[Pål Jensen]

I'm not crazy about what I'm reading... From what I'm gleaning from the interview, they're heading toward high-end FF 645 mirrorless cameras and teeny little DSLRs which may even be too small to use the k-mount. I don't want either.

I don't read that into the interview at all. Whats being said is that Pentax will make smaller DSLR's; nothing about sensor size in this regard.
The rest is just general industry trends driven by the interviewer with comments from Pentax...

[philbaum]

You're probably right about the different time scale perspectives. Regarding EVF vs OVF, I just don't see how an electronically reproduced picture of a scene can ever be as good as the scene itself.

The issue is more complex than the simple fact that EVF is not as good as the scene itself.

Kitazawa: Well, regarding the 645, sooner or later we will want to make it into
a mirrorless. The reason is the mirror shock inherent to SLRs. Those very tiny
vibrations do have an effect on the final image. I think in the future I would
like to pursue mirrorless full-frame and 645 cameras.

Professionals and enthusiasts care about image quality. And when you have someone like K, who effectively says that we can have better image quality if we go to mirrorless - thats going to attract photographers who care about IQ.

EVF doesn't have to be as good as the scene itself - it only has to be good enough to assist in the capture of the scene. Plus with EVF, the designer can make the VF as bright as desired, as large as desired, and reflect a more realistic version of the final image - EVF has a lot going for it.

Maybe there's a clue in what K said about specialty cameras. I can see professionals who are trying to catch highlights from an NFL game from the sidelines, who want and need full time optical VF. But a landscape photographer, who has the luxury of more time to put together a fetching image - i can see an EVF working out just fine. Perhaps thats what K meant by discussing specialty cameras - i don't know for sure.

If there was a Pentax version of the NEX, i'd buy it within a year. Other Pentax owners are not waiting, but buying into the Sony NEX now.

[jsherman999]

Given time and technological developments i can't see it not achieving it eventually. I will go with OVF for the interim, but i imagine a time where a EVF will just make more sense in many ways.
Having watched TV go from



to this



There is no reason to believe we won't see an EVF that wows even a die hard OVF guy sooner or later

Good illustration eddie

[gazonk]

Give it about 20 years or so.

That's too conservative. I tend to be too optimistic wrt technology, but still, I think we're talking about less than 10 years.

Btw. when in high school in 1979 I envisioned that we would have music and video playing pocket computers with built in cameras by 2000. My friend said it was crazy talk because of the heat generated by microprocessors (he had just built his first computer)

[aleonx3]

a FF, mirrorless or not ( I will take it any way) , with a design inspired by the old Pentax SLRs (NOT SONY NEX ) , magnesium body , 100% VF not electronic (Fuji did it) , 2 wheels front and back. 3 top of the line prime lenses , wide , normal , tele . (kit should come with an option for the wide!!! (we like wide!!!) or the normal ) .
price something like that :
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Digital Camera (Body Only) 2764B003 B&H

if that will come true I will go dancing naked in times sq

Yes.. that would be great, I will cheer you on the sideline.

There is also one more thing that falls in their favour; Pentax is in the better position to make smaller DLSR (with smaller primes or zooms like 18-135) without having to worry about undermining sales of big chunky lens with built-in stabilizers (in C&N world).

[Pål Jensen]

The issue is more complex than the simple fact that EVF is not as good as the scene itself.



Professionals and enthusiasts care about image quality. And when you have someone like K, who effectively says that we can have better image quality if we go to mirrorless - thats going to attract photographers who care about IQ.
.

Thats hardly a real problem. It can easily be avoided by letting the next 645D have live-view. Then you got both an optical finder and an electronic one in one body. The cost saving is minuscule by removing the prism and the mirror for a $10 000 camera.
I see the interview as loose talk about industry trends; nothing more. Reducing mirror vibration is an obvious benefit of a camera without a mirror but then the Pentax 645's have never be plagued by it in the first place....

[asaru]

My general impression with this interview is that at root it's no different from any corporate interview in the English-speaking world.

As others have pointed out, Kitazawa said nothing beyond laughing off leading questions.

An anglo corporate boss, however, would pepper his comments with phrases such as bleeding-edge, strategic-direction-reassessment, continuous-rethinking, human-design-reengineering, reimagination-of-the-accepted-commonplace, and so on.

These phrases are missing from the translation, but it's obvious enough where they should go.

And once they do, the import of the interview is transparently obvious.

It's meaningless biz-talk. Because it's meant to be inscrutable, in practice there's nothing inscrutable about it.

[Emacs]

Thats hardly a real problem. It can easily be avoided by letting the next 645D have live-view. Then you got both an optical finder and an electronic one in one body. The cost saving is minuscule by removing the prism and the mirror for a $10 000 camera.

No. Just take a look at the huge DFA 25/4. Without such a huge flange length it can be done much lighter and shorter. And won't suffer so much from CA as this one does.
Landscape camera better to be lighter IMO.

[lurchlarson]

Within 10 years someone will bump this thread up from the depths and we will all have a laugh about how we were bickering about the merits/cons of mirrorless cameras. Mirrorless is the wave of the future. You either get behind it or you get left behind. Remember the transition to digital? Pentax missed the boat with that one and lost a lot of market share. I would rather them be on the leading edge of this wave then get left behind again.

The first EVIL FF will be either from Sony or Pentax. Canon and Nikon have too much baggage to be the first ones on that. Yes, losing the current mount sucks but there is no way around it.

[eddie1960]

The first EVIL FF will be either from Sony or Pentax. Canon and Nikon have too much baggage to be the first ones on that. Yes, losing the current mount sucks but there is no way around it.

This is a good bet, 90% though it's Sony who are rumoured to have a NEX 9 FF being prepared for release. It would be great if Pentax beat them to market though, even if it didn't meet the needs of everyone here looking for FF it would bring a good number of new users to the brand

[RuiC]

Thats hardly a real problem. It can easily be avoided by letting the next 645D have live-view. Then you got both an optical finder and an electronic one in one body. The cost saving is minuscule by removing the prism and the mirror for a $10 000 camera.
I see the interview as loose talk about industry trends; nothing more. Reducing mirror vibration is an obvious benefit of a camera without a mirror but then the Pentax 645's have never be plagued by it in the first place....

And for that matter there still exists the mirror lock-up No need to drop the mirror from the design! Costs?...

[johnmflores]

Give it about 20 years or so. Then we might get pure electronic finders (as opposed to screens on the back of the camera). But before that, new battery technology is needed and heat generating problems from sensors need to be solved. Remeber that DSLR's already have electronic screens and EVIL cameras are cameras without the feature of a true viewfinder useful for aiming, composing and following action. The gain is reducing cost without sacrifing the quality of a good optical finder but we are far away from that....

My Panasonic GH2 can record over 90 minutes of HD video and over 120 minutes on a single battery without breaking a sweat. The future's already here.

[eddie1960]

And for that matter there still exists the mirror lock-up No need to drop the mirror from the design! Costs?...

While i agree it's not necessary to get rid of the mirror box on MF, All cameras suffer from mirror slap to some degree MF to a larger degree. Live view might be nice in studio or tripod bound on location, but there is a hole in the MF market a mirrorless could fill. There have always been MF rangefinders (bronica,Mamiya,Fuji for example) a Mirrorless with a good EVF could fill that gap coupled with a leaf shutter lens it would be very quite as well. Plus side is it could also be less expensive and with a smaller register distance could likely be adapted to any MF lens ever made. I think there are a lot of guys out there that might be tempted into this idea.
Compact (for the format), WR, MF what would be not to like

[eddie1960]

My Panasonic GH2 can record over 90 minutes of HD video and over 120 minutes on a single battery without breaking a sweat. The future's already here.

at some point in the 90 minutes i'm would guess there is measurable sensor noise kicking in from the heat.

[johnmflores]

at some point in the 90 minutes i'm would guess there is measurable sensor noise kicking in from the heat.

Nope. No difference from the first minute to the last minute. Not only that, but the GH2 records in CPU-intensive AVCHD format, so not only is the sensor generating heat, but the rear LCD and CPU are generating heat as well. IIRC, the GH2 has a dual core CPU to handle the class-leading video. All of this in a package significantly smaller than a K-5:




Panasonic sure does know a thing or two about miniaturization and heat management. I've even McGuyvered a 5000mAH RC battery and run the thing nearly continuously for a day of video shooting. Not a hiccup.