[Aristophanes]

You like to attack the man don't you?

I know what a DSLR is, so you needn't post a link or be so condescending.

I said this:
"Pentax's DSLR sales have remained static (and it's a similar case with Olympus DSLRs), but the new segment of the market (micro 4/3) has boosted Olympus and Panasonic sales to around 25%+ of the WHOLE
mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras market (including DSLRs)."

The mirrorless was a copy and paste error.

To make it clear:
1. Pentax's DSLR sales have remained static.
2. Olympus' DSLR sales have also remained static
3. A new segment of the interchangeable lens camera market is the micro 4/3 (and others), in ADDITION to DSLRs.
4. The new segment of the market (micro 4/3) has boosted Olympus and Panasonic sales to around 25%+ of the WHOLE
interchangeable lens cameras market (including DSLRs).

Tell me something, have you repaired cameras & and lenses (on and off) for more than 25 years like I have?

Have you ever repaired DSLRs like I have? Have you converted a DSLR to IR like I have?

So yes, I know what a DSLR is.

Read the data again!!

DSLR sales have *increased*. If a rising tide lifts all ships, then Pentax sales have increase as well. Check their own releases. Yup. That's what they say.

The pie is growing, better for M43 right now, but not necessarily at the expenseof DSLR, though that is likely.

M43/EVIL is not taking away low-end DSLR market share because they are in totally different price points right now and for the foreseeable future. It's the mid-price market that will take the hit. This explains the $350 Canon's we see in the flyers right now. Canon can outprice EVIL with a DSLR handily, so that's how they chase broad market opportunity cost.

No, I do not believe you made a copy and paste error because you repeated the same thing 3x.

[Aristophanes]

Try the E-PL1 instead with the retractable 14-42. It's not exactly pocketable, but it's definitely smaller than the K-x: The K-x with the 18-55 weighs 780g and has a depth of 135mm. The E-PL1 with the 14-42 weighs 494g and has a depth of 87mm.

I have tried the Olympus. I have a soft spot for Oly. They have a complete solution photographic line that I wish Pentax would emulate. And they're not Canikon. When I moved from Nikon I would have gone for Oly except the high-ISO performance on their 4/3 was simply not good enough. I shot 400 ISO film and 400 ISO 4/3 is not that good compared to almost all APS-C sensors.

M43 just makes that problem worse.

Yes, smaller form factor for sure with the E-PL1. Terrible AF. Awful high-ISO. Lousy flash. Ergonomics not as good as a DSLR with grip. That lens *will* break in 5x more ways than a (non-SDM) DSLR lens.

Too many compromises, and I'm not the only consumer who will figure that out.

[dnas]

Read the data again!!

DSLR sales have *increased*. If a rising tide lifts all ships, then Pentax sales have increase as well. Check their own releases. Yup. That's what they say.

The pie is growing, better for M43 right now, but not necessarily at the expenseof DSLR, though that is likely.

M43/EVIL is not taking away low-end DSLR market share because they are in totally different price points right now and for the foreseeable future. It's the mid-price market that will take the hit. This explains the $350 Canon's we see in the flyers right now. Canon can outprice EVIL with a DSLR handily, so that's how they chase broad market opportunity cost.

No, I do not believe you made a copy and paste error because you repeated the same thing 3x.

You are doing it AGAIN!!

I didn't say micro 4/3 was taking market share away from low end DSLRs. I said it may happen in the future as camera companies rationalise their product range.

Here is the point you REFUSE to understand: Olympus and Pentax were about on par two years ago with interchangeable lens cameras(both with just DSLRs). When Olympus introduced micro 4/3, they captured 200% more market than they already had, with interchangeable lens cameras, leaving Pentax far behind.


You are fond of "attacking the man not the ball" again, as usual. You continue to accuse me of not understanding the difference between micro 4/3 and real DSLRs.
But you don't answer my question, because you can't:

Have you repaired cameras & and lenses (on and off) for more than 25 years like I have?
Have you ever repaired DSLRs like I have? Have you converted a DSLR to IR like I have?

[falconeye]

People do want tiny cameras - they are called P&S - but adding many lenses to it doesn't make it tiny anylonger.

That's not true exactly. Pentax with their 110 SLR system (which is almost exactly FourThirds sensor/film size) showed that a small pocketable camera with interchangeable lenses is feasible. Even with an optical viewfinder and a mirror ...

But I do agree, all current SLD cameras (incl. the NEX) are bulky with lenses attached.

[stanleyk]

That's not true exactly. Pentax with their 110 SLR system (which is almost exactly FourThirds sensor/film size) showed that a small pocketable camera with interchangeable lenses is feasible. Even with an optical viewfinder and a mirror ...

But I do agree, all current SLD cameras (incl. the NEX) are bulky with lenses attached.

Pocketable is sort of amorphous description. I will agree with you on the NEX. It's kind of clunky if you ask me, but who knows Sony may sell tons of them. My buddy bought one.

I have the E-P2 which I find to be a great camera. Would I stick in my pocket? Not really it cost too much. But, for example, I have a photo vest and it does fit nicely in that pocket even with the 9-18mm attached.

No doubt it's kind of specialty camera. Personally I think that's how the camera market will segment itself, not towards one standard and everyone has to get in line behind that standard. I'm very happy with the E-P2 and the Pentax K7/KX (crummy viewfinder on the KX though) DA 15-70mm. The viewfinder on the E-P2 is really quite special and is a joy to manual focus with.

I'm not sure how the micro four thirds will go. I love my E-P2. It's not a Canon mark whatever Godzilla sized camera, but really that's not what it's trying to be. So it's kind of pointless to compare them if you ask me. Most people make compromises with life and with cameras.

[Art Vandelay II]

The only people that don't like these kinds of cameras (whatever acronym you choose) seems to be people that either have a hard time letting go of the past, or people that haven't even used one. I bought the E-P1 the first week it came out and while it wasn't the perfect camera for me it was clear to me that DSLR's ultimately have no chance in matching the sales of these cameras. I said it 2 years go when m4/3's was first announced, I said it again when I first tested the Panasonic G1, then once more after buying the E-P1...DSLR's are dead in the water. They are going to be relegated to the same niche area where range finders currently reside for amateurs. The difference is however, some pro's will continue using them (in full frame form).

The only way I will consider getting another DSLR is if Pentax (or anyone else for that matter) makes a full frame DSLR in a Pentax LX/Nikon FE type body. I would put up with more bulk for a larger sensor, but for me a DSLR doesn't offer enough advantages to deal with the noise, tiny optical view finders (all current DSLR view finders suck compared to Pentax LX), mirror slap, and unnecessary bulk (I don't need a grip, nor do I want one).

[Aristophanes]

Try the E-PL1 instead with the retractable 14-42. It's not exactly pocketable, but it's definitely smaller than the K-x: The K-x with the 18-55 weighs 780g and has a depth of 135mm. The E-PL1 with the 14-42 weighs 494g and has a depth of 87mm.

That's not true exactly. Pentax with their 110 SLR system (which is almost exactly FourThirds sensor/film size) showed that a small pocketable camera with interchangeable lenses is feasible. Even with an optical viewfinder and a mirror ...

But I do agree, all current SLD cameras (incl. the NEX) are bulky with lenses attached.

I know 2 pro photogs and both have an LX3 for their "pocket" camera. A slightly larger sensor on that thing and it challenges the IQ of M43.

[Art Vandelay II]

EVFs are already more usable than entry-level penta-mirror OVFs which are too dark. And you don't need to use the viewfinder, you can use the LCD just fine although you add some hand shake.

Bingo! In-fact I'd go as far as to say there are only a handful of acceptable OVF's on the DSLR market. All full frame DSLR's have acceptable VF's, although only the Sony A900/850 and Canon 1Ds can compare to older film cameras such as a Nikon F100. Most all APS-C OVF's are wretched little peep holes. Manufacturers have simply lost their way when it comes to DSLR VF's, the cameras have gotten bigger and the VF's have gotten smaller. Every single one of those cruddy pentamirror VF's are so dim and dark I'd rather use live view on an EVIL then look through one of them. Give me the GH1 EVF over a pentamirror any day of the week. Plus, as you mention, DOF preview is huge. You don't have to settle for just a preview through an OVF, you can actually see the bokeh and compose so the halos are exactly where you want them. Once you get used to that you almost feel handicapped trying to compose without it.

[gazonk]

I know 2 pro photogs and both have an LX3 for their "pocket" camera. A slightly larger sensor on that thing and it challenges the IQ of M43.

Even Ned has it :-) (in the pay-for-the-red-badge version)

[falconeye]

I know 2 pro photogs and both have an LX3 for their "pocket" camera. A slightly larger sensor on that thing and it challenges the IQ of M43.

I gave one to my mother (in the pay-for-the-red-badge version) so she wouldn't miss her 35mm Rollei that much anymore
One great camera for daylight footage, I must say.

[junyo]

I know 2 pro photogs and both have an LX3 for their "pocket" camera. A slightly larger sensor on that thing and it challenges the IQ of M43.

Rumors: Panasonic LX3 replacement will have a 4/3rds sensor, OVF, 3X zoom - 1001 Noisy Cameras

Might be wishful thinking or the perfect pocket camera. But this is the kind of stuff I wish Pentax would think about, because I guarantee these will sell by the boatload. Well, unless you screw it up like Sigma.

[Art Vandelay II]

I'm curious to see how Panasonic will pull off a 3x zoom in a pocket camera covering a 4/3's sensor. The only way I can think of is they'll have to use something like an f/4.5-5.6 28-85mm lens. If that is the case I have zero interest in it. I sometimes feel restricted using f/2.8 zooms, anything slower is worthless to me. I'd much rather have a simple old 50mm f/2 (or preferably f/1.4) then any slow standard zoom. I've got legs, I don't mind using them.

[nosnoop]

Might be wishful thinking or the perfect pocket camera. But this is the kind of stuff I wish Pentax would think about, because I guarantee these will sell by the boatload.

I agree with Art Vandelay; I just can't see how they can package it to anywhere close to the compactness of LX3, unless they make major compromise to the lens specs.
And no, it won't sell by the boatload. It will sell well as a niche product, but would probably be less than LX3 because of the inevitable much higher price.

[junyo]

I agree with Art Vandelay; I just can't see how they can package it to anywhere close to the compactness of LX3, unless they make major compromise to the lens specs.
And no, it won't sell by the boatload. It will sell well as a niche product, but would probably be less than LX3 because of the inevitable much higher price.

Again, m43 was supposed to be stillborn, and sells by the boatload.

If they cripple the lens it won't be as useful, sure, but that's speculation based on the speculation that their goal was to make it exactly the same size as the current camera, based on a camera that exists thus far only as rumor. But in equally plausible speculation, Panny can take advantage of a fixed lens and have a collapsible lens design that allows a larger camera that's still pocketable. One would assume that Panasonic understands that the speed of the lens was one of the initial specs that made the LX3 stand out when they pitted it against the G9, and not want to tinker with the formula too much.

Or it might not exist, and we're disputing the specs of a fairy tale.

[uccemebug]

Most all APS-C OVF's are wretched little peep holes. Manufacturers have simply lost their way when it comes to DSLR VF's, the cameras have gotten bigger and the VF's have gotten smaller.

Fully agree with this.

Give me the GH1 EVF over a pentamirror any day of the week.

I even prefer the wacky viewfinder on my old Olympus 35DC.

One thing that I've noticed about the u4/3 cameras—they're turning up in the used camera shops in big ways. I was in Map camera the other day and saw two whole cabinets full of them, far more than anything else they had in used stock. I wonder if this is a matter of the current bodies and/or results not meeting people's expectations. One way or another, they must be selling well. Here's one of the cabinets.