Originally posted by biz-engineer Mirrorless doesn't need a new mount. New mounts were created by Sony, Canon, Nikon & Co. so that to offer a temporary adaption of legacy glass via adapter while opening up business for selling new lenses for the new mount.
A mirrorless camera with a K mount is a stripped down version of a Pentax DSLR, it doesn't cost more to develop when using the K mount, it costs less because the software is straight-foward as there is only one sensor to read: the image sensor. A mirrorless camera is a DSLR with hardware and software components removed. For a design standpoint Mirrorless is a better design, because it is simplified. There are two downsides for camera users: banding from AF array on CMOS sensor, and EVF disconfort. But for the camera maker mirrorless means better profit margins, and a bit of a marketing rip-off for customers but that's another story.
Oh, I get what a mirrorless camera is, and why it's easier and cheaper to manufacture. I just don't think there's a significant potential market for one that has a big, empty mirror box in front of the sensor and (according to your previous post) no mechanical AF drive or aperture control, so incompatible with most existing K-mount lenses
I don't see that as particularly attractive when compared to Sony, Nikon and Canon with their more compact, short registration distance bodies and legacy lens adapters. I'd rather Ricoh invested in development of a hybrid viewfinder and offered something new and compelling. Of course, that would require even more R&D, and more complex and costly manufacturing, which isn't good for Ricoh... but neither, I'd venture to suggest, is a larger-than-necessary mirrorless camera with a redundant mirror box and minimal legacy lens support. The press, reviewers, other forums and users of other brands would have a field day, I fear...