[Rondec]

Considering that battery technology is pretty much industry standardized, there's no point to chase optimizations in that part of the design. The KP and K-01 are already highly miniaturized bodies, with the only real difference in sizing due to the prism hump as well as the PDAF mirror box on the bottom side. That's why further miniaturization, whilst retaining OVF PDAF + metering is the next big step in reducing the body. Pentax/Ricoh have hinted at this by saying SAFOX is approaching technical limitations.

If Pentax/Ricoh are capable of changing to a new PDAF system and incorporating both into the prism housing, then we have:
- The body of K-01
- No independent PDAF sensor under mirror box
- Cheaper to manufacture the body
- PDAF + metering unit is built into optional OVF finder (expensive)
- Mirror is fully reflective rather than semi translucent, as seen in older film cameras

Or if Pentax/Ricoh cannot shift into a new PDAF unit:
- body of KP
- PDAF unit still in body, raising base cost
- OVF accessory is cheaper
- Mirror is darker

MILCs may be a bit cheaper to manufacture, but until you get your R and D fully developed, they are pretty tech heavy and that is where Pentax seems to struggle. I can't imagine using any current Pentax camera only in live view. They just aren't that great with regard to speed or tracking. I think Pentax could get there, but it would take enough investment to make the camera at least as expensive as an equivalent SLR.

(I don't think MILCs end up being priced any cheaper than SLRs of comparative specs, although why that is is debatable.)

[lytrytyr]

I can't imagine using any current Pentax camera only in live view. They just aren't that great with regard to speed or tracking.

But they are often superior in accuracy with LV, and the advantage is especially noticeable at the wide end of standard zooms. The K-01 is the only Pentax camera I have which has really tamed the Tamron 17- 50/2.8. Even my DA 20-40 Ltd benefits from LV focusing at the wide end for really critical shots.

[reh321]

But they are often superior in accuracy with LV, and the advantage is especially noticable at the wide end of standard zooms.

and low light. My KP will sometimes focus in LV, when using the OVF results in endless ‘hunting’, but I would never ever again purchase a camera - like the K-01 or the GR - without an EVF.

[someasiancameraguy]

MILCs may be a bit cheaper to manufacture, but until you get your R and D fully developed, they are pretty tech heavy and that is where Pentax seems to struggle. I can't imagine using any current Pentax camera only in live view. They just aren't that great with regard to speed or tracking. I think Pentax could get there, but it would take enough investment to make the camera at least as expensive as an equivalent SLR.

(I don't think MILCs end up being priced any cheaper than SLRs of comparative specs, although why that is is debatable.)

I certainly agree that Pentax has a lot to catch up with regards to sensor based AF speed or tracking, but the Ricoh GR III already shows significant improvements compared to the K-70 in this regard. It's not perfect or class leading by any means, but I believe that with a bit more work the AF speed and tracking will be serviceable.

[Rondec]

and low light. My KP will sometimes focus in LV, when using the OVF results in endless ‘hunting’, but I would never ever again purchase a camera - like the K-01 or the GR - without an EVF.

Really? I don't own a KP, but the K-1 II focuses significantly better in low light with the PDAF system than with the live view. But maybe the KP is a different animal.

[reh321]

Really? I don't own a KP, but the K-1 II focuses significantly better in low light with the PDAF system than with the live view. But maybe the KP is a different animal.

Yes, below some point I have to use LV to focus, and below another I have to do it manually

[RobA_Oz]

MILCs may be a bit cheaper to manufacture, but until you get your R and D fully developed, they are pretty tech heavy and that is where Pentax seems to struggle. I can't imagine using any current Pentax camera only in live view. They just aren't that great with regard to speed or tracking. I think Pentax could get there, but it would take enough investment to make the camera at least as expensive as an equivalent SLR.

(I don't think MILCs end up being priced any cheaper than SLRs of comparative specs, although why that is is debatable.)

It’s particularly hard to make a judgment like that in the current environment of rising prices.

On the matter of whether MILCs are cheaper to manufacture, the major difference surely must be the cost of the EVF (less the eyepiece lenses that will be needed, regardless) versus the cost of the prism and mirror mechanism. Every DSLR must have a tailor-made prism and mirror mechanism, but I assume the EVF electronics are bought-in standard items. I don’t know how many makers of those items exist, so the cost to camera-makers could be determined by how competitive that part of the market is. The labour or machine time in installation of the respective items will also be different and, again I assume, will be higher for DSLRs than for MILCs.

[automorphism]

It’s particularly hard to make a judgment like that in the current environment of rising prices.

On the matter of whether MILCs are cheaper to manufacture, the major difference surely must be the cost of the EVF (less the eyepiece lenses that will be needed, regardless) versus the cost of the prism and mirror mechanism. Every DSLR must have a tailor-made prism and mirror mechanism, but I assume the EVF electronics are bought-in standard items. I don’t know how many makers of those items exist, so the cost to camera-makers could be determined by how competitive that part of the market is. The labour or machine time in installation of the respective items will also be different and, again I assume, will be higher for DSLRs than for MILCs.

I think you are definitely right about that. The EVF is just a really cool small monitor. The main this is it has no moving parts.

[RobA_Oz]

I think you are definitely right about that. The EVF is just a really cool small monitor. The main this is it has no moving parts.

While it’s true in general that pure electronic systems can have an indefinite life, I do wonder about any electronic component that functions with light (or any other form of energy input or output, other than signal-level amounts). What’s the MTBF typically for EVFs?

By way of contrast, modern materials and manufacturing techniques can produce mechanical systems that have much longer service lives than their predecessors (as we see with the K-1’s shutter life). In terms of the service life of the camera, the difference between electronic and mechanical may be irrelevant.

Nonetheless, not having a mechanical mirror operation to add to the vibration disturbance while operating the shutter is another plus point for the MILC’s EVF electronics. On a contemporary Pentax DSLR, the use of LiveView and the Electronic Shutter can mimic part of the MILC experience, of course.

[someasiancameraguy]

While it’s true in general that pure electronic systems can have an indefinite life, I do wonder about any electronic component that functions with light (or any other form of energy input or output, other than signal-level amounts). What’s the MTBF typically for EVFs?

By way of contrast, modern materials and manufacturing techniques can produce mechanical systems that have much longer service lives than their predecessors (as we see with the K-1’s shutter life). In terms of the service life of the camera, the difference between electronic and mechanical may be irrelevant.

Nonetheless, not having a mechanical mirror operation to add to the vibration disturbance while operating the shutter is another plus point for the MILC’s EVF electronics. On a contemporary Pentax DSLR, the use of LiveView and the Electronic Shutter can mimic part of the MILC experience, of course.

EVFs are just monitors with a layer of optics on top, so their MTBF is typically determined by the light source. OLED/AMOLED usually has something like 50k to 100k hours, but will eventually dim, suffer slight color shift on the pixel level and cannot be corrected, and become unevenly lit before it actually fails. LCDs are typically more reliable if we talk just about the panel, but the florescent backlight will likely fail in slightly shorter to similar times (around 10k - 50k hours) and ways as LEDs will (also subject to dimming and color shift).

[RobA_Oz]

EVFs are just monitors with a layer of optics on top, so their MTBF is typically determined by the light source. OLED/AMOLED usually has something like 50k to 100k hours, but will eventually dim, suffer slight color shift on the pixel level and cannot be corrected, and become unevenly lit before it actually fails. LCDs are typically more reliable if we talk just about the panel, but the florescent backlight will likely fail in slightly shorter to similar times (around 10k - 50k hours) and ways as LEDs will (also subject to dimming and color shift).

I seem to recall that the life of a LED lamp was measured as the time to fall to something like 70% of its initial output. Don’t hold me to the number, as it’s a while since I was involved with lighting applications.

[ZombieArmy]

The only advantage I see In the K-01 being an MILC is the size and weight sporting a K mount.
(I would consider a GR series if they were to support interchangeable lenses,)
I can easily fit the camera, and 15, 40 & 70 limiteds in a coat pocket for a quick outing.
What I really like is the quality aps-c sensor and simplicity for manual shooting, not so many bells and whistles to work around.
I think the idea of a modular flash, ovf or evf on top of the camera is a great idea and would be easy enough to implement.
Size and weight does have it advantages though. The setup for these shots with my K1 or K3 would be a lot more extensive,

I mean it's also using the K-5 sensor, which in my opinion is one of best rendering sensors ever made.

[someasiancameraguy]

I mean it's also using the K-5 sensor, which in my opinion is one of best rendering sensors ever made.

Is this the GR III?

[pcrichmond]

I mean it's also using the K-5 sensor, which in my opinion is one of best rendering sensors ever made.

Absolutely true, should have mentioned that

[UncleVanya]

A revamped GXR line with a k Mount apsc (or ff) sensor module and a tilting EVF like a Panasonic GX8 would be mighty interesting. It could still offer other sizes of fixed lens modules for portability say a 1” sensor to rival Sony’s rx100?