Originally posted by dlacouture 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: [...]
Then a µK-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).
I think they'd be crazy to introduce a new mount that used mechanical linkages today. Any new mount ought to be designed to last for 35 years, just like the K-mount was. The future is surely fully electronic mounts. The new mount lenses will have their own motors for focus and aperture. (And eventually aperture and shutter will probably become solid state, if that gets good enough.) Look at the Q-mount, or the Fuji X-Pro1.
That being the case, a purported µK-K would need to convert the electronic connections into mechanical ones. It would need a focus motor and a lever that moved to set aperture. As such I don't think it will be "simple".
Originally posted by Kunzite "Making the display lighter and darker" - an annoying, imprecise alternative to the old exposure bar? It seems EVF is all about worse alternatives to perfectly working technologies
You are assuming its bad before you even see it. If you don't like that feature, you'll surely be able to turn it off. And turn on other assists, such as a histogram, or blinking the over and under-exposed pixels, if you prefer. Because the features will be in software, they become, well, soft: user-configurable.
Quote: "It can magnify the view to show individual pixels" - slow but necessary for accurate focus. Can you do it and keep composing, in the same time?
It's up to Pentax how they design it. (Remember we're talking about what the technology's potential, not about any concrete design.) They could make it enlarge just the central area, for example, leaving the outer area to show the field of view.
Quote: "An EVF should be closer to WYSIWYG than an OVF" - only if the EVF is accurately calibrated, and you aren't surpassing it's limitations.
Why assume it won't be calibrated? It sounds like you are looking for reasons to hate new technology.
Quote: Even so, in a way you're letting the camera deciding what the end result should looks like and showing that to you.
No more so than shooting JPEG. Even if you shoot RAW, the camera is making choices when you chimp on the rear monitor.