[maxfield_photo]

Why reinvent the wheel? The K mount has served photographers for 36 years, and until mirrorless came along there were no major complaints about the flange distance. If you want to be a serious photographer, be a serious photographer, if you want a small camera buy the Q.

[bossa]

Why re-invent it? Because Ricoh's money can give Pentax a chance to do it again and right this time. With the zillions of lenses Canon and Nikon already have it'd be almost impossible for them to follow without going broke. This is a chance for Pentax to forget the wagon wheel, innovate, reinvent itself and redefine Digital Photography in the process. I find it hard to believe that people want them to keep doing the things they did they did which almost lead to their demise.

[bossa]

Why reinvent the wheel? The K mount has served photographers for 36 years, and until mirrorless came along there were no major complaints about the flange distance. If you want to be a serious photographer, be a serious photographer, if you want a small camera buy the Q.

Yeah, why use an iPod when an old Walkman cassette player is still kicking around in the garage? Who needs LBT or Hubble when Mount Palomar is still with us? Who needs Hi-res digital television when we have a perfectly healthy Lo-Res CRT TV? Who needs Digital Photography when you can still buy film? ..on and on and on I could go here...zzzz

We're 'always' happy with what we have until something revolutionary shows us something way more interesting.

[junyo]

What a bunch of Luddites. Why go with pneumatic tyres when you can have a wagon wheel, right?

Pneumatic wheels are old technology; they make helicopters, you caveman.

Or, wheels are cost effective, mature technology for an awful lot of jobs. A quantum multiphase lenscap camera/fajita maker would be cool and all, but unless it can make markedly better/faster/cheaper images than I can with old fashioned glass lenses and an antique CMOS sensor then it's just high tech masturbation.Technology just for the cool factor is an expensive proposition - [insert Q joke here].

Abandoning K mount is madness. The instant you obsolete Pentax users lens libraries you've destroyed a large portion of the reason to stick with Pentax. You've effectively created a startup camera company.

[WyldRage]

Going mirrorless doesn't mean the death of the K-mount necessarily, but many companies have failed and disappeared when they don't join in or when they fight against a technological shift: just ask Kodak. Will the CSC become an alternative to the DSLR, disappear or even replace it? It's too soon to know, since Canikon has barely begun stirring. If the users, who will ultimately decide the fate of the market, prefer the CSC, it will be far better for Pentax to be one of the innovators of this segment, but they are letting that opportunity pass them by.

And the flange distance not being an issue? It always was an issue: rangefinder cameras, with both fixed and interchangeable lenses, and point and shoots were there as an alternative to the SLR in the film era. The issue has only become greater, with the increase bulk of DSLR compared to SLR cameras. And until people will be able to stuff a DSLR in their pockets, they will look for a smaller alternative.

[maxfield_photo]

I own neither an iPod, a digital TV, nor a Hubble space telescope, and you are correct; I am perfectly happy. I do however own a film camera, K mount digital camera, and a bunch of K mount lenses. One of the reasons I have stuck with Pentax for the last 30 years is I know that I won't have to start from scratch when the next new fad comes along. Ask an old Canon user how much they enjoy re-buying their system every 15 years or so. The only thing that has kept Pentax alive during the digital transition is the loyalty of their old film users, alienate them and you might as well stick to selling endoscopes.

[jsherman999]

An innovator asks, "What can I do with this new thing?"
A Luddite asks, "What can't I do with this new thing?"

Good way to spin it, John. "Innovator" is an attractive term, but folks who buy cameras are not innovators, they are simply... customers.

The problem here for Ricoh is that if they bring something to market that represents a clean break from K-mount yet does not match or exceed the K-5 in performance, then they've taken a step back, and every current Pentax DSLR owner will realize this. This break from K-mount will have burned a loyalty bridge, so the incentive to stay with Pentax during the initial mirrorless move wil not be there. Many will jump ship at that point. Ricoh will be left with folks moving from other brands only, or folks upgrading from lower-tier bridge cams only - and if their initial product does not beat Sony/Canon/Nikon/Panasonic/Fuji/Samsung equivalent bodies in some significant way... Then Ricoh sees no net gain from where they stand today, and in fact because they lost existing Pentax customers because of the K-mount break - they realize a net loss in patronage.

It makes much more sense for Ricoh to work towards the future while not neglecting the main asset they bought - Pentax K-mount. There are ways to do that that have nothing to do with Luddism.

I will be a very happy mirrorless customer when I find one that meets my minimum thresholds in several areas, and I expect that to happen soon. But if it doesn't fully support K-mount natively or with an adapter, I have no incentive to give Pentax an inside lane on that race. When faced with a $1000+ body decision that also requires new lenses, folks can get pretty dang pragmatic.






.

[johnmflores]

I own neither an iPod, a digital TV, nor a Hubble space telescope, and you are correct; I am perfectly happy. I do however own a film camera, K mount digital camera, and a bunch of K mount lenses. One of the reasons I have stuck with Pentax for the last 30 years is I know that I won't have to start from scratch when the next new fad comes along. Ask an old Canon user how much they enjoy re-buying their system every 15 years or so. The only thing that has kept Pentax alive during the digital transition is the loyalty of their old film users, alienate them and you might as well stick to selling endoscopes.

The other side of the coin...if Pentax sticks resolutely with their loyal old film users, they will surely be buried with them.

[stanleyk]

I own neither an iPod, a digital TV, nor a Hubble space telescope, and you are correct; I am perfectly happy. I do however own a film camera, K mount digital camera, and a bunch of K mount lenses. One of the reasons I have stuck with Pentax for the last 30 years is I know that I won't have to start from scratch when the next new fad comes along. Ask an old Canon user how much they enjoy re-buying their system every 15 years or so. The only thing that has kept Pentax alive during the digital transition is the loyalty of their old film users, alienate them and you might as well stick to selling endoscopes.

That doesn't seem to have stopped Canon from selling more cameras than Pentax. A WHOLE LOT more cameras.

[junyo]

The other side of the coin...if Pentax sticks resolutely with their loyal old film users, they will surely be buried with them.

It's not just their film customers. Switching from K-mount screws people that bought K-5's yesterday.

Is the opportunity presented by the theoretical MILC mount more or less than that loss of goodwill?

And the entire conversation presupposes that K mount isn't viable for a competitive MILC, which I believe is wrong.

[jsherman999]

Why re-invent it? Because Ricoh's money can give Pentax a chance to do it again and right this time. With the zillions of lenses Canon and Nikon already have it'd be almost impossible for them to follow without going broke. This is a chance for Pentax to forget the wagon wheel, innovate, reinvent itself and redefine Digital Photography in the process. I find it hard to believe that people want them to keep doing the things they did they did which almost lead to their demise.

If they break from K-mount completely, why do you care what they do more than you care what Fuji does, or Panasonic, or Samsung, or Sony, or Canon, or Nikon?

Are you loyal to the Pentax name itself?


.

[bossa]

People with huge Pentax lens 'libraries' are probably not the target market and from the description I doubt they even constitute a market per se.

[jsherman999]

The other side of the coin...if Pentax sticks resolutely with their loyal old film users, they will surely be buried with them.

I would guess that the majority of current Pentax DSLR owners have never even really shot film, and especially didn't build up a big lens collection while doing so. K100, K10, K20, K-7, K-5 and especially K-x brought in a whole slew of new folks.

[Philoslothical]

And until people will be able to stuff a DSLR in their pockets, they will look for a smaller alternative.

A pocket sized DSLR is a contradiction in terms. There are always going to be people who want the little gadget with electronic everything, and there will always be a large following of the traditional form factor and quality produced by DSLRs. This doesn't need to be an either/or proposition. Make a mirrorless piece of crap with an EVF for the first group, and keep on producing incrementally better DSLRs for those that are serious about their glass.

This whole size argument seems ridiculous to me, comparing Pentax DSLRs to Canikon models. We're already blessed with compactly designed DSLRs, that are still big enough to fit solidly in the hand.

That doesn't seem to have stopped Canon from selling more cameras than Pentax. A WHOLE LOT more cameras.

There have been a lot more factors in play than the form factor of Pentax's DSLRs, or their lens lineups. Hoya left the name to languish. You don't sell cameras without marketing them.

[Winder]

Why do people think that Pentax will abandon the K-mount? There have been no comments made by anyone associated with Pentax to that effect, but it keeps circulating.

If Pentax releases a new EVIL mount it will have no effect on the K-mount.