[Supernaut]

That is simply an unfair statement. The NEX had a 2 year head start, of course it is outselling the K-01.

I'm not much of a fan of the K-01, I just don't think that is a meaningful comparison yet.

Bookmark this and get back in two years then. My point is that there is a major difference when looking at the target groups.
Fixed K-mount is directed towards the few with K-lenses already. A new mount which allows for an (AF-) adapter would interest anyone.

[Clavius]

A new mount which allows for an (AF-) adapter would interest anyone.

We can mount our K-mount glass with an adapter to other brands right now, but that doesn't appeal to us. Why would it appeal to us when it's a Pentax camera without K-mount? We don't want to mount our lenses via an adapter.

[Ash]

Definitely a matter of watch this space.
Ricoh are allowing Pentax division to focus purely on their camera and lens development without interference, so there will be a number of announcements this year, probably around Photokina time.

[junyo]

All I can tell you is I had mine out w/ the K28/3.5, DA40 Limited, K135/2.5 and DA55~300 all weekend at a camping event with 60 or so adults. Stimulated lots of conversation, including but not limited to the idea that I can use my old lenses - but especially that ANYONE CAN BUY OLD K-MOUNT LENSES SUCH AS A K28 FOR $150 +/- on eBay, KEH or a local camera store. The K-01 isn't JUST for exisiting owners of K-mount lenses.

The 2 guys with D700's and G zooms were especially - something that looked like - envious. I got very sharp shots at 300mm.

This is, and continues to be, one of the weirdest arguments for retaining the K-mount on an MILC in the known universe.

All of those cheap eBay lenses, every single one, mounts on all other MILC platforms. Plus thousands, if not millions of other brand's lenses that the K-01 distinctly can't mount. I use more K mount glass on my Fuji XPro than I do Fuji right now (oh, the terrible agony of mounting an adapter, it scarred me for life.. and means I don't have to stop down meter any more). If you're the guy with the D700 and you're thinking about mirrorless, Sony/Oly/Fuji/Samsung say 'bring your old lenses, we'll make them work somehow'. Pentax says 'scrap your existing investment and start over with used lenses from eBay' (or 'put them on a Q and turn them all into telephotos...") Man, such a compelling sales pitch.

I'm not sure in what bizarro universe a user of Brand X who isn't invested in Brand Y's glass, would you pick the one MILC that only runs Brand Y's lens, and nothing else. Why? To avoid tempting yourself with equally cheap FD lenses? So you have to run an adapter anyway to use M42 lenses? The only people looking to lock themselves into K-mount legacy glass are people already locked into K-mount legacy glass.

[eddie1960]

This is, and continues to be, one of the weirdest arguments for retaining the K-mount on an MILC in the known universe.

All of those cheap eBay lenses, every single one, mounts on all other MILC platforms. Plus thousands, if not millions of other brand's lenses that the K-01 distinctly can't mount. I use more K mount glass on my Fuji XPro than I do Fuji right now (oh, the terrible agony of mounting an adapter, it scarred me for life.. and means I don't have to stop down meter any more). If you're the guy with the D700 and you're thinking about mirrorless, Sony/Oly/Fuji/Samsung say 'bring your old lenses, we'll make them work somehow'. Pentax says 'scrap your existing investment and start over with used lenses from eBay' (or 'put them on a Q and turn them all into telephotos...") Man, such a compelling sales pitch.

I'm not sure in what bizarro universe a user of Brand X who isn't invested in Brand Y's glass, would you pick the one MILC that only runs Brand Y's lens, and nothing else. Why? To avoid tempting yourself with equally cheap FD lenses? So you have to run an adapter anyway to use M42 lenses? The only people looking to lock themselves into K-mount legacy glass are people already locked into K-mount legacy glass.

Pentax was looking for a system that meets the needs of their existing user base. a smaller system that requires adapters for their DA LTD for example was not in the cards. Add in this was developed in Hoya time frame where R&D dollars were at a premium and the fact that they have a small camera capable of taking just about any lens made in the Q (which performs quite well and is a truly small camera unlike the competition. anything else would just be another me too product which is not the direction Pentax is known for taking. Then look at the other side they were looking to build a model that appealed outside the typically stodgy enthusiast base and appeal to move up users. being able to show the range of lenses available todya brand new with AF etc versus what the competition has is definitely an edge.
Now the Ricoh on board there is the third option a GXR with a k mountor that lets you use your native lenses with full functionality (which I'm sure is on the horizon) and an M mountor which allows most lenses ever made ( a new version of which is on the horizon, and now under Pentax I wouldn't be surprised if it had the 24mp FF sensor to help meet the volume commitments on that sensor)

One thing is certain Pentax isn't likely to build a me too MILC, it's not there style and there is ample options from other vendors for people who want to use loads of old glass with adapters (AF glass with MF adapters are mostly hopeless the throw is way to short to MF effectively. anyone moving from a D700 would of course realise that and would not look at a MILC for his/her Good Glass

[Kunzite]

I believe the main attraction for the FF Pentax is so that we can use our old M, A and FA lens, and of course for the 3 amigos.

For me the main attraction would be a bigger, better viewfinder. I would have to buy (some) new lenses, so it would be quite expensive... not sure I would do it.

Yes, I don't want to use a stinkin' adapter. Paying extra for the privilege of using a Pentax lens, on a Pentax camera? Really?

I also don't see why should Pentax accommodate miscellaneous old lenses, but making using their own more difficult. Nor why they should absolutely replicate what Sony would do (then, maybe they should also get rid of the hot shoe?)
I can easily see how people with D700 and expensive Nikkors would gladly jump to some no hotshoe APS-C NEX, buy adapters and use their lenses - with functionality loss. Not.

[eddie1960]

the only adapter option I could see working is if the body shipped with a good AF adapter that let you use all the existing lenses, but then you just end up with a clunky front heavy box like a nex....not really a good solution IMO. The K-01 isn't the solution for me but that is more because it is an entry model. a model with functionality like the K5 and an optional EVF (or built in on the side like an RF) would suit me better. I'm still not sold on EVF, but the focus peaking idea really appeals. the older I get the hard it is to MF, once I can no longer use my +3 diopter on the OVF like I do now, and have to wear glasses full time it may be the jump to mirrorless (of course a big bright FF OVF could well slow that down )

[monochrome]

Bookmark this and get back in two years then. My point is that there is a major difference when looking at the target groups.
Fixed K-mount is directed towards the few with K-lenses already. A new mount which allows for an (AF-) adapter would interest anyone.

Not at all - far from it. An adapter is an adapter. I don't want to adapt my camera to suit my lenses, which is where I have my money. I want my camera to natively support all the lenses I own that have the same flange ears as the mount.

Otherwise why bother with Pentax at all - just bite the bullet and join the Nikon juggernaut.

[monochrome]

This is, and continues to be, one of the weirdest arguments for retaining the K-mount on an MILC in the known universe.

All of those cheap eBay lenses, every single one, mounts on all other MILC platforms. Plus thousands, if not millions of other brand's lenses that the K-01 distinctly can't mount. I use more K mount glass on my Fuji XPro than I do Fuji right now (oh, the terrible agony of mounting an adapter, it scarred me for life.. and means I don't have to stop down meter any more). If you're the guy with the D700 and you're thinking about mirrorless, Sony/Oly/Fuji/Samsung say 'bring your old lenses, we'll make them work somehow'. Pentax says 'scrap your existing investment and start over with used lenses from eBay' (or 'put them on a Q and turn them all into telephotos...") Man, such a compelling sales pitch.

I'm not sure in what bizarro universe a user of Brand X who isn't invested in Brand Y's glass, would you pick the one MILC that only runs Brand Y's lens, and nothing else. Why? To avoid tempting yourself with equally cheap FD lenses? So you have to run an adapter anyway to use M42 lenses? The only people looking to lock themselves into K-mount legacy glass are people already locked into K-mount legacy glass.

Again, I will not add an adapter to a Pentax camera to mount Pentax lenses. Screw that. If I have to adapt the camera I'll just move to Nikon and adapt their camera.

[Kunzite]

Not at all - far from it. An adapter is an adapter. I don't want to adapt my camera to suit my lenses, which is where I have my money. I want my camera to natively support all the lenses I own that have the same flange ears as the mount.

Otherwise why bother with Pentax at all - just bite the bullet and join the Nikon juggernaut.

I absolutely agree, including the join the Nikon part (however, I'm certain Pentax won't do such a crazy thing - and their actions and declarations proves they aren't).

junyo would like Pentax to be another Sony, or so it seems. However, all those MILC pioneers have something in common, something that Pentax "lacks": they failed at DSLRs. Olympus thought marketing can compensate a smaller sensor, Samsung couldn't care less about their partnership with Pentax and Sony tried to flood the market with a myriad similar models. Of course, marketing again tells us DSLRs are "obsolete" and destined to be replaced with the MILC wonder cameras.

[Blue]

Again, I will not add an adapter to a Pentax camera to mount Pentax lenses. Screw that. If I have to adapt the camera I'll just move to Nikon and adapt their camera.

And you can mount your snark, too.

Its not that easy to adapt Pentax to Nikon. It is for Canon and m4/3 etc.

[monochrome]

junyo would like Pentax to be another Sony, or so it seems

junyo also forgets that Pentax has the Q system - a mirrorless camera with excellent IQ that can (or will be able to) mount virtually any lens on earth. We could discuss the sensor decision in the Q all day long, but it appears to me that Pentax is actually so far ahead of the game that few people get it yet.

[VladimirYo]

but it appears to me that Pentax is actually so far ahead of the game that few people get it yet.

Do you think that sensors will be better and better in small size?

[monochrome]

Do you think that sensors will be better and better in small size?

Well of course the general rule is technology increases in capacity and decreases in size over time. The direct question, whether a PnS-sized sensor will to increase in quality is more one of whether sensor manufacturers continue to invest in developing those sensors and whether there continues to be a market for cameras that use them.

[junyo]

Pentax was looking for a system that meets the needs of their existing user base. a smaller system that requires adapters for their DA LTD for example was not in the cards.

I was responding specifically to the idea that the K01 was for anyone other than the existing Pentax user base, which you apparently agree with. I understand exactly why Pentax did it:

Again, I will not add an adapter to a Pentax camera to mount Pentax lenses. Screw that. If I have to adapt the camera I'll just move to Nikon and adapt their camera.

And I'm guy who hates Pentax, mind you. If they asked loyal customer buy an adapter with the camera, screw them, he's going to Nikon.

And that's why the existing Pentax user base is killing Pentax. As a company, it's long term suicide to survive on the whim of a bunch of people holding on to mountains of glass who want innovative new products at rock bottom prices. Pentax is going to introduce a new FF camera, the prime market for which have been squirreling away lenses for decades, which pretty much insures minor after purchase lens sales. Why exactly?

junyo would like Pentax to be another Sony, or so it seems. However, all those MILC pioneers have something in common, something that Pentax "lacks": they failed at DSLRs. Olympus thought marketing can compensate a smaller sensor, Samsung couldn't care less about their partnership with Pentax and Sony tried to flood the market with a myriad similar models. Of course, marketing again tells us DSLRs are "obsolete" and destined to be replaced with the MILC wonder cameras.

Pentax isn't doing so great at DSLR's, unless 'success' means being a distant 3rd/4th and being so profitable you get sold every couple of years, and can't field a larger than 2 DSLR lineup, excluding your mega upmarket unit, that sells in tiny quantities. Sony, for a failure, has a better higher end camera lineup, actually makes money selling cameras, and makes money every time Pentax or Nikon sells a camera. So yeah, Pentax being Sony would be an upgrade from my prospective.

junyo also forgets that Pentax has the Q system - a mirrorless camera with excellent IQ that can (or will be able to) mount virtually any lens on earth. We could discuss the sensor decision in the Q all day long, but it appears to me that Pentax is actually so far ahead of the game that few people get it yet.

In your rush to insult me, you've now resorted to lying. I mentioned the Q by name "or 'put them on a Q and turn them all into telephotos...". Technical exercise notwithstanding, outside of the Pentax echo chamber, the Q is a not particularly well selling joke.

Again, this forum sometime verges on being a piece of performance art. I want Pentax that steals customers from other brands and is available everywhere. I want a Pentax that moves units by the boatload. And making niche products for a limited audience and then trying to mass market them isn't how any of that happens. Now back to your regularly scheduled jerking off about how Pentax's 5% and lack of retail outlets has Canikon running scared and how a 150MP FF (M42 mount, yay!) is being released tomorrow.