. Something that can rival a K70 in IQ. I would buy something like that. Wouldn't you?

No chance we're seeing that in the foreseeable future. They barely are able to develop the K line while they're saying its their top priority. I don't see how they would be able to launch and rapidly develop a new line of camera. I may be wrong, but I'm certainly not holding my breath for a Pentax MILC although it would be fine to have the option.

[brofessor]

Interesting viewpoints. It is hard to tell if pentax users would like an enthusiast grade MILC but don't think they will get one (for obvious reasons) or don't want one to begin with, because they think it is going to hurt the dslr side of the things. I guess it is fair to say that most pentax users (including myself) don't see an added benefit of a high grade MILC (sorry K-01) because we already have relatively compact DSLRs that can produce great images (i.e. KP). On the other hand, as a consumer, I wish I could get great still images AND great AF tracking for videos in the same package that will allow me to use my current lenses.

[biz-engineer]

The OP clearly was asking about a MILC {Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera}, often abbreviated "Mirrorless" - as you clearly understood in the post just before this oneLenses on the GRiii are not interchangeable - in fact, some vendors list GR family in their "point-and-shoot" section.

You can always remove the mirrorless camera model from the Ricoh lineup to show that Ricoh don't have a mirrorless camera.

[reh321]

You can always remove the mirrorless camera model from the Ricoh lineup to show that Ricoh don't have a mirrorless camera.

Huh??

[labidas]

But that's not a feature of mirrorless, it is just a negative on Pentax's current implementation of auto focus. I imagine a D850 or D750 even would keep up with your A7 III's auto focus just fine.

Nope. A7III is miles ahead.

And the benefits are pretty obvious.
1)You have less surfaces/obstructions that interfere with the focus.
2)Focusing is done on the sensor which means AF microadjustments are unnecessary.
3)You can spread out your focus points all across the sensor.
4)You can use a combination of contrast + phase detect AF.
5)You can use the actual live feed from the sensor and combine it with AI. = eyeAF!!!

D750 is a dinosaur.

I would definitely want a MILC Pentax. Just keep the good old body design of the K3/K1.

[Rondec]

Nope. A7III is miles ahead.

And the benefits are pretty obvious.
1)You have less surfaces/obstructions that interfere with the focus.
2)Focusing is done on the sensor which means AF microadjustments are unnecessary.
3)You can spread out your focus points all across the sensor.
4)You can use a combination of contrast + phase detect AF.
5)You can use the actual live feed from the sensor and combine it with AI. = eyeAF!!!

D750 is a dinosaur.

I would definitely want a MILC Pentax. Just keep the good old body design of the K3/K1.

Right.

Have you used a D750 and with what lenses? Because your post is not about real world auto focusing and how much faster the Sony will actually get to the target and how well it tracks and in what lighting. It is just propaganda from Sony.

Speed of lens used, skill of photographer are not factored into your equation either.

[brofessor]

Right.

Have you used a D750 and with what lenses? Because your post is not about real world auto focusing and how much faster the Sony will actually get to the target and how well it tracks and in what lighting. It is just propaganda from Sony.

Speed of lens used, skill of photographer are not factored into your equation either.

I think what he is trying to say is that, holding the skill constant, Sony has a more advanced AF system. A skilled photographer will always find ways to make best use of any AF system.

[reh321]

I think what he is trying to say is that, holding the skill constant, Sony has a more advanced AF system. A skilled photographer will always find ways to make best use of any AF system.

Have you actually used a D5, D500, D850, or D7500??
They have a special processor with special AF programming.
I'm not convinced that Sony AF is more advanced than that.

[clackers]

Nope. A7III is miles ahead.

The method is slower, Labidas.

You're missing a dedicated PDAF system, powered by the mirror.

The mirrored AF sensor can use as many pixels as it likes, the onboard PDAF pixels of mirrorless use up real estate that you cannot form a picture from. The camera will try to hide the gaps by baking the RAW, making up values (I think someone mentioned 12 percent of the surface does not read data) but this can lead to banding and artifacts, like all digital processing.

Rarely is the PDAF enough by itself … the usual is actually a hybrid of both CDAF and PDAF, introducing a delay.

As I understand it, amongst the criticisms of the EOS R and the Nikon Z7 is that the autofocus is not as fast as the 5D Mk IV and the D850 they are based on … disturbing for professionals who are being asked to put out a lot of cash and change mounts for native lenses.