Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-21-2011, 09:52 AM   #526
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,031
Maybe, but they issued a rather hudge and quite annoying-hand product...


Last edited by Zygonyx; 09-21-2011 at 11:29 PM.
09-21-2011, 11:12 PM   #527
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,229
QuoteOriginally posted by Zygonyx Quote
Maybe, but they issued a rather huge and quite annoying-hand product...
indeed. may become a nice system but tvose two cams are.very uninteresting.
09-22-2011, 05:36 AM   #528
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
Original Poster
I heard that Ricoh will postpone Pentax' other mirrorless (probably APSC; what this thread is about) project which is almost complete.

Seeing that Ricoh committs to mirrorless in interviews they give, I assume that Ricoh wants a complete review before giving or not giving green light to the current project. Understandable as it is an important milestone for the next ten years or so.
09-22-2011, 06:16 AM   #529
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,854
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
I heard that Ricoh will postpone Pentax' other mirrorless (probably APSC; what this thread is about) project which is almost complete.

Seeing that Ricoh committs to mirrorless in interviews they give, I assume that Ricoh wants a complete review before giving or not giving green light to the current project. Understandable as it is an important milestone for the next ten years or so.
Understandable also because it directly competes with the GXR.

09-22-2011, 08:35 AM   #530
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,311
But the line does need at least one APS-C entry level body, doesnt it??? Or.... maybe this is where they need to make that daring decision that will put them ahead of everyone else?
09-22-2011, 08:55 AM   #531
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,854
QuoteOriginally posted by the swede Quote
But the line does need at least one APS-C entry level body, doesnt it??? Or.... maybe this is where they need to make that daring decision that will put them ahead of everyone else?
APS-C is by far the best value in the industry both for consumers and suppliers.

APS-C is produced in huge volumes at low cost with IQ sufficient that many pros rely on their APS-C camera. It will take FF the better part of a decade to match that industrial volume/price combination.

All the action right now is in the sub-APS-C market as camera manufacturers scramble to maintain gross revenues with the onset of iPhone cameras taking away a big chunk of their P&S biz.
09-23-2011, 08:36 AM   #532
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,311
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
APS-C is by far the best value in the industry both for consumers and suppliers.

APS-C is produced in huge volumes at low cost with IQ sufficient that many pros rely on their APS-C camera. It will take FF the better part of a decade to match that industrial volume/price combination.

All the action right now is in the sub-APS-C market as camera manufacturers scramble to maintain gross revenues with the onset of iPhone cameras taking away a big chunk of their P&S biz.
Understandable! I didnt think of it that way

Maybe a good idea is to move the Entry level segment into mirrorless and maintain the semi-pro/advanced amateur segement as APS-C, and then slowly build up the FF line? bahhh... i dont know... just an thought
09-23-2011, 09:43 AM - 2 Likes   #533
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
All the action right now is in the sub-APS-C
That's one way to look at it.

However, when the digital "revolution" started in photography some dozen years ago, all the action was in the small sensor area.

What then has happened some six years ago was an unanticipated success of entry-level dSLRs many people upgraded to, making FT and APSC very wide-spread. And mirrorless system cameras try to carry this to a smaller package which is certainly appealing to many who did upgrade.

We're now another six years later and three things are happening at the same time now:

1. cellphone cameras replace P&S.
2. mirrorless replace/make obsolete entry-level dSLRs (Q, N1, GH, PEN, NX, NEX, X10, ...)
3. larger sensors become affordable (FF like APSC some six years ago and MF like FF some six years ago).

All three are exciting developments and will probably be complete in another six years. APSC SLRs aren't though meaning there won't be any new ones then. I may be wrong. But I don't see heavy investments anymore in the APSC SLR segment. Look what happened to FT SLRs...

09-23-2011, 09:53 AM   #534
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
...
1. cellphone cameras replace P&S.
2. mirrorless replace/make obsolete entry-level dSLRs (Q, N1, GH, PEN, NX, NEX, X10, ...)
3. larger sensors become affordable (FF like APSC some six years ago and MF like FF some six years ago).

All three are exciting developments and will probably be complete in another six years. APSC SLRs aren't though meaning there won't be any new ones then. I may be wrong. But I don't see heavy investments anymore in the APSC SLR segment. Look what happened to FT SLRs...
.

As I've been saying.



.
09-23-2011, 07:22 PM   #535
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,210
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
That's one way to look at it.

However, when the digital "revolution" started in photography some dozen years ago, all the action was in the small sensor area.

What then has happened some six years ago was an unanticipated success of entry-level dSLRs many people upgraded to, making FT and APSC very wide-spread. And mirrorless system cameras try to carry this to a smaller package which is certainly appealing to many who did upgrade.

We're now another six years later and three things are happening at the same time now:

1. cellphone cameras replace P&S.
2. mirrorless replace/make obsolete entry-level dSLRs (Q, N1, GH, PEN, NX, NEX, X10, ...)
3. larger sensors become affordable (FF like APSC some six years ago and MF like FF some six years ago).

All three are exciting developments and will probably be complete in another six years. APSC SLRs aren't though meaning there won't be any new ones then. I may be wrong. But I don't see heavy investments anymore in the APSC SLR segment. Look what happened to FT SLRs...

I think 4/3 dSLR was a very very dumb idea. Oly had some good bodies but lacked sensor size.
09-23-2011, 09:43 PM   #536
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 971
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
I think 4/3 dSLR was a very very dumb idea. Oly had some good bodies but lacked sensor size.
Completely disagree. Those tiny bodies with huge performance is quite a bargin for what you pay for. Nowadays, if I were to start off with photography, I would rather get a EPL-3, GF3 or EP3 than say a Canon 1100D or even a K-r. The body shape and functionality is very close to p&s, so they're pretty easy to learn and much easier to deal with than dSLR. Their performances are just getting better and better, not to mention the huge boost in quality already vs. traditional p&s. And if I am really serious about photography, I would move on up to semi-pro dSLRs or just stick with Micro 4/3s with their respectable lines of quality glass (leica and voightlander anyone?). Of course I love my K5 and would not dream of trading away my dSLR any time soon, but I can see myself owning a small micro 4/3 camera in the future to bring during light trips or day-to-day shooting. Mirror-less seems to be the way to go for the average consumers nowadays.
09-24-2011, 01:25 AM   #537
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,311
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
That's one way to look at it.

However, when the digital "revolution" started in photography some dozen years ago, all the action was in the small sensor area.

What then has happened some six years ago was an unanticipated success of entry-level dSLRs many people upgraded to, making FT and APSC very wide-spread. And mirrorless system cameras try to carry this to a smaller package which is certainly appealing to many who did upgrade.

We're now another six years later and three things are happening at the same time now:

1. cellphone cameras replace P&S.
2. mirrorless replace/make obsolete entry-level dSLRs (Q, N1, GH, PEN, NX, NEX, X10, ...)
3. larger sensors become affordable (FF like APSC some six years ago and MF like FF some six years ago).

All three are exciting developments and will probably be complete in another six years. APSC SLRs aren't though meaning there won't be any new ones then. I may be wrong. But I don't see heavy investments anymore in the APSC SLR segment. Look what happened to FT SLRs...
One of the best posts i've seen here lately!
09-24-2011, 10:24 AM   #538
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,210
QuoteOriginally posted by Eagle_Friends Quote
Completely disagree.
Obviously you missed the part where I said the Oly dslr bodies were good. I didn't say anything about the mirrorless bodies.

QuoteOriginally posted by Eagle_Friends Quote
Those tiny bodies with huge performance is quite a bargin for what you pay for. Nowadays, if I were to start off with photography, I would rather get a EPL-3, GF3 or EP3 than say a Canon 1100D or even a K-r.
These are not dSLR bodies, they are mirroless bodies with m4/3 mount. I have an e-p1 and GF2. That wasn't the discussion. The 4/3 sensor makes sense in those especially the GF2 and GF3 given how compact they are. However, it is in fact the undoing of the dSLR. Furthermore, the last dSLR body by Oly rivals the K-5 in price. The E-5 is available from BH at $1499 shipped. That would be akin to the D7000 costing more than the D700.

QuoteOriginally posted by Eagle_Friends Quote
The body shape and functionality is very close to p&s, so they're pretty easy to learn and much easier to deal with than dSLR. Their performances are just getting better and better, not to mention the huge boost in quality already vs. traditional p&s. And if I am really serious about photography, I would move on up to semi-pro dSLRs or just stick with Micro 4/3s with their respectable lines of quality glass (leica and voightlander anyone?). Of course I love my K5 and would not dream of trading away my dSLR any time soon, but I can see myself owning a small micro 4/3 camera in the future to bring during light trips or day-to-day shooting. Mirror-less seems to be the way to go for the average consumers nowadays.
Again, all this is moot because I said dSLR and not mirrorless. As far as 1/2.3" compacts go, Pentax has sucked at it. And have never been in the ball game with a 1/1.63" sensor.

Last edited by Blue; 09-24-2011 at 12:12 PM.
09-24-2011, 01:04 PM   #539
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 90
Just you guys know, Blue is referring to the 4/3rd system and not the Micro 4/3rd.

The 4/3rds system includes cameras such as the Olympus E-5, the Leica Digilux 3, and the Panasonic DMC-L10, and I agree that the 4/3rds system is a bust. The three major benefits that the 4/3rds system aimed for was digital optimization, compact designs, and an open standard for compatibility among different manufacturers. Unfortunately, the size benefit did not carry over at all (the e-5 is rather huge), and the 'open standard' seems to have dropped since it appears Panasonic and Leica jumped the 4/3rd ship. The digital optimization was the interesting part since the lens mount was nearly twice the diameter of the image circle, which supposedly allowed lens designers more freedom in design.

For size reference, here is the Olympus E-3, which is the predecessor to the E-5 as the Olympus flagship DSLR.



However, I am a little confused as to how the 4/3rds system got into the conversation.
09-24-2011, 10:19 PM   #540
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 971
opps, i am mistaken, i thought you were referring to all 4/3 sensor system as a dumb idea. but without the first 4/3 dslr, there wouldn't be micro 4/3 cameras. so there's that...
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, k-5, mirrorless, pentax, pentax mirrorless, pentax news, pentax rumors, rule, share
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mirrorless Camera--Good or Bad? InStitches49 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 15 11-10-2010 10:15 PM
[RUMOR] Canon's First Mirrorless Camera! jct us101 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 12 09-14-2010 08:08 PM
Pentax is investigating a mirrorless system camera falconeye Pentax News and Rumors 172 04-01-2010 01:03 PM
Pentax mirrorless camera in LX like design body ogl Pentax News and Rumors 94 03-23-2010 04:21 AM
Samsung GX fullframe mirrorless camera system? amonsul Pentax News and Rumors 46 11-12-2009 05:37 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:47 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top