[ScreamingIdiot]

I agree it's plausible... but is it cost effective is the question.

[Quicksand]

The amount of energy it would take to repeatedly start and stop a stabilizing gyroscope makes that concept pretty infeasible for a handheld camera. It ought to work, though!

[Nimrad]

I recently moved away from Pentax to Olympus E-P3(mirrorless microFourThirds) mainly because of size. This interview was AWESOME to read as I still have a place for Pentax in my heart. I just love their way of thinking about size AND weather sealing which is both really important to me. If pentax were to release a Full Frame small mirrorless camera my wallet would really sweat. This is awesome!

[Emacs]

If pentax were to release a Full Frame small mirrorless camera my wallet would really sweat. This is awesome!

My thoughts too. I really love the idea of FF mirrorless with even better than Sony EVF and in body stabilization. That would be the killer.

[RuiC]

Steadicam rigs have existed for video for some time, but it seems to me that it should also be feasible to add a gyroscope to an SLR grip to reduce the handheld shake before the shot is taken.

Obviously, this isn't something that you'd want all the time, which is why it would be best implemented in a grip.

You can start here:

Build Your Own Camera Gyro-Stabilizer With a Spare Hard Drive | DO IT: Projects, Plans and How-tos

With a bit of luck it can be smaller than this:

http://www.tylerminigyro.com/images/494_minigyro_w_still_camera_4_14_09_.jpg

[Brangdon]

If software on your computer can de-blur image shake, then theoretically the camera firmware (which is really software) can be programmed do the same thing. We may have to wait few years before cameras have enough processing power to accomplish that but it could be a 100% electronic solution.

I'd call that software, rather than electronic. Maybe it's a matter of terminology.

I've been thinking about this part of the interview:

Kitazawa: That's right. Polarizing filters, liquid-crystal shutters, liquid-crystal apertures... I think all the components which have always until now been objects that moved around mechanically are on their way to being replaced by electronics.

The K-mount has survived so long partly because it has evolved. It has gained auto-focus, aperture control, power-zooming. Now I am wondering: ignoring the mirrorless issue, can the K-mount evolve to support these electronic features without unreasonable compromise?

I'm especially thinking of aperture. If the aperture is controlled through liquid crystal, then presumably that could be given a backwards compatible mechanical linkage, but that would take away much of the benefit. I am wondering if (a) a new mount to take advantage of electronic lens features is inevitable over the next 5-10 years; and (b) whether to introduce a new mount today would be premature, as this technology is not yet mature enough to standardize? (Obviously (b) is written in ignorance of what Pentax have been playing with behind closed doors.)

Presumably a liquid crystal shutter could be designed to give "perfect" round bokeh.

[Fogel70]

I'd call that software, rather than electronic. Maybe it's a matter of terminology.

I've been thinking about this part of the interview:

Kitazawa: That's right. Polarizing filters, liquid-crystal shutters, liquid-crystal apertures... I think all the components which have always until now been objects that moved around mechanically are on their way to being replaced by electronics.

The K-mount has survived so long partly because it has evolved. It has gained auto-focus, aperture control, power-zooming. Now I am wondering: ignoring the mirrorless issue, can the K-mount evolve to support these electronic features without unreasonable compromise?

I'm especially thinking of aperture. If the aperture is controlled through liquid crystal, then presumably that could be given a backwards compatible mechanical linkage, but that would take away much of the benefit. I am wondering if (a) a new mount to take advantage of electronic lens features is inevitable over the next 5-10 years; and (b) whether to introduce a new mount today would be premature, as this technology is not yet mature enough to standardize? (Obviously (b) is written in ignorance of what Pentax have been playing with behind closed doors.)

Presumably a liquid crystal shutter could be designed to give "perfect" round bokeh.

In a mirrorless system for the future I do not see much use in keeping K-mount. Adapters are much better used for legacy support, and support of K-mount can hopefully be done without any need of crippling "features of the future" in the camera system. If keeping K-mount Pentax might even have to cripple the K-mount more in future by removing all moving parts, and in the end it will mean worse support for old lenses than with a new mount. With adapters Pentax can get income for legacy support, instead of added cost in the manufacturing of the camera if keeping K-mount.

If new interface between camera and lens is all electronic I guess it is much easier to seamlessly go from mechanical shutter/aperture to liquid crystal shutter/aperture. It probably do not matter much for an electronic interface if shutter/aperure are mechanical or electronic.

[Clinton]

Adapters are much better used for legacy support, and support of K-mount can hopefully be done without any need of crippling "features of the future" in the camera system.

Sure, as long as it is fully supported, and has autofocus capability. Keep in mind, that AF motor is going to have to go somewhere.

And when all is said and done, your camera isn't actually going to be any thinner than it is now.

I find this whole notion is preposterous. First, why buy Pentax if not for the K mount and support. Second, If this were Nikon, would everyone be sitting around thinking how great it would be if they threw away all the glass they owned. For Pentax we shoot with better glass than Nikon; glass that so many of you are suggesting we toss and replace.


The future is fully automated cars that will run on rails, with magnetic induction motors powered by the road. The technology is here today. Why aren't we already riding in these cars?

[rparmar]

I find this whole notion is preposterous. First, why buy Pentax if not for the K mount and support.

Most camera buyers have never heard of K-mount and wouldn't care one way or another. Pentax has near zero market penetration and little incentive to keep the interest of old (and getting older!) buyers. A new successful system could easily double or triple their market.

I'd be happy to see a new full-frame mirrorless camera, with a new streamlined set of exemplary lenses. It would sure beat that Q thing.

The future is fully automated cars that will run on rails, with magnetic induction motors powered by the road. The technology is here today. Why aren't we already riding in these cars?

The same reason that American cities aren't full of street-car networks. They were systematically bought up and run into bankruptcy. So the answer is "vested interests". Nothing to do with the question at hand, however.

[jsherman999]

The same reason that American cities aren't full of street-car networks. They were systematically bought up and run into bankruptcy. So the answer is "vested interests". Nothing to do with the question at hand, however.

Clinton's point is valid, though. Recent history is full of technological inevitable things that only seemed inevitable at the time, and never panned out when actual implementation attempts fleshed out practical usage drawbacks.

For example, we're supposed to all be flying helicopters to work now, if you believe the 1920's prognosticators, or hovercraft/air cars, if you believe the 60's future wizards.

How much this applies to a new mount is debatable, but 'it's new, thus it will take over' has never been a sure bet.

Most camera buyers have never heard of K-mount and wouldn't care one way or another. Pentax has near zero market penetration and little incentive to keep the interest of old (and getting older!) buyers. *A new successful system could easily double or triple their market.*

Easily? Keep in mind they'll be competing directly against Fuji, Panasonic, Samsung, Olympus, Sony, and CaNikon in this tier. It's going to be brutal - more brutal than FF. Throwing away K-mount while trying to establish themselves with a new mount in that environment reminds me of when Homer Simpson tried to save himself from the La Brea tar pits by trying to pull his legs out with his arms, and then trying to pull his arms out with his face. And Pentax won't have Stampy around to save it.




.

.
.

[Winder]

Sure, as long as it is fully supported, and has autofocus capability. Keep in mind, that AF motor is going to have to go somewhere.

And when all is said and done, your camera isn't actually going to be any thinner than it is now.

I find this whole notion is preposterous. First, why buy Pentax if not for the K mount and support. Second, If this were Nikon, would everyone be sitting around thinking how great it would be if they threw away all the glass they owned. For Pentax we shoot with better glass than Nikon; glass that so many of you are suggesting we toss and replace.


The future is fully automated cars that will run on rails, with magnetic induction motors powered by the road. The technology is here today. Why aren't we already riding in these cars?

Sony just invented the E-mount. Olympus and Pannasonic invented the M4/3 mount. Fuji is getting ready to release the X1 (new mount) in February.

There is no reason for a manufacturer to tie itself to legacy glass. Especially a company with such a small market share. I can see Nikon and Canon needing to support its massive user base, but Pentax has a lot more flexibility.

Keep the K-mount alive, but a new mount would be a good move for a mirrorless body. A high quality weather sealed body with a couple of good lenses is what Pentax needs.

I get the feeling that Fuji is going to build on the X100 success with the new X1 and the organic APS-C sensor.

[Kunzite]

The future is fully automated cars that will run on rails, with magnetic induction motors powered by the road. The technology is here today. Why aren't we already riding in these cars?

I believe the following commercial is somewhat relevant to that question:

You Tube

You Tube

Most camera buyers have never heard of K-mount and wouldn't care one way or another. Pentax has near zero market penetration and little incentive to keep the interest of old (and getting older!) buyers. A new successful system could easily double or triple their market.

I'd be happy to see a new full-frame mirrorless camera, with a new streamlined set of exemplary lenses. It would sure beat that Q thing.

Success (and one on the scale you're talking about) is not guaranteed. On the contrary, it would be very difficult for them first to destroy all their market share, then to get 4x as many customers they once had. Breaking news: most Pentax users heard of K-mount and would care a little bit if it would be killed.
The only way would be mirrorless in addition to the K-mount but this is dangerous as well.
By the way, it's not the Q thing they would have to beat; but m4/3/NEX/NX.

About the LCD aperture; now that's very interesting. We can be sure such technology is nowhere near; so that gives us a hint about what kind of stuff they were talking about. Mr. Kitazawa is not talking about real products, almost ready to put on the market - but what could happen in the future.

[Fogel70]

Sure, as long as it is fully supported, and has autofocus capability. Keep in mind, that AF motor is going to have to go somewhere.

And when all is said and done, your camera isn't actually going to be any thinner than it is now.

I find this whole notion is preposterous. First, why buy Pentax if not for the K mount and support. Second, If this were Nikon, would everyone be sitting around thinking how great it would be if they threw away all the glass they owned. For Pentax we shoot with better glass than Nikon; glass that so many of you are suggesting we toss and replace.

I really doubt that it is possible to make a mirrorless FF K-mount camera with full support of old K-mount lenses.

For one thing the camera then has to use phase detect AF, so the camera either has to use a mirror for separate AF-sensors, or a image sensor with PDAF support. But I don't think there will be any FF sensor with PDAF support in the near future (if ever).
Maybe it would be possible for Pentax to buy a custom designed FF sensor with PDAF support, but then the price will very high and it will probably double the production cost of the camera.

If using a new mount it is possible to use contrast detect AF in the camera and put the support of old PDAF lenses in the adapter, just like Sony did on the SLT adapter for NEX, but Pentax need to add a motor for support of screw-drive lenses.
Pentax can then make a small FF camera and it will probably not be more expensive than a similar specified camera from any other brand.

If Pentax keep on using K-mount on mirrorless system they will only be able to sell it to an ever shrinking Pentax K-mount user base. Introducing mirrorless cameras are usually done to expand into new markets, not to support already existing markets. For us who want to keep using K-mount lenses Pentax will continue producing cameras with mirrors.

But anyway, as Pentax has not yet started developing any mirrorless FF system, it probably will take at least 3 years before it can hit the market (if ever).

[Kunzite]

PD-AF (on/off the sensor), CD-AF or other method - the camera must have it anyway, so determining the correct focus isn't the issue. Moving the lens elements to focus, that's where it gets complicated.

Mirrorless (FF or not) with K-mount is definitely possible; there is nothing the K-mount can't do compared with the modern mounts, but does it make sense? (keeping the SLR registration distance, thus still needing to make all your wides retrofocus). Even a K-mount-like (same specs but a short registration distance) would put them at a slight disadvantage, compared to the full electronic mount competitors.
Mirrorless (FF or not) with a new, electronic mount - that should be OK; though I'd like Pentax to take care of their current customers in the first place (since we're the one keeping them alive, by buying their products - not fantasizing about strategic direction changes).
There would be two things missing from a new mount (at least):
- screw drive AF: the new mount would have at most SDM-compatible AF. So the screw drive motor must go into the adapter, or you'll lose AF with all those lovely Limiteds
- mechanical aperture lever: the adapter must also include a motor and the mechanisms for it, as well. Alternative: manual aperture control with stop-down metering.
A+B = an expensive adapter required just to have the same level of functionality as with a K-mount DSLR.
And it's actually less functionality, since you'd lose the optical viewfinder (an EVF fan would disagree).

"an ever shrinking Pentax K-mount user base" - what on Earth are you talking about? For me it looks like a poorly informed excuse to push towards mirrorless; but fortunately Ricoh's plans are different.
Expect the K-mount user base to grow.

[Fogel70]

"an ever shrinking Pentax K-mount user base" - what on Earth are you talking about? For me it looks like a poorly informed excuse to push towards mirrorless; but fortunately Ricoh's plans are different.
Expect the K-mount user base to grow.

This is what I suspect will happen in the future if Pentax do not listen to a changing market.

I would not be surprised if a new entry level mirrorless cameras in a few years will be sold at half the price of today.
If Pentax cannot cut manufacturing cost as much by using K-mount it will be hard for them get new users to the brand. And it will only be us loyal K-mount users left.

When mirrorless cameras evolves they will be a closer and closer match to a DSLR and will eventually grab the largest part of system camera market with a lower price.