[Anvh]

Think im one of those really picky ones who dont want to use adaptors.... My FA's belong on a K-mount...

What's the problem with using an adapter?

If they really going to use FF they might indeed just keep the K-mount, it will balance things out a bit better when there is a lens on it.
But if they use APS-C there is a bit more to gain, just look at the sony NEX bodies.
Not a fan of their styling though, i would want a real grip on the camera but it dos show how small they can be.

There are also other advantages concerning lens design that are flavourable if you move the lens closer to the sensor.
the Sony nex is to close though, just look at their corner sharpness... around 30mm would be ideal fos APS-C, that is roughly the same aspects as the k-mount for FF

I mean if they decide not to go for FF they might as well optimize the mount for what they do use, k-mount was designed for 135 film afterall.

---

Last edited by Anvh; 12-18-2011 at 03:17 AM.

[Matus]

John, the difference is, that a simple and compact film SLR does not need all the electronics and other stuff behind and around the sensor (very well seen in the cross section you posted) and does not have an LCD which also adds to the thickness of the body. As Pentax SLRs use the K-mount the flange-to-sensor distance is the same as with Pentax film SLRs - in other words - should Pentax introduce FF DSLR - the dimensions would not necessarily have to change (much).

Should Pentax bring an EVIL camera - there should be no problem what so ever to make a K-mount adapter (could even do AF - like SONY does).

And I do not expect that anything bad should happen to K-mount in the near future. There is no replacement, DSLRs still sell well and Ricoh does not produce any - no conflict of interest. Now whether the FF EVIL camera (should that ever happen) will come from Pentax or Ricoh is secondary.

Actually - with all the noise around - it would not be so surprising to me if Ricoh would release an APS-C K-mount module for the current GXR line. It could be the fastest way to allow Pentax users to use their lenses on a compact mirror less body.

[Kunzite]

OK, so you folks decided not only the EVF is good enough for us, and also that we should use our lenses with adapters, and if we're lucky we might even have AF (we'll have to pay for those adapters, by the way).
How about our opinion?

[Anvh]

OK, so you folks decided not only the EVF is good enough for us, and also that we should use our lenses with adapters, and if we're lucky we might even have AF (we'll have to pay for those adapters, by the way).
How about our opinion?

Like that we decide what Pentax does

But everyone is free to give their opnion, i only haven't heard one about why an adaptor is a bad idea besides that they don't want to use one...
You named the first reason here in your comment.
AF linkage wouldn't be a problem, there are extension tubes and teleconverters for the K-mount that offer that support.
And if Pentax will make a new mount they will off course be smart enough to make a good working adapter for it.
Nikon and Sony are doing that now for there mirrorless system and Olympus and Panasonic have already done that, i trully don't see a problem there.
Only problem is the cost for such an adapter, that's off course not good but if you want to move on you must leave some things behind.
In all honesty, if they keep with only making ASP-C cameras i hope they let the k-mount go and rather sooner then later because it will open posibilities in lens design.

I'm not that interested in that the camera becomes 2cm smaller...

[Rondec]

I have to say I am not very excited about mirrorless cameras for the upper end offerings -- I had hoped they would stay more at the entry level, but I guess we'll see. Size is just not reduced that much when you combine even an APS-C sensor mirrorless body with a compatible zoom, particularly not an f2.8 zoom which is what I shoot most of the time. Take a 28-70 f2.8 or a 70-200 f2.8 and stick it on a mirrorless camera and I think you'll have an unwieldy mess. Just seems odd, when you consider that the target of full frame (upper end photographers) are often the ones using the largest lenses.

I am sure Pentax has had a lot of idea projects bouncing around for awhile that Hoya would not green light because they felt they were too risky. What direction Ricoh decides to let them take remains to be seen.

[asw66]

Actually - with all the noise around - it would not be so surprising to me if Ricoh would release an APS-C K-mount module for the current GXR line. It could be the fastest way to allow Pentax users to use their lenses on a compact mirror less body.

I'd go somewhat further and say it would be strange if Ricoh didn't offer a K-mount module for GXR.

[dadipentak]

Just because ML can be made smaller doesnt mean it must be...

Amen! IQ and functionality first. Do you want something that'll fit in a shirt pocket or do you want FF?

[Brangdon]

Or come up with a fully compliant, weather sealed adapter. Whatever, it'll just be glued to whatever you sell me.

Quite so. Which almost makes the adapter a pointless complication for the majority of Pentax SLR users. However, I wonder if it could be useful as a tool to help transition to a new mirrorless mount. Camera first, lenses later.

(we'll have to pay for those adapters, by the way).

I'd expect them to include the adapter in the basic price; you probably won't be able to buy the camera without the adapter. In the short term it'll effectively be k-mount. Only in the medium to long term will it become interesting to remove the adapter to use the new mount lenses.

That way, when the camera comes out it has plenty of (k-mount) lenses, and when after, say, 2 years, the new lenses come out they will have an installed base of cameras that can use them.

I am speculating wildly, of course, but it could help ease the transition. Ricoh say they cherish Pentax's user base, and EVF will be a hard sell regardless. I imagine the people who care about full-frame are mostly old-school, OVF people who have old lenses they want to use. If Ricoh go the adapter route, they need to make it so well integrated that those people don't see any compromise.

(I also agree with what Anvh said, that the larger your sensor the larger the camera and lenses and the less the advantage of reducing the registration distance. And hard-core users like a largish body anyway, with nice big easy to use buttons and plenty of them. If you want small, there's always the Q. So k-mount full-frame mirrorless makes sense to me, without the adapter.)

[Clavius]

I'm expecting LCD shutters really soon in cameras, it's the same kind of shutters they use in active 3D glasses so that technology has had a boom this past few years.
They can reach 1000hz so far as i know, that would be good for 1/1000 shutterspeed, doesn't sound much but is probably enough for most and...

That's not nearly fast enough. That's terrible.

[befocus]

Quite so. Which almost makes the adapter a pointless complication for the majority of Pentax SLR users. However, I wonder if it could be useful as a tool to help transition to a new mirrorless mount. Camera first, lenses later.

I'd expect them to include the adapter in the basic price; you probably won't be able to buy the camera without the adapter. In the short term it'll effectively be k-mount. Only in the medium to long term will it become interesting to remove the adapter to use the new mount lenses.

That way, when the camera comes out it has plenty of (k-mount) lenses, and when after, say, 2 years, the new lenses come out they will have an installed base of cameras that can use them.

I am speculating wildly, of course, but it could help ease the transition. Ricoh say they cherish Pentax's user base, and EVF will be a hard sell regardless. I imagine the people who care about full-frame are mostly old-school, OVF people who have old lenses they want to use. If Ricoh go the adapter route, they need to make it so well integrated that those people don't see any compromise.

(I also agree with what Anvh said, that the larger your sensor the larger the camera and lenses and the less the advantage of reducing the registration distance. And hard-core users like a largish body anyway, with nice big easy to use buttons and plenty of them. If you want small, there's always the Q. So k-mount full-frame mirrorless makes sense to me, without the adapter.)

on this basis and by continuing the speculation, what about a camera with modular mount ?
In the ricoh gxr, mount sensor and lens are a unique module, the A-12 is a mount + sensor, and if they put only the mount modular? each with his bayonet and his flange distance, might make it easier the tropicalization and the communication with the camera body and an eventual internal engine

[Kunzite]

That's not nearly fast enough. That's terrible.

But that's the "EVF way of thinking". Yes, is terrible but it will be forced upon us, as being "good enough".

I'd expect them to include the adapter in the basic price; you probably won't be able to buy the camera without the adapter. In the short term it'll effectively be k-mount. Only in the medium to long term will it become interesting to remove the adapter to use the new mount lenses.

I don't. Nobody does it (think Olympus, Sony) - why would Pentax? Increasing the price by offering an adapter only some will actually need?

Anvh, it's the other way around; you have to explain what advantages I'd have by being forced to buy an adapter and use an EVF which I hate. Please also explain why I would "move on" to an immature technology. Yes, I would indeed "move on" - but most likely to Nikon.
That's what you (EVF fans) are consistently forgetting: many long-time Pentax users don't want EVFs, and certainly don't want Pentax to give up on the K-mount. Yet you want us to pay the price because you chose the wrong company.

I'll point out we don't know yet what will happen. I'm not convinced the K-mount will go; I'm just trying to explain why this would be such a bad thing. For me at least, and those Pentaxians who aren't that happy with EVFs and their drawbacks.

[the swede]

You're not picky. You're just right. If I wanted to use my lenses with a adapter, I can just as well move system. No need to wait on Pentax. I just can't comprehend why they want to throw in their own windows like that.

Thanks! Thats my thoughts to.

What's the problem with using an adapter?

I just dont want to use an adapter... plain and simple... dont want it...

Amen! IQ and functionality first. Do you want something that'll fit in a shirt pocket or do you want FF?

I want FF K-Mount..... simple...

Imho... Pentax could do really well making an APS-C ML with new mount. But FF should stay K-mount... again... imho

Well well... thats not up to me, and thats only what i want... if Pentax goes by what the masses want, they'll do what they have to do.
And if it doesnt please me, then i'll just change... but probably not, haha... im weak for Pentax!

[jogiba]

If they go mirrorless they should make sure the video part is top notch, just look how many indie movie makers love the 5D mark II

The mirrorless GH2 beats the 5D MKII in video quality.

Vimeo

Vimeo

[johnmflores]

But that's the "EVF way of thinking". Yes, is terrible but it will be forced upon us, as being "good enough".


I don't. Nobody does it (think Olympus, Sony) - why would Pentax? Increasing the price by offering an adapter only some will actually need?

Anvh, it's the other way around; you have to explain what advantages I'd have by being forced to buy an adapter and use an EVF which I hate. Please also explain why I would "move on" to an immature technology. Yes, I would indeed "move on" - but most likely to Nikon.
That's what you (EVF fans) are consistently forgetting: many long-time Pentax users don't want EVFs, and certainly don't want Pentax to give up on the K-mount. Yet you want us to pay the price because you chose the wrong company.

I'll point out we don't know yet what will happen. I'm not convinced the K-mount will go; I'm just trying to explain why this would be such a bad thing. For me at least, and those Pentaxians who aren't that happy with EVFs and their drawbacks.

The history of photography is the history of "good enough". Oskar Barnack thought that cinema film was "good enough". Nikon and Canon, et. al. thought that APS-C is "good enough" for most users when they introduced their first consumer dSLRs. On the other hand, Kodak thought that Kodak Disc was "good enough" - it wasn't. Nor was 110 film. It looks like mirrorless cameras with EVFs is the next test of "good enough".

And while Ricoh Pentax would be wise to consider the needs of current Pentax owners, they also have to consider the fact that most photography and most young photographers don't look through a viewfinder. Losing a slice of current (aging) Pentax owners is one thing. Losing a potential market of new (younger) photographers is another thing altogether, and Ricoh Pentax must balance those competing interests.

Personally...
- I love the added data overlays that EVFs can provide
- I love the constant exposure preview and constant DOF preview that EVFs can provide
- I love the instant review that EVFs can provide
- I love the "see in B&W" or other effects that EVFs can provide
- I hate the "looking at a video screen" feeling that EVFs provide
- I hate bringing an EVF camera up to my eye and seeing black because I haven't turned the camera on
- I love the "looking at reality" feeling that OVFs can provide
- I hate trying to compose a shot in near darkness with an OVF, esp. since cameras like the K-5 can actually take decent shots in those conditions
- I hate the smaller APS-C OVFs, esp the tunnel-like pentamirrors
- I hate calibrating lenses
- I love the "looking at reality" feeling that OVFs can provide (x 2)

[Art Vandelay II]

I have to say I am not very excited about mirrorless cameras for the upper end offerings -- I had hoped they would stay more at the entry level, but I guess we'll see. Size is just not reduced that much when you combine even an APS-C sensor mirrorless body with a compatible zoom, particularly not an f2.8 zoom which is what I shoot most of the time. Take a 28-70 f2.8 or a 70-200 f2.8 and stick it on a mirrorless camera and I think you'll have an unwieldy mess. Just seems odd, when you consider that the target of full frame (upper end photographers) are often the ones using the largest lenses.

There's no perfect camera for everyone I suppose. However, since I personally don't care much about zooms I'm all for an ME Super sized mirrorless 35mm camera. As far as high end photographers using large lenses goes..I counter that with Leica. The cheapest lens they make is $1700, and every single lens they make is smaller than a FA31mm limited. They sale so many there is currently a 3-4 month wait because they can't meet demand. So I'd say there are a fair number of high end photographers that appreciate small primes. However, until recently we haven't had many options in the digital world. In fact, the NEX-7 is probably the first true DSLR replacement for a lot of us, and it is just now starting to ship.

As far as using large telephotos, f/2.8 zooms, etc. The one thing I don't understand is it seems no one thinks a large mirrorless camera will ever be made. Further, Pentax could design a modular body (seems righ up Ricoh's alley) about the size of a NEX-7, but design it so a vertical grip could be added to give it more heft when needed. You can always make a camera larger, but it seems Pentax has made a digital K-Mount camera about as small as they can; and they are still too large for some of us.