[eddie1960]

If I was a pro, I would not be interested in a mirrorless camera right now. They do not have the range of lenses or performance that a lot of pros depend on (not to say they never will). As an armature, it makes perfect sense. I do not need the fastest camera, because it is ok if I miss a photo (I will get the next one). If I was a pro, a louder camera is ok (people paid you to take pictures, they expect it). As an amateur , I do not want to be a disruption to an event (so I want a quiet camera). If I was a pro, I would want to use fast zoom lenses. These do not make sense on a small mirrorless body. As an amateur, I only feel the need for 3-4 prime lenses (again, if I miss a shot, it is ok. There will be plenty of other opportunities). As a pro, it is ok to have a large camera, since you are traveling to do photography. As an amateur, I travel to have fun, and part of that fun using my creative side and taking photos (thus, photography is a secondary goal).

I have different needs than most pros. When I purchased my camera a few years ago, there were not mirrorless options I found acceptable. Now there are, and I think they meed my personal needs better than a DSLR. They may not fit your needs. You might photograph different things than I do, or you do photography for a different reason than I do, and thus you may need a DSLR. That is ok (I do not think the DSLR is going anywhere anytime soon).

Doesn't that depend on the work you are doing as a pro?
it's a false argument because pro's shoot with anything from small RF cameras to 8x10 view cameras. Cameras themselves aren't pro or not. the people who use them are. and they use them in many more ways than shooting sports and news events that need the big zoom systems. Heck arguably a mirrorless or a rangefinder are much better for many forms of photojournalism. just like the 645D may be better for the guy who shoots for NatGeo the beautiful landscapes.
Heck just look at the variety of gear that Digitalis shoots with everything from Rf to MF And if I'm not mistaken he also has LF gear
Every job for a pro has gear best for it. you may use non optimal gear for a job because you don't have the other, that's a different kettle of fish.
you've just swallowed the canikon koolaid. good to see advertising and placement still works

[Clavius]

1) Lack of ergonomics: easily fixable

Cool... How then?!? You can't make the tiny buttons on the NEX5, or any other tiny point-and-shoot, any bigger.

2) There's much room for improvement unlike SLRs which have already achieved their top.

Wrong, you can't know that. You cannot prove there's no room for more innovation. There's always room for innovation.

BTW, I did't notice it's slower than K-5. What's wrong with me?

It is. And I've often wondered what's wrong with you too.

3) Easily fixable. It's not hard to make huge and heavy EVIL.

True... But you would still look stupid.

5) Well. Don't even try to deny you rather want to look like a photog than to be him.

That's the point, I'm not denying it. People who don't know photography think the man with the bigger camera is the better one. They don't give a rats *ss if the EVF is almost as good as a OVF.

your response is again without arguments.

[befocus]

Cool... How then?!? You can't make the tiny buttons on the NEX5, or any other tiny point-and-shoot, any bigger.


Wrong, you can't know that. You cannot prove there's no room for more innovation. There's always room for innovation.


It is. And I've often wondered what's wrong with you too.


True... But you would still look stupid.


That's the point, I'm not denying it. People who don't know photography think the man with the bigger camera is the better one. They don't give a rats *ss if the EVF is almost as good as a OVF.

your response is again without arguments.

if you want this you better buy a canon/nikon...

[Emacs]

your response is again without arguments.

I don't find this is a good idea to find arguments for the claims which are pure nonsense (most of them at least, only battery life is a real issue, others are either fixable or too subjective).
Still, most people who used NEX-7 found its EVF to be close enough to FF OVF. And this is the first real EVF. Previous ones were just toys.
I found it much better solution for manual focusing too than any cropped tiny dark viewfinder. It's so good for me I don't even want to buy any AF lens, I just don't need it. At least I can shoot directly into an eye now, which was very rare case with K-5.

[Clavius]

At least I can shoot directly into an eye now, which was very rare case with K-5.

Again, that says more about you, then about your equipment. I've never ever missed an eye with the K5. It's so extremely easy.

You rant on about MF, but MF is old tech. A future EVIL should have very good AF. But the AF on the EVIL's is very poor. Why? Because they can't use phase detection AF. It's a technical impossibility which cannot be overcome. They are restricted to contrast detection.

[Emacs]

Again, that says more about you, then about your equipment. I've never ever missed an eye with the K5. It's so extremely easy.

A50/1.2? 85/1.4? You must be living in another universe.

[violini]

ペンタックス35mmフルサイズカメラ. (Pentax 35mm FF DSLR. I strongly believe the new Pentax FF will be a DSLR, not an evil thing.)
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/pentax-dslr-discussion/84209d...ee-mz5-006.jpg

---

Last edited by violini; 12-18-2011 at 02:41 PM.

[aheadfordinci]

ペンタックス35mmフルサイズカメラ. (Pentax 35mm FF DSLR)
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/pentax-dslr-discussion/84209d...ee-mz5-006.jpg

sexy.

[Emacs]

They are restricted to contrast detection.

Contrast detection is hopeless. Much better approaches have been developed already, they need some refinement at the moment though. Just like PDAF approaches they shows if the object either behind or ahead of focus point so these methods are as fast as PDAF at least. And they don't depend so much on luminocity as PDAF does due to their basic principles. And they are much more flexible than PDAF due to their software nature (eg when shooting portraits the system can looking for the eyes in focusing area. It also possible to highlight DOF. Not just peaking as sony did, but actual DOF, with different intensivity based on the distance to the DOF center). I have said many times already the only real issue that has not been solved yet is battery capacity. Other problems will be eliminated in the very near future. I guess it's about 2-3 years.

http://jburge.cps.utexas.edu/research/Home_files/BurgeGeisler_PNAS_2011.pdf

[Fontan]

More or less regardless of mirrorless?

HaHa.


Precisely. Mirrorless or not, I hope it is stainless (not steel).

[pz1fan]

Tomorrow, we'll find out if the topic of this post is true or not.

[Parliament]

ペンタックス35mmフルサイズカメラ. (Pentax 35mm FF DSLR. I strongly believe the new Pentax FF will be a DSLR, not an evil thing.)
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/pentax-dslr-discussion/84209d...ee-mz5-006.jpg

Hah an M-135/3.5!

This can only mean one thing:

This new FF DSLR will be able to autofocus with MF lenses =D

[Fontan]

Tomorrow, we'll find out if the topic of this post is true or not.

No we won't. No announcement. THis is the day the magazine which has the interview in it is coming out. I will go pick it up.

[RuiC]

Yeah I've been asking a few times as well why Mirrorless FF = no K mount. From what I can discern, it's to do with how close the lenses are to the sensor. But if Sony can create a-to-e mounts, Pentax should be able to do the same.

But I haven't had the time to do much reading on it and no one has really explained to me either. *confused*

The lenses are designed to focus on the sensor. If you move the sensor closer you change the focal plane. Moving the sensor that close means than your old lenses will not be able to focus. Lenses need to be redesigned if you change the register distance. That is the very simple version.

You are right tjk911, an adapter would put the lens back at the appropriate distance and all K's would be usable!

[falconeye]

Not to offend anybody involved and interested in Petax past, current and future products (and their compatibility), but "forcing" Pentax to use K-mount as basic for their FF ML camera would mean forcing them to unnecessarily large lenses and strongly retrofocus wide lenses.

This is said on a regular base and I'll take your post to comment.

A mount with a large registration distance like K used for mirrorless can use the empty space for protruding rear lenses or a retractable lens mechanism. It doesn't require retrofocus wide lenses because they tend to have small enough rear elements.

Having said this, I don't object against Pentax using a new mount for mirrorless. Sometimes, it is just time for the next generation of things... I like the Sony approach with a large enough E mount for FF and phase AF adapter.