Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-23-2012, 02:11 PM   #646
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,443
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
First of all it's just a rumour...
And the rumour says it will use a k-mount meaning the thickness of the camera will be the sam as your Kr or K5, ect.
So it won't be something like a Q, Sony NEX, ect. It might be more like the DSLR we have now most likely, something like the Km and Kx in turns of size and handeling.
So still not really pocketable...

The rumour looks to me Pentax will compete with the newer Sony cameras with the translucant mirror with this one.
Then I am back to not understanding why we don't use a (better) Q and a DSLR. But then I still have mostly film cameras so maybe I just don't get it.

01-23-2012, 02:21 PM   #647
Pentaxian
Fogel70's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,748
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Then I am back to not understanding why we don't use a (better) Q and a DSLR. But then I still have mostly film cameras so maybe I just don't get it.
With two different systems you need to get two sets of lenses.

It's just the same argument used by Pentax K-mount user that want K-mount on mirrorless system. But with K-mount it is not possible to make as small cameras, so it might be harder to get new users into K-mount system.
01-23-2012, 02:44 PM   #648
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
You'll have to be fair here. The inexpensive Canon lenses you list above here are without stabilisation. If you want stabilisation with all of them, you'll have to have deeper pockets then with Pentax.
Ask yourself which of the following two options would sound more appealing to a prospective customer?

1) A camera body without stabilization but with many inexpensive lenses
2) A camera body with stabilization but with just a couple of inexpensive lenses

For stabilization to matter, you first need lenses to stabilize.
01-23-2012, 05:27 PM   #649
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Louisville, Kentucky
Posts: 443
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
I'll be really disappointed if you have to do that, I expect this camera to have a built in EVF.
I also hope the new camera to have a built-in EVF, but at this stage of leaks and rumors we just don't know.

01-23-2012, 05:30 PM   #650
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,921
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Like I said before. I owned a NEX5n and a K5 at the same time for some months.

Catch in focus on the K5 works 100% spot on with my Porst 55mm ƒ1.2! Yes, there are some shots that I miss, but those are human error only.

With the NEX5n, it would take ages to focus that same Porst 55mm ƒ1.2.



Agree, it's surely easier. But so much more work and it takes much more time. Your subject and yourself shouldn't be moving at all. It's ideal for landscapes, architecture. But don't try doing that at a party or a sportsevent!

With my Porst, K5 and catch in focus, I can do portraits with the eye in 100% focus at a CHILDRENS PARTY. It takes some work, knowhow and practice though.

But when I get the chance to take time to focus, like with a landscape, I'll use the LV and zoom in 8x.

It's really nice being able to choose, and have best of both worlds. So, going mirrorless is the removal of an important feature, not the improvement or addition of one.




Don't get me wrong. I feel the same. I'm particularly happy they kept K-mount! I just hope and pray that they'll keep the OVF for their high end bodies. Hopefully there's a very interesting model(s) to come.
If that is your experience with catch in focus and focus confirmation in general on the K5 , then I will leave it at that.
I've never experienced this sort of accuracy out of my K100, K7, K5 and my brother's K5 and also from the dozen or so Pentaxians I get to meet monthly.
Perhaps your copy is exceptional.
01-23-2012, 05:35 PM   #651
Pentaxian
LFLee's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Western MA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,264
will it be as awesome look as the OM-D?


source: A better picture of the Olympus OM-D camera | Photo Rumors
01-23-2012, 05:39 PM   #652
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Louisville, Kentucky
Posts: 443
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
You're not dense. You're like me. Why get a tiny mirrorless camera if you're gonna lug around multiple lenses, a tripod, a flash, light-meter and tons of spare batteries too? Who notices that one saved cubic cm and the 75 grams that were stripped?

It's a fad, like the tiny mobile phones a few years ago. It'll pass, just like it did with the cellphones.

I love photography. I would NEVER want to get rid of features for design or portability. Only the best IQ counts. If I could afford a 645D, I would lug that around 24/7 and still love it.
+1. I totally agree, still a small carry with you all the the will be good at times. I still remember how much I enjoyed using my Roll I 35S when I didn't want to lug around a slr.
01-23-2012, 05:54 PM - 1 Like   #653
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,921
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
These minute advantages pale in the face of the advantages of being able to get inexpensive 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 50/2.5 macro, 85/1.8 autofocus lenses for Canon cameras. Each of these costs under $360. What does Pentax offer under this price bar? A 35/2.4 and a 50/1.4. We don't even have 24 or 28 mm lenses at any price range - you need to hit the used market to get those focal lengths.

My point was that if someone wants to buy Canon, you're not going to change their mind by pointing to some manual focus lens bargains. And if they are inclined to use MF lenses, they can do that on their Canon too - Pentax may do that better, but that's not good enough to ignore the advantages of the EF mount platform. Few people buy DSLRs to use exclusively with inexpensive old MF lenses.



I understand. See above. Canon users are not that much excited about old MF lenses because they have access to inexpensive AF ones. Nikon has their share of inexpensive lenses too. So selling Pentax on account of access to MF bargains isn't going to work well - it might work in some cases, but not many. WR, SR, build quality, ergonomy, sensor performance - those are better arguments. Backward compatibility is overrated though - it means nothing to a new user that wants AF and needs all the technological help he can get to obtain decent pictures without being a great photographer. And it's not that perfect either due to the mount crippling.

These things come up in open discussions where people recommend multiple brands. We are here on a Pentax forum and it is easy to get blinded by one-sided Pentax arguments. But it's worth looking at what other brands have to offer, the same way we would like prospective Canon/Nikon customers to consider what Pentax has to offer. A good starting place is to look at the lens lineups of Canon or Nikon, check their prices, read reviews - you'll get a different perspective on the strengths and weaknesses of the Pentax platform.
Excellent points regarding the current position of lens offerings for the person considering entry into the Pentax system.

I am the 'Pentax pusher' in the local forums which is not brand orientated but has a heany Canikony presence, and this is precisely the difficulties I run into when trying to convince people that Pentax is a viable option. The other problem of course is the 'unknown brand' problem.
If a person is looking at buying into a system at lower cost while keeping nice things like DOF control; fast aperture with AF , CanNikon does offer this better with 35/1.8; 50/1.8; 85/1.8.
The argument is "But Pentax has better built and quality 35/2; 35/2.4; 50/1.4 at fair prices!"
Don't forget that all this happens 'on-paper' via text on the internet for people who know nothing about build quality and stuff, so no one can actually get a real feel of all this.
Pentax lenses and system are also much smaller and less of an encumbrance over a long day of shooting, but this is also very hard to bring across over the internet (ie. people just have to see this physically for themselves)
All that is need to sway their decision is that Canikon has cheap primes that have a fast 'F' number which can give them "bokeh" ( the often mis-used term)
and do nice portraits with.


Only when a potential buyer only wants kit lenses; Don't care for primes; Know that they don't mind more costly/better quality lenses; done their research about Pentax; Or see the value in Pentax cameras; does the argument sway in Pentax's favor.

I think too many folks here have too many legacy lenses that they forget that newbies really need those affordable but good performing primes with AF

01-23-2012, 05:58 PM   #654
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,236
Small cameras are not a fad. Plus, I don't think a lot of us want absolutely tiny... Pentax already has the Q for those people interested in small ILC. We want small yet powerful in features and functionality.

The K-7 and K-5 are in that line of thought and we want more along those lines. The closest thing outside of Pentax is a D7000, but it's slightly bigger and doesn't have share reduction.
01-23-2012, 06:27 PM   #655
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,443
QuoteOriginally posted by sjwaldron Quote
Small cameras are not a fad. Plus, I don't think a lot of us want absolutely tiny... Pentax already has the Q for those people interested in small ILC. We want small yet powerful in features and functionality.
That's exactly my point. We already have the Q mount and compact form. Can't they build Q adapters for all the other-brand lenses? We have the K-mount and dSLR form with a 43mm rregister distance. If we want a compact EVF / ILC why not just make the Q a much better camera? If we want a small K-mount dSLR EVIL to use all the legacy lenses why not just build it in the K-r body?

I really don't understand why people want a compact K-mount camera - by definition it isn't pocketable, the register distance is impossible to work with and it seems to be wrong on every count.

A small, EVIL dSLR - sure, I get that.

QuoteOriginally posted by sjwaldron Quote
The K-7 and K-5 are in that line of thought and we want more along those lines. The closest thing outside of Pentax is a D7000, but it's slightly bigger and doesn't have share reduction.
01-23-2012, 07:08 PM   #656
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Var, South of France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,071
If you plan to design mirroless-specific lenses anyway, then there is no need to stuck with K mount.

As I said earlier, it would make more sense to design a new mount specific to mirrorless but making it fully compatible with the K-mount via a simple adapter: say the new ľK mount has exactly the same connectors/screwdrive as the K-mount, but is using a slightly different bayonet design so as to prevent using a K-mount directly on the new mirrorless body, or using a ľK lens on a K SLR.
Then a ľK-K adapter is only a matter of transmitting electrical and mechanical contacts (not exactly rocket science, this is really nothing more than an extension tube).

This design can be accommodating for virtually any difference between the ľk and K flange distances, as you don't have to house motors or electronics into the adapter.

This way you get the best of both world... Nikon tried this with their 1 line, and the ungainly AF adapter, but the appeal is lost on me due to the 2.7x crop factor and the unforgiving 10MP crop.

But give me a small ľK mount and its pancake lenses, with a fully compliant ľK-K adapter (included), and I'm all sold!

After all, that's why I bought into the Samsung NX system : their excellent pancake lenses paired with small bodies (and cheap prices!!!! The NX100 goes for 159€ right now, a frightfully insane price IMO for a K7 sensor in a small body).

Last edited by dlacouture; 01-23-2012 at 07:25 PM.
01-23-2012, 07:35 PM   #657
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by dlacouture Quote
As I said earlier, it would make more sense to design a new mount specific to mirrorless but making it fully compatible with the K-mount via a simple adapter: say the new ľK mount has exactly the same connectors/screwdrive as the K-mount, but is using a slightly different bayonet design so as to prevent using a K-mount directly on the new mirrorless body, or using a ľK lens on a K SLR.
That's the same drum I've been beating on this other thread.

It says something about how disconnected some users are from the rest of the market when they think that such concepts are not feasible or would ruin Pentax.
01-23-2012, 08:21 PM   #658
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,254
QuoteOriginally posted by LFLee Quote
will it be as awesome look as the OM-D?
I don't see something awesome...
01-23-2012, 08:23 PM   #659
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
is this blog trustworthy enough? says he saw a prototype that will be launched on CP+

Mike's CES 2012 Camera Wrap-Up and Predictions | TechnoBuffalo
01-23-2012, 08:45 PM   #660
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Madison, Wis., USA
Posts: 1,510
QuoteOriginally posted by Alizarine Quote
is this blog trustworthy enough? says he saw a prototype that will be launched on CP+

Mike's CES 2012 Camera Wrap-Up and Predictions | TechnoBuffalo
I don't know Mike and cannot comment on trust level. But please recall that Pentax has said all along that they see no point (or success) in marketing new bodies that are like existing mirrorless designs. They need to be different enough that they grab attention in the raucous party that the photo world is now. Mike's words sound in tune with what we've been hearing but I have no idea whether he saw anything or not. Doesn't make much difference; he didn't have anything that would be news to us.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, k-01, k-01 mirrorless camera, mirrorless, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is the new pentax mirrorless coming out tomorrow? justtakingpics Pentax News and Rumors 12 07-26-2011 06:22 AM
There may not be a 2nd mirrorless camera rustynail925 Pentax News and Rumors 5 06-29-2011 05:36 PM
Mirrorless Camera--Good or Bad? InStitches49 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 15 11-10-2010 10:15 PM
[RUMOR] Canon's First Mirrorless Camera! jct us101 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 12 09-14-2010 08:08 PM
New Pentax: K-5, K-r and Mirrorless models coming JohnBee Pentax News and Rumors 32 08-08-2010 01:57 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:14 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top