[jsherman999]

...

On a completely unrelated subject . . . boy do I envy Sony Alpha users having that Zeiss 24mm f2 . . . have you seen the review at Photozone for that one? Very nice.

.

Indeed. An aps-c FOV/DOF equiv of a 16mm f/1.3 lens, with 1:3.4 max magnification (!) and 9 rounded blades. Very nice


Specifications
Optical construction 9 elements in 7 groups inc. 2x aspherical + 2x ED elements
Number of aperture blades 9 (rounded)
min. focus distance 0.19m (max. magnification ratio 1:3.4)





I want one for the K-1. :^)



.

[Kunzite]

You don't abandon K mount to make a few bucks on new lenses. You abandon K mount to maintain your market share.

Sorry, I can't agree with that. Abandoning the K mount means losing every bit a market share they have. It's called "starting from scratch".
And besides losing customers, it also means losing the main revenue source. It's a suicidal move, it won't happen.

[Anvh]

Sorry guys, I just don't see the reason that mirrorless should always be smaller. I am comfortable with K-5 + grip. If mirrorless added some value to this setup, I want it! Q should have solved the miniaturisation need for some, now let's focus on common sense.
David

Actually when you look at the quality aspect the shorter registers of the Sony and the likes an't doing the wide angle lenses any good.
The angle of the light hitting the sensor is so great that it reduce the quality.

A fixed mirror system like Sony has more intriguing instead of going fully mirrorless.

[abacus07]

Sorry, I can't agree with that. Abandoning the K mount means losing every bit a market share they have. It's called "starting from scratch".
And besides losing customers, it also means losing the main revenue source. It's a suicidal move, it won't happen.

I've never said that they would leave Kmount in the next year. they'll continue to churn out new bodies and the current lenses as long as the existing customers were buying them. There are almost no development costs and it's a cash cow. but I am completely convinced that if Pentax continues to only offer cameras with the current large body (LCD to lens length) they will die a slow death. It's not about where the market is today but where the market will be 5 years from now.

[garyk]

I agree. Pentax is to small to continue to support the DSLR market. It will die. Along with the Kmount. Hoya was more of a holding company until they stripped what they wanted then passed on to the current owners. Who will strip the remaining technology and incorporate it in there products. This has played out countless times in the corp. world. Nothing new.
The only thing is whether they will continue to call it Pentax. I think 50-50 on this. The sale was a rather small one. And did not make the news really. So I think it is a toss up. But the end results are the same.

[stanleyk]

garyk-

Agreed. I'm not sure but I do think Pentax has more brand recognition in Japan so maybe it sticks. Ricoh seems to make what I frequently see people refer to as "photographer's cameras." I really loved the GXR I tried out. If it had a built in neutral density filter like the X100 I would have bought it instead. That said it was a really fine camera. I think Ricoh will benefit enormously from the purchase of Pentax. I could see a scenario where the keep the 645D as Pentax and focus on that. I'm just not seeing the Full Frame DSLR from them forum members want. If that was what I wanted I'd sell my Pentax stuff while it still has some value and invest in Sony. I think they are a company to watch. I'm very excited about the NEX 7 after reading pre-review on Luminous Landscape so I pre-ordered one with the 24mm. I'm not much of DSLR person so I could see the K5 being my last one. It's really a nice camera though. My understanding is there are NEX adapters for Pentax lenses.

[maxfield_photo]

You guys are over reacting. It's like Chicken Little - the mirrorless apple hit you on the head, and suddenly the sky is falling. Those of us entrenched in the K mount, as well as our Canon and Nikon counterparts, ain't about to give up our beloved glass just because some new innovation has come along.

I'm perfectly content to let folks who are interested have their mirrorless bodies, it's maybe a little money diverted from R&D that interests me, but as the old saying goes, "it takes money to make money." I just feel sorry for entry level folks in a few years who may get stuck with lenses they can't use on a more professional body. I think this may cause them to migrate to a different brand when the time comes.

[Aristophanes]

Pentax is to small to continue to support the DSLR market. It will die. Along with the Kmount.

The DSLR market is abut 90x larger than the nascent mirrorless market now, with substantially higher profits because DSLR's require much less R&D, development, marketing, and risk than mirrorless being all new and untested in the market.

Follow the money. It says Ricoh bought Pentax because of the K-mount. The K-mount will be their traditional line, but a new line of mirrorless is coming, almost certainly with a new mount because the engineering and optics says it must be so. That's not a loss. It's an opportunity.

Ricoh will support both mounts because there are enough stupid LBA dimwits to buy both mounts and make Ricoh 50% more return per customer. That's what Sony is doing and why Canikon are waiting to see what unfolds.

You know who buys Leica S2's? Leica M9 owners.

[Oog]

Ya I don't get this whole "mirrorless" talk - correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't "Live view" = "mirrorless"? One could simply take the mirror out of a K-5, and either use the back LCD for focusing, or go Sony's way and create some sort of electronic viewfinder. To keep the K mount the way it is, the flange-to-sensor distance has to be kept the same. So the only way "engineering and optics says it must be so" to change the mount in order to go "mirrorless" is if they change that critical distance. Why would they do that? One reason is to make a smaller camera (i.e, the Pentax Q).

Hopefully Pentax keeps the K mount - Nikon kept theirs, Canon sort of did, and the cine PL mount is industry standard....

Canon is releasing a new camera supposedly next month - people have already noted the price drop in their FF offering. Hopefully Pentax/Ricoh makes a FF as their new "flagship," and start (re)producing some AF lenses again.

[jsherman999]

...

Canon is releasing a new camera supposedly next month - people have already noted the price drop in their FF offering. Hopefully Pentax/Ricoh makes a FF as their new "flagship," and start (re)producing some AF lenses again.

+1

(And if the rumors bear fruit, that Canon release is going to be very interesting.)

.

[Aristophanes]

+1

(And if the rumors bear fruit, that Canon release is going to be very interesting.)

.

And Nikon's:

Nikon 1 System Review

[RioRico]

I agree. Pentax is to small to continue to support the DSLR market. It will die. Along with the Kmount. Hoya was more of a holding company until they stripped what they wanted then passed on to the current owners. Who will strip the remaining technology and incorporate it in there products. This has played out countless times in the corp. world. Nothing new.

Let's see, dSLR sales worldwide are booming (and increasing), Pentax sales are booming (and increasing), and so Pentax will die? Ricoh, which has beaten Canon in the office machine business, is going to strip some patents from Pentax and abandon the serious camera game? Ricoh has been lying about their Pentax plans, their intention to be a serious player in the serious camera game? Are these your contentions? Take a look at Ricoh's history and try again.

[russell2pi]

I am completely convinced that if Pentax continues to only offer cameras with the current large body (LCD to lens length) they will die a slow death.

Why? You only have to look at a DSLR next to a 70s/80s vintage SLR with the exact same registration distance to see that a huge reduction in camera size is possible without reducing sensor-to-mount distance. (And that's with a full-frame sensor!)

Or, look at a DSLR with a pancake lens on it. They look ridiculous! Not because of the size of the camera from the rear of the mount to the rear of the camera body. No, it's because of the silly proboscis in front of the pentaprism and the big hand grip.

If they thought small size with excellent usability was where the demand was, they would not be pursuing mirrorless, because reducing the registration distance by taking out the mirror only delivers a minor space saving in return for a large loss of usability.

[Kunzite]

I've never said that they would leave Kmount in the next year. they'll continue to churn out new bodies and the current lenses as long as the existing customers were buying them. There are almost no development costs and it's a cash cow. but I am completely convinced that if Pentax continues to only offer cameras with the current large body (LCD to lens length) they will die a slow death. It's not about where the market is today but where the market will be 5 years from now.

Then what are you saying? "they'll continue to churn out new bodies and the current lenses" - that doesn't sound like abandoning the K-mount; but then in order to do that there are significant development costs (and significant benefits). Are you talking about very small revisions to current cameras, MkII versions of current lenses with almost no change? That would be stupid, they would kill their only (for now) cash cow.
Let's wait and see where the market will be in 5 years from now, before deciding Ricoh should just abandon the newly acquired K-mount.

I agree. Pentax is to small to continue to support the DSLR market. It will die. Along with the Kmount. Hoya was more of a holding company until they stripped what they wanted then passed on to the current owners. Who will strip the remaining technology and incorporate it in there products. This has played out countless times in the corp. world. Nothing new.
The only thing is whether they will continue to call it Pentax. I think 50-50 on this. The sale was a rather small one. And did not make the news really. So I think it is a toss up. But the end results are the same.

Oh, really? They will die because they're selling K-mount products while making a profit? You're funny...
Incorporate in their products... which ones? Few compacts and the modular thingie?
They already said they'll keep the Pentax brand, btw. Stop playing Chicken Little.

RioRico & maxfield_photo:
Well said.

[Aristophanes]

Why? You only have to look at a DSLR next to a 70s/80s vintage SLR with the exact same registration distance to see that a huge reduction in camera size is possible without reducing sensor-to-mount distance. (And that's with a full-frame sensor!)

No, it is not possible. The electronics have to go somewhere including SR, PDAF, rear and top LCD's, the buffers for FPS and video, all within a body that has to be 5x more resistant to shocks than any 1970's SLR. That's a major reason why APS-C came to dominate. The smaller sensor left room for other stuff. Another major factor is cooling. The buffer chips for fast FPS and video take up considerable space and have a limited ability to get much smaller without performance an heat compromises. And all this stuff needs power, and battery tech has its limits as well. All this takes up weight, too. Every microprocessor adds up. Even Nikon 35mm cameras like the F5 and their Canon equivalents are large cameras.

If people want smaller they will have to give up some of these items but pay the same or more. Since features sell, a start-from-scratch design like mirrorless is necessary. I doubt the premium people will pay for small will warrant giving up key features.