[Pablom]

if in any way this thing reduces DSLR prices than I'm all for it

[eigelb]

Would this be Pentax's first rangefinder?

Yeaa a Pentax rangefinder woul be awesome but unbelievable

I have to say that if Pentax releases an EVIL camera without some sort of proper* K mount support (directly or with an adapter), at this point of time it should really be extra special to make me buy one. If I can use none of my old gear, there are already gen 2 Panasonic and Olympus µ4/3 cameras not to mention final (and aggressively priced) products of APS-C EVIL by Sony and Samsung.

*) proper meaning at least automatic aperture, preferably AF too.

[Pablom]

according to that document not only a mirrorless Pentax is on it's way but apparently Hoya is trying to sell the Pentax business. So how does Citi know all these things that no one else does? or do they?

[jct us101]

Looks like Mirrorless Forums might have been a good idea after all!

[Mike Cash]

Would this be Pentax's first rangefinder?

I do wish people would stop misusing the term "rangefinder".

[Pablom]

I do wish people would stop misusing the term "rangefinder".

actually a mirrorless camera with an optical viewfinder is not a bad idea, even with it's limitations.

but that is not going to happen

[Miserere]

Why? You could make it identical and release a simple spacer with screw extension and pass thru contacts.

Nope, that wouldn't work because the mirrorless camera wouldn't have a screwdrive motor...unless they didn't want to make it small, but then there's little point to a mirrorless camera. The Pentax MILC would be SDM focusing only, so DA SDM lenses should have no problem focusing.

The big issue is aperture control. All the current MILCs use electronic aperture (meaning there is a small motor inside the lens that closes the diaphragm), which makes sense as mechanical aperture control is very old-school and will eventually die out.

I'd be awfully disappointed if they abandoned their backwards compatibility.

A Pentax MILC cannot afford to be backwards compatible, it would impose unnecessary restrictions on its design that would make it DOA. This is actually a great opportunity for Pentax to move forward with a vision of the future, which is what MILCs are (whether people are happy with that or not).

The best we can hope for is an adapter like Sony has made for its NEX line. The adapter has a mechanical system that allows for auto aperture, so you set the aperture through the body and the lens gets closed down automatically to that aperture. Focus, on the other hand, is manual.

This would be a good solution because lacking auto aperture is the biggest annoyance when using 3rd party lenses on Panolympus and Samsung MILCs. Manual focusing on rear LCDs is fine, and doing it on EVFs is actually easier than on OVFs (at least for APS-C).

...

[Fogel70]

I have to say that if Pentax releases an EVIL camera without some sort of proper* K mount support (directly or with an adapter), at this point of time it should really be extra special to make me buy one. If I can use none of my old gear, there are already gen 2 Panasonic and Olympus µ4/3 cameras not to mention final (and aggressively priced) products of APS-C EVIL by Sony and Samsung.

*) proper meaning at least automatic aperture, preferably AF too.

If Pentax make an EVIL I doubt they will use any mechanical connection in the mount (no AF motor in camera or any mechanical aperture control), so any support for old lenses would have to be in the K-mount adapter (just like the A-mount adapter for Sony NEX).

But this would make the adapter expensive, and I doubt there would be any support for AF on focus-screw lenses.
But AF would be quite slow for DSLR lenses anyway as they don't work very well with contrast detect AF.

[stanleyk]

This would be a good solution because lacking auto aperture is the biggest annoyance when using 3rd party lenses on Panolympus and Samsung MILCs. Manual focusing on rear LCDs is fine, and doing it on EVFs is actually easier than on OVFs (at least for APS-C).

...

He's exactly correct on this.

For anyone who has tried to manual focus something like a 85mm f1.8 or 50mm f1.7 on a KX you would love the EVF on the E-P2. Great diopter too.

Whatever Pentax does (and hopefully they will release a FF camera to please a lot of forum members), if they release an EVIL I hope they have something similar to Olympus' EVF.

One of the great things about the E-P2 is it's ease at manual focusing combined with the ability to get inexpensive (or expensive) adapters for just about any lens. I just got a Konica 40mm f1.8 and adapter. The whole thing cost me less than $90. That's a really great lens. Again, hope Pentax can do the same if they release one of these cameras.

[Daedbird]

Ok, so until we see it, no one knows what Pentax may do with an EVIL system, but here are the things I can, and cannot see the system.

1. I don't see why it would need to be anything other than a K-Mount - Lets face it, EVIL cameras are not pocket cameras. With a lens attached, they need t be a carried. Their selling points are they are much smaller than a SLR, with small lenses. We know Pentax can make small lenses, and an EVIL K-mount would give them an advantage over all the other systems - compatible lenses up the wazoo.

2. Why would it need a bump? The long-standing K-system has to be the size that it is for two reasons: 1. to make room for the pentaprism and 2. to create enough space for refraction of lens. I still wonder if a combination of lens/software in camera could not compensate. It would likely mean a smaller than APS sensor, but then you would also not have to worry about the sensor getting dirty. Wouldn't this be akin to a person needing glasses?

3.Miniaturization of parts/placement - We all have or have had Pentax SLR cameras, the manual ones of which are as dee as m4/3 cameras. THe biggest problem with depth of a digital is the sensor is usually in the same place as the lcd screen. By either shifting these so they are not on top of one another (kinda like the NEX) Pentax should be able to reduce the size.
If they cut the flash, they could save space, but I think they should retain a flash.

4.Adapter is possible. Ok let's say Pentax does go with a new lensmount (and how do they pay for that), it would be stupid not making it somehow compatible with the current K lenses. But it would involve an expensive, and complicated adapter. Lets say Pentax chooses to eliminate the screw drive in this new system, instead powering lenses like SDM lenses. It could have an adapter that not only took K mounts, but also had a screw drive in it. This would allow legacy lenses (and lets face it, focusing with MF lenses on a LCD may not be that great.

5. VIDEo VIDEO VIDEO - It better have major video bonafides, as we see with Olympus, these systems sell when they have video capabilities.

[Q Bahorel]

There's a line near the end about the "sale" of the Pentax camera operations. Odd. I think that might refer to the purchase and integration of Pentax as a risk still ongoing rather than shopping the Pentax brand around. Maybe Hoya is shopping it around. Who knows?

Could you please explain "Pentax as a risk still ongoing?" Do you mean that Hoya's deal to buy Pentax is still in progress?

edit: the Q1 profit margin on Pentax was 4.1%

For people who don't feel like grabbing the pdf, here's the relevant portion (pg 4):

Have to admit that this "exit strategy for the Pentax camera operations" part does not feel good. Then again, I have zero understanding of business and perhaps it's just normal situation analysis.

[konraDarnok]

Nope, that wouldn't work because the mirrorless camera wouldn't have a screwdrive motor...unless they didn't want to make it small, but then there's little point to a mirrorless camera. The Pentax MILC would be SDM focusing only, so DA SDM lenses should have no problem focusing.

I disagree. The point isn't solely to make the camera smaller. It's to get rid of the mirror box. Which is a complicated piece of engineering. Which means it's expensive. An LCD is very simple in comparison. Cameras are small enough.

An LCD viewfinder truly is WYSIWYG. Which was the whole point of an SLR in the first place over other systems.

And I just don't see a screwdrive motor as being all that large to begin with.

I don't see any reason to switch mounts for those reasons. The only reason why they'd switch it is to finally get rid of the aperture linkage, which like the mirror box is expensive to manufacture -- by virtue of just being a physical thing -- rather than some simple electrical contact that just passes digital protocols.

[konraDarnok]

MF lenses on a LCD may not be that great.

I think it would be far superior.

Imagine your LCD viewfinder, in the center you'd have a circle about the same size as the old split prism, but in this camera it's a zoomed section of live full size pixels.

Just like using live view in zoom mode on their current cameras -- it's far easier to achieve manual focus than using either the viewfinder or the focus confirm from the AF sensor.

It's actually how my old canon point and shoot implemented MF, but that was clunky because there was no focus ring, just a couple of buttons. But it was accurate and really easy to see if you were in focus.