[ElJamoquio]

Of course, sticking to a mount until its end of life is nothing new for Pentax, so it is not surprising they plan to stick to the K mount until it will become obsolete as well.

Well, it's not obsolete yet. Let's revisit in a decade.

[Kunzite]

I don't need to ask Pentax. I have been with K-mount ever since its inception. It isn't just in the U.S.A. that the prices have been elevated. It is happening in other countries as well. Look at the Nikkor 200/4 example above. That puts them in an area price was and warranty wise that people will start taking into consideration. That is not the best place for a 5% "niche" company to be in. There are some folks that still shun Canon over the FD thing. Canon was a diverse large corp and they transitioned by deep pockets. Plus, a law suite by Honeywell against Minolta helped them out a lot by putting a big burden on Minolta.



So the DA 50/1.8 and DA 560/5.6 is on there. That still isn't a Road Map "full of lenses" like you stated earlier. It is 2 named lenses, 4 mystery lenses and a TC they have been holding up for 6 years. Outside of the 560 and TC, the only interesting thing on there is the mention of a DA Zoom LTD!



You said I called someone a liar. I did not. I don't know why you think wondering about the history of the k-mount is ridiculous. That has been a concern every since '89. A year ago, you would have said the thought of Ricoh buying Pentax was ridiculous. I hope the k-mount is around a long time.



I wasn't the one being rigid about possibilities.

You should, or better said you should remember what you already know; they (K-mount included) have a very poor record at dying, despite unfavourable conditions and changing owners 3 times. And they'll tell you about the new lenses (probably won't talk about cameras, but they're preparing those, too).
UPP and a 89% price increase, I believe they're unique to the U.S.

So what if they're unnamed? They're still lenses, and they're 8 of them (+ the TC). One doesn't simply announce they would launch 8 new lenses in 2 years, planning R&D, production and logistics capacity then decide it's better to abandon the K-mount altogether.

You didn't call anyone a liar, but as I've already said, if they'll stop after the 560mm then the roadmap is a lie. It's an argument against your thought that crossed your mind (that more lenses are planned), it is not directed against you.
At some point I trusted Hoya, getting past my initial strong doubts over them, yes. It was a mistake; sometimes the first, fresh impression is the correct one.

I'm only rigid about impossibilities, I believe they're not very... possible

About the "obsolete" K-mount, well... it's as "obsolete" as the F-mount. Should Nikon change it, as well?
Strangely, the only mount that was not "obsolete", a "true digital" mount (unlike those dinosaurs from the film era), is... dead. Yes, I'm talking about 4/3 - all the marketing BS couldn't save it.

[Blue]

You should, or better said you should remember what you already know; they (K-mount included) have a very poor record at dying, despite unfavourable conditions and changing owners 3 times. And they'll tell you about the new lenses (probably won't talk about cameras, but they're preparing those, too).
UPP and a 89% price increase, I believe they're unique to the U.S.

From 1989 to 2007 they had never been bought out. In the past 5 or 6 years, they have been bought twice.

So what if they're unnamed? They're still lenses, and they're 8 of them (+ the TC). One doesn't simply announce they would launch 8 new lenses in 2 years, planning R&D, production and logistics capacity then decide it's better to abandon the K-mount altogether.

Until there are working proto-types or are on the shelf, they are vaporware. The TC has been around for 6 years in working proto-type.

You didn't call anyone a liar, but as I've already said, if they'll stop after the 560mm then the roadmap is a lie. It's an argument against your thought that crossed your mind (that more lenses are planned), it is not directed against you.
At some point I trusted Hoya, getting past my initial strong doubts over them, yes. It was a mistake; sometimes the first, fresh impression is the correct one.

The 560 will be the first lens out of those mystery lenses except maybe the DA 50/1.8.

I'm only rigid about impossibilities, I believe they're not very... possible

About the "obsolete" K-mount, well... it's as "obsolete" as the F-mount. Should Nikon change it, as well?
Strangely, the only mount that was not "obsolete", a "true digital" mount (unlike those dinosaurs from the film era), is... dead. Yes, I'm talking about 4/3 - all the marketing BS couldn't save it.

As far as impossibilities, that is an opinion. 1 year ago, you would thought a Ricoh buy-out impossible. But they announced it in July. It caught most people by surprise.

I have never said the K-mount was obsolete. I have actually said the opposite in a plethora of threads over the years that debate mounts. In fact, I have advocated keeping the k-mount compatible with a potential mirror-less system even if it requires a af compatible adapter. The k-01 was down to take them K-mount without one which I believe was a good move.

[Kunzite]

Before Hoya, they changed their owners - from the founder family to shareholders like Sparx. That's when they lost control, which made possible the Hoya's hostile takeover.

It doesn't matter if they have or not the actual lenses, and in which stages of development (I'd assume they were working on those for a while, since this would take some time). What it matters is they promised them, in that roadmap.

1 year ago, I would thought the Ricoh buy-out was unlikely, and a Samsung buy-out, impossible.

Laurentiu Cristofor made a comment about the K-mount (eventually) becoming obsolete, ElJamoquio followed with a comment (that it's not yet). None of them claimed it is, and of course neither did you. Sorry for not being clear.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Laurentiu Cristofor made a comment about the K-mount (eventually) becoming obsolete

Thanks for pointing out that I did not claim that the K-mount was obsolete. The obsolete mount I was referring to was the M42 mount.

About the "obsolete" K-mount, well... it's as "obsolete" as the F-mount. Should Nikon change it, as well?
Strangely, the only mount that was not "obsolete", a "true digital" mount (unlike those dinosaurs from the film era), is... dead. Yes, I'm talking about 4/3 - all the marketing BS couldn't save it.

The F mount only kept its name unchanged, but the initial mount did become obsolete. Furthermore, the current F mount may become obsolete as well, although the larger market share it enjoys may delay that longer.

As for the FT mount, also, in one way, it is not obsolete - it's just been re-envisioned as the MFT mount. AFAICT, the MFT mount is pretty much identical to the FT mount except for the different registration distance (they added some extra contacts). One could argue that FT and MFT are more similar than the current F mount or K mount and their first iterations. Reminds me of that Austin Powers line:

In many ways, Bob's Big Boy never left, sir. He's always offered the same high-quality meals at competitive prices.

A mount can become obsolete either because its tech fell behind the times or because the company supporting it fell behind the competition.

M42 was technologically obsolete at the time Asahi decided to abandon it in 1975.

The Canon FD mount would have become obsolete too. It was smart move for Canon to drop it and cut their losses. Canon used to promote it as being better than a bayonet system, but how many breech lock mount cameras are there around today? Also, note that Canon kept producing FD mount cameras until 1990, 3 years after their introduction of the EF mount in 1987.

And Olympus seems to have gained more market share since they moved from FT to MFT.

Neither the move away from FD mount, nor the one away from FT mount can be qualified as fiascoes - on the contrary - they both seem smart moves for the respective companies. Furthermore, they are examples of changes made by companies that had either a large market share or a smaller one, respectively.

The K mount is not technologically obsolete, but the Pentax brand does run the risk of becoming obsolete. These days there is also a change going on in the industry as far as enthusiast markets go - trends show that SLRs are going to get replaced by MILCs by many people - it will take several more years for this to happen, no doubt, but the trend is pretty clear. When a wave of change comes like this, small companies either ride it and try to improve their position or they try to resist it and they go under. It's going to be interesting to see what Pentax will do over the next years. But I just don't see much coming out of sticking to the K mount unless they also manage to provide something else that is special. Affordable FF would be one thing, but I don't see how they could pull it off. We'll see.

[parsons]

The K mount is not technologically obsolete, but the Pentax brand does run the risk of becoming obsolete. These days there is also a change going on in the industry as far as enthusiast markets go - trends show that SLRs are going to get replaced by MILCs by many people - it will take several more years for this to happen, no doubt, but the trend is pretty clear. When a wave of change comes like this, small companies either ride it and try to improve their position or they try to resist it and they go under. It's going to be interesting to see what Pentax will do over the next years. But I just don't see much coming out of sticking to the K mount unless they also manage to provide something else that is special. Affordable FF would be one thing, but I don't see how they could pull it off. We'll see.

Does a sub $1800 mirror less qualify?
That would tick both boxes...

[Alizarine]

The K mount is not technologically obsolete, but the Pentax brand does run the risk of becoming obsolete. These days there is also a change going on in the industry as far as enthusiast markets go - trends show that SLRs are going to get replaced by MILCs by many people - it will take several more years for this to happen, no doubt, but the trend is pretty clear. When a wave of change comes like this, small companies either ride it and try to improve their position or they try to resist it and they go under. It's going to be interesting to see what Pentax will do over the next years. But I just don't see much coming out of sticking to the K mount unless they also manage to provide something else that is special.

It may be shorter than what we think, given the pace of technology these days. When the EVF finally does come very close to the speed and accuracy of the optical viewfinder, mirrorless systems are most probably going to replace SLRs. The K-01 is probably some transition product, and soon enough, Pentax will have to move from K-mount to a new one (with the Q replacing all of their P&S cameras, with exception of the WG series, if I were to choose).

[riff]

soon enough, Pentax will have to move from K-mount to a new one

naa why?

[Alizarine]

naa why?

because of this...

trends show that SLRs are going to get replaced by MILCs by many people - it will take several more years for this to happen, no doubt, but the trend is pretty clear.

"soon enough" can be pretty soon, or further off, but eventually yes, if the trend above continues. SLRs may persist, but the mainstream mount has to adjust to the needs of the times. If not, then there should still be screwmount cameras still in production today, right?

[monochrome]

Pentax will have to move from K-mount to a new one

Only if the current assumption that removing the mirrorbox must translate into a pocketable camera with a register distance shorter than 45.46mm. I absolutely cannot use anything smaller than a K-01. Can't hold it. Can't steady it. I have no use for those compacts on steroids.

Can't use a tack hammer either for anything larger than a tack..

[Alizarine]

It doesn't have to be necessarily pocketable. That's the area for phonecams and the Q (sans lens) I think. Not everyone is up for oh-so-tiny cameras, even me. The NEX isn't near pocketable, and even though it removed in-body IS, it gained also in some areas. I guess once the electronic shutter gains enough advantage to replace the mechanical one, then a lot of changes will happen to the popular camera structure. I just hope my eyes are too weak to use cameras by that time, lol.

[Kunzite]

It may be shorter than what we think, given the pace of technology these days. When the EVF finally does come very close to the speed and accuracy of the optical viewfinder, mirrorless systems are most probably going to replace SLRs. The K-01 is probably some transition product, and soon enough, Pentax will have to move from K-mount to a new one (with the Q replacing all of their P&S cameras, with exception of the WG series, if I were to choose).

EVF coming very close to optical viewfinders... shorter, soon enough - means decades, yes?

I sort of imagine myself working with one of those slim mirrorless wonders. Giving up on the optical viewfinder. Giving up on using a real flash (NEX series, except the 7) or on a very good sensor (all the others). Looking ridiculous if I would put a non-pancake lens on it. Still not having anything even remotely pocketable, but cramps in my fingers.
No, thanks - I'll stay with DSLRs.

[Alizarine]

EVF coming very close to optical viewfinders... shorter, soon enough - means decades, yes?

Can't say how long. The transition from mainstream film to mainstream digital didn't take 20. The first digital was made in 70's, true, but from the late 90's to the early 2000's things took a very large turn and made film cameras a minority. While SLRs may persist into the far future, mainstream technology will always change, depending on human needs. We might not be there by that time though. Sorry for taking the thread too far from topic.

Now going back to the U.S. pricing of Pentax lenses...

[ENicolas]

Nikon announced the D3200 today. It's big selling point other than the 24 MP sensor? It has a wi-fi module that will let you use live view and trip the shutter from your smart phone.

In ten years only professionals will still be using camera bodies. The rest of the market will be lenses with sensors built in that are controlled by other devices. You can use whatever screen you want to frame the shot, and wirelessly transfer the file from the sensor to the device. There won't be any memory in the lens/sensor other than the buffer.

Want to take a wide-angle, a medium, and a telephoto shot at the same time? Three lens/sensors on one tripod controlled by one device.

Except I think the whole idea of a "still frame" is on the way out, too. We'll be shooting video clips and the software will pick the sharpest and best exposed frames for us automatically. Every exposure will be a 10-second clip, automatically analyzed and bracket-exposed for HDR processing.

And after that we'll have HDR sensors and displays. And those displays are going to be flexible plastic sheets that weigh a little more than a sheet of paper. We'll be using that same technology for "prints", too: multi-media presentations on disposable flexible displays that have far more dynamic range than paper prints.

It's a good time to be alive.

Sorry - I guess this is going 'way off-topic....

[Kunzite]

So I won't be able to hold a camera in my hands? Look through a viewfinder? Compose an image? Every image will be 1/60? Photography as an art will be dead, replaced by gadgetry?
I'd rather prefer end-of-the-world scenarios that involves brain-eating zombies