Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-29-2012, 10:03 AM - 1 Like   #541
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,168
Anvh, you can propose a new mount all you want, it's not going to happen, aside from the logistics of developing enough new lenses to make a decent release lineup, you put all the legacy users in the position of buying an expensive adapter effectively raising the price of a new body and making competing systems more attractive. Aside form the ability to build marginally faster lenses (that AF systems will have trouble hitting focus on) and allowing he use of other lenses on your brand (so not selling your own lenses or selling less of them). If ther was was ever a way to guarantee shrinking the brand this is it. Oly was a whole other issue, 4/3 was already a failing system comparatively. Canon PO'd a whole generation of users with the FD switch but the breach mount just wouldn't work in the AF world so they had no choice. Eventually it paid off but it hurt them initially. K mount has a very solid base to build from, the reason for current market share numbers is more to do with poor marketing and lack of assortment caused in part by an owner who really just wanted to dump the division with as little investment as possible. Ricoh seems to desire the other direction. with a proper DSLR assortment pending, 2 mirrorless offerings (with supplemental pieces to come I'm sure, and a Medium format system that is a leader in it's sector All they need to do is invest in the system, execute a consistent marketing plan and provide support, It's not easy but it's not brain surgery either. A new mount would mean they may as well have just restarted the Ricoh SLR division

05-29-2012, 10:46 AM   #542
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Rorschach Quote
Maybe, but I've got the primes pretty well covered by older quality lenses already. The 16-50mm would have been perfect for me, without the qc problems of course.
As far as i know it's not QC problem but a design problem...
05-29-2012, 10:47 AM   #543
Pentaxian
aurele's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,907
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
As far as i know it's not QC problem but a design problem...
if you consider SDM as a design part then yes it is a design problem :P

i wish very hard that Pentax will drop SDM and bring DC motor in all their lenses. In fact, i don't even think someone will miss SDM.
05-29-2012, 10:54 AM   #544
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
Anvh, you can propose a new mount all you want, it's not going to happen, aside from the logistics of developing enough new lenses to make a decent release lineup, you put all the legacy users in the position of buying an expensive adapter effectively raising the price of a new body and making competing systems more attractive.
Why are we so focused on the legacy users, i really wonder about the percentage of that.
I think that currently new users with DA lenses out rank the legacy users, but sadly we don't have any numbers.
Beside that why can't they make an adpater that works, and don't come with the price of sony or nikon adapter since they have AF inside.
The original olympus adpter from m4/3 to 4/3 is $146.83.

QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
Aside form the ability to build marginally faster lenses (that AF systems will have trouble hitting focus on) and allowing he use of other lenses on your brand (so not selling your own lenses or selling less of them).
DOF will be the same size as the fast lenses on FF so are you saying that AF won't work on that?

QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
If ther was was ever a way to guarantee shrinking the brand this is it. Oly was a whole other issue, 4/3 was already a failing system comparatively. Canon PO'd a whole generation of users with the FD switch but the breach mount just wouldn't work in the AF world so they had no choice. Eventually it paid off but it hurt them initially. K mount has a very solid base to build from, the reason for current market share numbers is more to do with poor marketing and lack of assortment caused in part by an owner who really just wanted to dump the division with as little investment as possible. Ricoh seems to desire the other direction. with a proper DSLR assortment pending, 2 mirrorless offerings (with supplemental pieces to come I'm sure, and a Medium format system that is a leader in it's sector All they need to do is invest in the system, execute a consistent marketing plan and provide support, It's not easy but it's not brain surgery either. A new mount would mean they may as well have just restarted the Ricoh SLR division
You've forgotten the story where pentax hold on to the M42 for to long and couldn't compete with the rest and they lost a great market share because of this.

I never said the K-mount wasn't good enough for now, i don't mind using it at all for APS-C, i'm only saying that with a specialized mount for APS-C you can directly compete with FF products.
I don't read you're disagreeing with that so we are basically just arguing about the market and i'm in no position to do that so i won't

05-29-2012, 10:57 AM   #545
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by aurele Quote
if you consider SDM as a design part then yes it is a design problem :P

i wish very hard that Pentax will drop SDM and bring DC motor in all their lenses. In fact, i don't even think someone will miss SDM.
No the motor is okay, nothing wrong with that, from what i know it's a misalignment in one of the shafts in the AF that can cause problems over time.
I'm glad they don't use that dual AF system anymore, that was a big mistake if you ask me, making the lens far to complicated for his own good.

DC can't and won't replace SDM, DC doesn't have the torque needed to move the larger elements with the WR.
Besides that we have no proof beside one lens that the DC is any better.
05-29-2012, 11:33 AM   #546
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,168
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Why are we so focused on the legacy users, i really wonder about the percentage of that.
I think that currently new users with DA lenses out rank the legacy users, but sadly we don't have any numbers.
Beside that why can't they make an adpater that works, and don't come with the price of sony or nikon adapter since they have AF inside.
The original olympus adpter from m4/3 to 4/3 is $146.83.


DOF will be the same size as the fast lenses on FF so are you saying that AF won't work on that?


You've forgotten the story where pentax hold on to the M42 for to long and couldn't compete with the rest and they lost a great market share because of this.

I never said the K-mount wasn't good enough for now, i don't mind using it at all for APS-C, i'm only saying that with a specialized mount for APS-C you can directly compete with FF products.
I don't read you're disagreeing with that so we are basically just arguing about the market and i'm in no position to do that so i won't
All AF systems have had trouble with ultra fast lenses hitting the correct focal point , it's more to do with how small an area is in focus versus how large the af focal point is

I'm certain there are a very good number of new users who are entirely DA based as you point out (on a new mount of course they all become legacy users as well BTW)
even if the adapter is $150 like the oly one was then you are saying people will lineup to pay $150 more to buy the Pentax on a new mount so they can use their lenses with an adapter??
I wouldn't, I would continue to use my gear on an old body, sell off the stuff i could get the best return on or couldn't use on a new brand and make a move based on where i perceived the best value is. Personally i don't want a smaller camera than the k5/7 and I definitely don't want an EVF that isn't as good as even a moderate OVF like the K5/K7 one FF OVF is like
As I said If ricoh wanted to go down that route they could just as easily have used the Pentax purchase cost as part of their start up cost and built their own (like Samsung has done, or Panasonic)
The time to have done this has come and gone with the introduction of the K-01, It will never happen in the DSLR line which is the cash cow employing many aspects of design that were cost covered decades ago
There are a lot of reasons for Pentax's decline in the market, mismanagement under the owners prior to hoya, LACK OF MARKETING, then Hoya stripping things down to bare minimums and not investing heavily (though definitely they did do some good work in the body end just not enough of it), killing off dealer networks via unreasonable minimums .....it's a long list. Thing is the mount still has excellent value, Like Nikon they have no need to change the mount to build and develop the brand (Nikon has really made a massive turnaround in the last 4 years)
Ricoh most definitely has a plan as monochrome has said, but i highly doubt it includes the expense and uncertainty of killing of K mount for a new mount so users can more easily use lenses from other brands rather than buying into more pentax lenses
I just can't see it now that the K-01 is out (now if they drop the k-01 there is room to begin the process but i doubt thaqt will happen)
05-29-2012, 11:39 AM   #547
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,428
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Canon FD use 42mm that's FF so the mirror is 34mm long, heigh however you want to call it.
APS-C mirror is 22mm long so that's already 12mm difference, 50% more then you say and this only by looking at the mirror.
So cannon FD mount but instead of using 34mm mirror we use 22mm mirror, and all of a sudden we have 12mm room to move the register from 42mm to 30mm.
Any flaws in this that will account to more then 1mm differnce?

Again: can you show me how those 8mm would bring such a tremendous advantage (compared even to allowing the lens to protrude 8mm further into the mount) that would offset losing all their customers?
good luck to you to proofing that it doesn't and i never talk about customers, i only said it could be a possible other direction to take to compete with FF instead of getting a FF sensor.
The mirror sits in a "landscape" orientation, which coincidentally is also the sensor/frame orientation; please don't tell me you don't know this because I'd have a hard time believing it. So we're talking about the "height" in this orientation, i.e. the shorter side. 24mm for the FF, 15.7 for APS-C (for simplification, we can say the mirror has the same dimensions as the sensor).
You're insisting they should change the mount, you must prove there is a very compelling reason to do it.

The "legacy users" are about 100% of the K-mount customers. You would have to show us reasonable evidence that:
1. Pentax can quickly build a new system from scratch, including those ultra-fast lenses, in a record time. How long would it take even to have something comparable with the K-mount system? At 4-5 lenses per year?
2. Pentax can survive all this time while making heavy losses, since the K-mount would be hit and the new system, nowhere near attractive/complete.
3. Pentax can gain back the people's trust, after screwing them for no apparent reason
4. After all this, Pentax would be in a much better position than if concentrating their efforts into growing the K-mount

Tell us about the M42 story when you see Pentax clinging to their obsolete bayonet mount while all the others switched to something else. There were strong technical reasons why the M42 had to go - the inability to have electric contacts (imprecise alignment), and being slower to use than the bayonet mount.
You failed to provide any compelling argument for completely screwing up their (K-mount) customers. I really don't understand why you insist so much on a terribly flawed idea; are you trolling by any chance?

And yes, we know with absolute certainty it won't happen.
05-29-2012, 11:45 AM   #548
D0n
Banned




Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 530
I'd rather see a square sensor than a different mount....
three scroll wheels..... aperture, shutter and iso
as for the mount... what is the point? the mount is already plenty wide for aps-c.... what can you do with a wider mount that you couldn't do by re-engineering the lenses...
you already got power contacts, electronic contacts (room for plenty more if needed) mechanical connections....
it seems to me that a leaf shutter lens especially for the k-01 is by far more needed than a new mount.

05-29-2012, 12:12 PM   #549
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,168
QuoteOriginally posted by D0n Quote
I'd rather see a square sensor than a different mount....
three scroll wheels..... aperture, shutter and iso
as for the mount... what is the point? the mount is already plenty wide for aps-c.... what can you do with a wider mount that you couldn't do by re-engineering the lenses...
you already got power contacts, electronic contacts (room for plenty more if needed) mechanical connections....
it seems to me that a leaf shutter lens especially for the k-01 is by far more needed than a new mount.
only way to have a square sensor using the existing mount is to limit it to 24x24 so not really a great option, I'd rather see a 24x36 and have a crop option. 6x6 film had the advantage of more real estate then 645 with the ability to crop to 645, or print square but that is limited in application ( and i like 6x6 aqnd 6x7 myself)

the smaller 127 format 4x4 square was almost the square version of 35mm when cropped (still a bit larger but close)

3 scroll wheels i can see, though i would be happy just to be able to assign both wheels when using a pre a lens
05-29-2012, 12:28 PM   #550
Loyal Site Supporter
drougge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Malmö
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 787
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Depends on the lens and the aperture, if you want a large aperture with for example the 85mm then it will never fit inside the K-mount.
Not sure if 50mm lenses go into the mount or not.
Lenses are allowed to go as far into the mount as they can without hitting anything in there, completely without regard to what lens it is. If the lens actually does depends on the lens, but I was talking about what the mount allowed. (This is relevant based on what you quoted, not so much what you said.)

If you want a larger aperture than 1.4 for an 85mm (on APS-C) you want something you don't usually have on FF. (Yes, fine, Pentax once made a slightly faster 135mm.) What you appear to want is a 55mm f/0.95. Maybe.

QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
The 50mm f/1.2 does and the 85mm f/1.4 and most likely also the very long primes and zooms.
But those are FF lenses, now if you want a FF equivalent of those lenses on APS-C what must you do then?
Pentax doesn't still make those lenses. If you want APS-C equivalents I would suggest you probably actually want an FF camera. Faster lenses are more expensive, or conversely, thin DOF is cheaper in a larger format. Buy cameras less often, and afford a lens every year instead of every ten years.

QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
thanks for that info, what mount are you talking about?
I said on the 5D, so obviously that's the mount they use on the 5D, the EF mount.
05-29-2012, 12:34 PM   #551
Loyal Site Supporter
drougge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Malmö
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 787
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
DOF will be the same size as the fast lenses on FF so are you saying that AF won't work on that?
Smaller formats generally require higher precision (in all parts).

QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
Canon PO'd a whole generation of users with the FD switch but the breach mount just wouldn't work in the AF world so they had no choice.
I'm sure their marketing said so, but it's obviously not true. They went to a completely electronic mount, and they most definitely could have added electronics to their old mount, and made cameras that still supported the old (mechanical) aperture control for a few generations. The end result of what they did is probably better (for them), but that doesn't mean the alternative was impossible.
05-29-2012, 12:40 PM   #552
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,497
If I want to mount my Pentax lenses to a full-featured camera with an adapter I can do that already. There are lots of them out there, including the Q. I needn't wait for Pentax to develop a another new mount, new adapter and new camera.

For the last time, if I must buy an adapter to mount my DA and DA* lenses (forget my legacy lenses, I can shoot film. I'm talking about current issue lenses) there's absolutely no reason to stay with Pentax. They'd need to make their cameras at least a 20% better value proposition to make it worth the hassle of buying and owning a Pentax versus Nikon or Canon, availability and support-wise.

I really do not understand why proponents of a new mount won't accept this.

Last edited by monochrome; 05-29-2012 at 01:06 PM.
05-29-2012, 12:49 PM   #553
D0n
Banned




Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 530
if pentax wanted to make the ultimate camera for everybody, they'd ink a deal with Apple.
take the k-01, cut off the back of the camera and mate it to an ipod touch and slap a kmount on front, and install a custom firmware... all controls on the touch screen except for the shutter red and green buttons. I'd buy it..lol!
05-29-2012, 01:04 PM   #554
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,497
QuoteOriginally posted by D0n Quote
if pentax wanted to make the ultimate camera for everybody, they'd ink a deal with Apple.
take the k-01, cut off the back of the camera and mate it to an ipod touch and slap a kmount on front, and install a custom firmware... all controls on the touch screen except for the shutter red and green buttons. I'd buy it..lol!
D0n - Steve Jobs left complete development plans for the next 4 Apple products. One of them is the iCam.
05-29-2012, 01:13 PM   #555
D0n
Banned




Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 530
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
D0n - Steve Jobs left complete development plans for the next 4 Apple products. One of them is the iCam.
yeah but that may simply be a lytro cam insatlled on an Ipod for all we know...
I want a kmount! lol!

hell a q mount on an iphone would rock!

Last edited by D0n; 05-29-2012 at 01:35 PM.
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!
dslr, forum, full-frame, k3, k30, k5n, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why full frame? VoiceOfReason Pentax DSLR Discussion 208 07-28-2012 08:09 AM
K5 vs Full Frame KALAIS Pentax K-5 21 09-24-2011 11:25 AM
Pentax and Full Frame... Shutter-bug Photographic Technique 60 11-03-2010 10:03 AM
Pentax A 50/1.2 on Full Frame aegisphan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 10-28-2010 04:16 PM
Photokina 2010, Pentax and the full frame mystery falconeye Pentax News and Rumors 727 09-03-2010 11:11 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:23 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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