[reh321]

The thing is, Ricoh already have a capable mirrorless camera in the GR III. Just put a K mount on it and take our money. Or is it not that simple?

A K-mount would add a great of depth to a camera that is valued for its small dimensions - and it still would not have an EVF.

[Wasp]

A K-mount would add a great of depth to a camera that is valued for its small dimensions - and it still would not have an EVF.

I can learn to live with the added girth of the K mount. An EVF can't be too hard to do.

[motorhead9999]

What do you consider fast?

https://www.adorama.com/mk652e.html?

https://www.adorama.com/sart3512e.html?

https://www.adorama.com/mk2518e.html?

https://www.adorama.com/sart5514eb.html?

I'd also like to point out that there isn't a 35mm f1.2 lens available for the K amount at any size, weight, or price. Yes, these are the "cheapie" lenses, but at least they actually exist for mirrorless cameras. Some of these have no DLSR equivalent.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE DSLRs. I have a Canon SL1, 10D and D30, a Nikon D70, A Pentax K10d and a (an?) *ist D, an Olympus E-1, and I'm sure one or two more I can't remember right now. In most situations my SL1 is my go-to camera. I'm hoping Santa brings me an original 5D! I also have a Sony NEX-3, a Panasonic G2, and have had a half dozen other Sony mirrorless models and a couple Fuji X cameras along the way. There are many on this forum (not you) that always comment on mirrorless cameras, whom I'm pretty sure have never really used one. Many of those that have only ever used them with adapted K mount lenses. Of course the size advantage is partly lost doing that! I do say partly however - any full frame DSLR absolutely dwarfs a Sony A7, A9, et cetera.

Yes, a K1 is certainly larger than a Mirrorless full frame body. However, in the grand scheme of things, it's not THAT much larger that it makes a difference. A Sony body will take up just a somewhat smaller (in real terms) space in your bag than a K1.


Prior to getting my K1 recently, I was a dedicated Sony user (I have an A7iii and an A7riii), and what I will say is that those who say mirrorless is a toy are kidding themselves, and those who say that the dslr is dead isn't quite correct. There's some advantages to both (although mirrorless is certainly closing the gap). Quite frankly, Pentax could change nothing about the K1, and just add an EVF and I would be thrilled. If there's one thing I miss having on the K1, it's an EVF (even the lesser quality one on the a7iii).

Re: your comment on the lenses: This is spot on. If there's one thing that I am extremely hesitant on with Pentax is the lens selection and future roadmap. Yes, vintage lenses are great and having an ungodly number of years worth of them is fantastic. But it's also great to have new and better stuff coming out, especially stuff that is niche, that make this platform alive and not dead. With Sony, I literally have access to anything. I have all the Sony first party lenses available, I can use any vintage lens I want, AND I have 3rd part support from companies like Tamron, Sigma, Voigtlander etc. With Pentax, they've basically lost all major 3rd party support, and Ricoh seems to feel that there is no urgency in either having a wide variety of modern lenses, or putting out products that make people want to join the system. This is one of the reasons why I originally left the brand in the first place last year. As much as I have loved the K1 for landscape purposes, there's enough inherent issues that make me nervous about staying here. Granted, the fact that I have my Sony gear and *most* of the lenses I have for Pentax (which aren't many mind you, and mostly vintage)will adapt if I ever left the K1 again helps me stay here.


Really, as much as Ricoh/Pentax say they won't, they *need* to go mirrorless, and they need to do it well. It's the only way to stay alive. And there's really no excuse for them not to (other than their hugely limited resources). Canon and Nikon have both shown how to move over to this world. Make a good mirrorless body, make a good autofocus adapter to the K mount, and people will stay with the company, but also have room to grow in the future. Just make sure the flange distance this time makes the body a universal receiver, rather than a universal donor.

[Fenwoodian]

.
It's not that Pentax can't create a mirrorless camera, they already have (K-01, Q). It's that they choose not to in order to focus their R&S resources elsewhere (lens and DSLR development).

[Fenwoodian]

Really, as much as Ricoh/Pentax say they won't, they *need* to go mirrorless, and they need to do it well. It's the only way to stay alive.

Define "stay alive"? While Pentax is not growing market share, I sense that their current strategy is making a profit for them. That's more than can be said for the recent financials from Nikon and some of the other big players.

[tokyoscape]

I sense that their current strategy is making a profit for them..

I think this is a good question to ask Pentax representative on the next interview which usually happened during CP+ in Yokohama. Ricoh still keep the brand, so I guess it is still doing something positive for Ricoh. But from reading at their financial report, Ricoh used to mention Pentax but not for the couple of the latest report anymore. Pentax is in the Other category and something in that category making money for Ricoh, but they didn't say it is Pentax or say anything can be implied that it is DSLR. If I remember it right, they didn't even mention DSLR in the latest report. I see many people here imply that Pentax is still financially making profit for the strategy they are using, but I am not so sure until Ricoh say it on a financial report.

---------- Post added 12-17-19 at 04:20 PM ----------

Really, as much as Ricoh/Pentax say they won't, they *need* to go mirrorless, and they need to do it well. It's the only way to stay alive. And there's really no excuse for them not to (other than their hugely limited resources). Canon and Nikon have both shown how to move over to this world. Make a good mirrorless body, make a good autofocus adapter to the K mount, and people will stay with the company, but also have room to grow in the future. Just make sure the flange distance this time makes the body a universal receiver, rather than a universal donor.

Reading the latest interview, they are clearly talking about it. I don't remember read any Pentax interview saying something can be implied that there is no possibility of doing a Mirrorless. It makes money in the shrinking camera market right now for example look at companies like Sony, Fuji. It would be financial suicide for Pentax to give up without a fight.

Getting too little new users + loosing more and more of the old user = making less and less money = The end anyway.
Unless the prophecy came true which we have a little more than a year to see, will sufficient number of mirror less people move back to DSLR? We will see!

[motorhead9999]

Define "stay alive"? While Pentax is not growing market share, I sense that their current strategy is making a profit for them. That's more than can be said for the recent financials from Nikon and some of the other big players.

Exist as a viable brand in the next 10-20 years. I'm not in Pentax's financials, but while turning a profit is important, and staying afloat moreso, you can only tread water for so long. At some point, everything will move mirrorless. Everyone in the business is rushing to catch up with Sony and their advances. At some point, Sony will come up with tech that will take any advantages that DSLRs have, and roll it into their mirrorless system. Look at the progress they've made from the A7 to the A7iii. They went from terrible autofocus, terrible battery life, and terrible lens selection to class leading autofocus, battery life (roughly, depending on the situation you choose to compare with) on par to a DSLR, and a rich, vibrant lens selection that is growing every year.


Canon and Nikon have certainly managed to extend the life of DSLRs. By making their mirrorless lens adapters give native autofocus to their older DSLR lenses, they've allowed entrenched DSLR people to stick their toes in the mirrorless waters while still having their DSLRs available to them. At some point though, the public will phase DSLRs out by choice.


With that having been said, I'm ok with Pentax not rushing out a crappy mirrorless system just to put on a public face. I'd rather they take the time to do it right, and release a relatively mature product. They'll also need the lenses to go with it. Sony took a big impact initially with not having a selection of lenses available. Pentax can't put themselves in that situation. More concerning to me is the paltry amount of lenses out there for the full frame system (beyond vintage lenses). If people don't see new and exciting products and options for their cameras, they're going to feel that their system isn't moving forward. In almost 4 years of release, there's only 16 1st party full frame lenses listed on B&H, several of which (I believe) existed before the K1 came into being, and 3rd party manufacturers have more or less abandoned the mount,. Sony has 6ish years of full frame over 20 modern lenses, and a thriving 3rd party community. Which do you think seems like a healthier ecosystem to sink your money into, especially to someone looking to move into a system?

My two cents. I don't want to paint Pentax as doom and gloom (even though I'm pretty sure I've done just that) because it's not. I'm knee (and credit card) deep in Sony. And yet, I've picked up a K1 body and have chosen to use that as my landscape camera. That says something. But that something also needs to keep moving forward instead of relying on the past.

My two cents.

[photoptimist]

At some point, Sony will come up with tech that will take any advantages that DSLRs have, and roll it into their mirrorless system.

Let me know when Sony rolls an optical through-the-lens viewfinder into their cameras. An OVF is one of the biggest advantages of DSLRs. For various reasons that have been discussed ad nauseam on PF, OVFs have a wide range of advantages in creative workflow, ergonomics, and other areas.

Currently, except for the EVF, all modern DSLRs provide MILC features when in liveview. It's easier for DSLRs to roll in MILC technology than vice versa.

Where Pentax could make a huge splash is with a hybrid VF that seemlessly switches between OVF and EVF modes.

[motorhead9999]

Let me know when Sony rolls an optical through-the-lens viewfinder into their cameras. An OVF is one of the biggest advantages of DSLRs. For various reasons that have been discussed ad nauseam on PF, OVFs have a wide range of advantages in creative workflow, ergonomics, and other areas.

Currently, except for the EVF, all modern DSLRs provide MILC features when in liveview. It's easier for DSLRs to roll in MILC technology than vice versa.

Where Pentax could make a huge splash is with a hybrid VF that seemlessly switches between OVF and EVF modes.

Except I will take an EVF over an OVF any day of the week. Live View is great when you're on a tripod and looking down at a screen. When I'm walking around, I want to look through the viewfinder, not the back of my screen.

Again, my opinion.

[photoptimist]

Except I will take an EVF over an OVF any day of the week. Live View is great when you're on a tripod and looking down at a screen. When I'm walking around, I want to look through the viewfinder, not the back of my screen.

Again, my opinion.

I'm not talking about looking down at the screen in back, I'm talking about a hybrid VF. You look through one eyepeice and either see an electronic screen (EVF mode) or an optical focusing screen (OVF mode) at the touch of a button/flip of a switch. There are at least four ways to design this and Ricoh had a patent on at least one.

Obviously some people hate OVFs, most of them have probably already bought a MILC. But some people prefer an OVF for most conditions. But maybe they might want an EVF digital review image for a couple of seconds after each shot to avoid chimping. Or they might use OVF mode for long stills photographic sessions and EVF mode for occasional video shots.

The point is that a DSLR with a hybrid screen is basically two cameras in one.

[reh321]

Pentax can't put themselves in that situation. More concerning to me is the paltry amount of lenses out there for the full frame system (beyond vintage lenses). If people don't see new and exciting products and options for their cameras, they're going to feel that their system isn't moving forward. In almost 4 years of release, there's only 16 1st party full frame lenses listed on B&H, several of which (I believe) existed before the K1 came into being, and 3rd party manufacturers have more or less abandoned the mount,. Sony has 6ish years of full frame over 20 modern lenses, and a thriving 3rd party community. Which do you think seems like a healthier ecosystem to sink your money into, especially to someone looking to move into a system?

My two cents. I don't want to paint Pentax as doom and gloom (even though I'm pretty sure I've done just that) because it's not. I'm knee (and credit card) deep in Sony. And yet, I've picked up a K1 body and have chosen to use that as my landscape camera. That says something. But that something also needs to keep moving forward instead of relying on the past.

My two cents.

I do not disagree with most of your words. My disagreement with them is in Pentax’s ability to design and in Ricoh’s willingness to expand that ability.

I believe Ricoh is willing to spend only so much on Pentax - and I do not argue against that. When I first became a member here, the cry I was hearing was “give us a ‘FF’ body so our old {prime} lenses may act as they were designed to act.” Perhaps Ricoh believed that pitch - when they purchased Pentax, part of what they acquired was a real wealth in old K-mount lenses that are ‘out there’ - but as soon as they announced the K-1, people started talking about new DFA* lenses. In the last few years, they have demonstrated how much Pentax has lost in the past twenty years as far as releasing new K-mount lenses is concerned. I believe they could design yet another mount, but I despair at the thought of their trying to release the number of lenses in the mount that people would expect.

Yes, they could release an adapter from K-mount to the new mount, but I believe within a few years most people would no longer be satisfied with that solution.

Yes, perhaps they could join the L-mount coalition, but I remain unconvinced that the business case for that solution would leave people satisfied either - it may boil down to Pentax’s designing a K-mount to L-mount adapter .... and shortly thereafter Ricoh’s quietly shutting down Pentax operations.

[motorhead9999]

I do not disagree with most of your words. My disagreement with them is in Pentax’s ability to design and in Ricoh’s willingness to expand that ability.

I believe Ricoh is willing to spend only so much on Pentax - and I do not argue against that. When I first became a member here, the cry I was hearing was “give us a ‘FF’ body so our old {prime} lenses may act as they were designed to act.” Perhaps Ricoh believed that pitch - when they purchased Pentax, part of what they acquired was a real wealth in old K-mount lenses that are ‘out there’ - but as soon as they announced the K-1, people started talking about new DFA* lenses. In the last few years, they have demonstrated how much Pentax has lost in the past twenty years as far as releasing new K-mount lenses is concerned. I believe they could design yet another mount, but I despair at the thought of their trying to release the number of lenses in the mount that people would expect.

Yes, they could release an adapter from K-mount to the new mount, but I believe within a few years most people would no longer be satisfied with that solution.

Yes, perhaps they could join the L-mount coalition, but I remain unconvinced that the business case for that solution would leave people satisfied either - it may boil down to Pentax’s designing a K-mount to L-mount adapter .... and shortly thereafter Ricoh’s quietly shutting down Pentax operations.

You're right in that. The Pentax lenses they have released have been very nice, and I can't fault them (although to be fair, it seems that a few were Tamron rebadges). And yeah...there's the business side which is hard to discern being on the outside. But it's a vicious circle. They're not making lenses because they're not selling many cameras, and they're not selling many cameras because there's not a great amount of lenses out there.

L mount would be an interesting idea, although they're certainly having their struggles too. As nice as it is having Leica on board, the price on Leica lenses almost makes them a non-starter for folks. If they can get a robust lens lineup (and having sigma on board helps), there might be a future there. But certainly having an open system to handle a lot of the lens design would help. But you're right...if Pentax isn't going to be selling lenses themselves, and will only really be making bodies, that certainly wouldn't give Ricoh much of an incentive to keep the brand going.

[CapitanXeon]

....make a good mirrorless body, make a good autofocus adapter to the K mount, and people will stay with the company, but also have room to grow in the future. Just make sure the flange distance this time makes the body a universal receiver, rather than a universal donor.

Maybe the screwdriver shaft might complicate things a bit, as they would need to retain the in-camera motor, or either put the best motor possible into the adapter and drive its cost up the roof.
I can agree on the flange distance thing tho looks like Pentaxians are the most keen to use adapted lenses, at least on what i can see on the internet.

[motorhead9999]

I can agree on the flange distance thing tho looks like Pentaxians are the most keen to use adapted lenses, at least on what i can see on the internet.

You always want most what you can't have...and after being able to adapt pretty much any lens to Sony, I want that too!

[house]

I think Pentax is hoping to become the leica of DSLRs. Not in terms of price but in terms of niche tech. They have the heritage and have put out gear with a very solid and camera like feel. Could work.