[magkelly]

I'm a professional, cough, and I loathe using a grip. Not everyone wants one integrated and in fact for me it would be a reason NOT to buy. Optional suits me better. If people want them fine, but I don't. A grip just gets in my way working, seriously. Just give me extra batteries handy and forget about it...

[VoiceOfReason]

I heard Sony is getting into the 8x10 format digital market. Pentax is doomed. DOOMED! So sell me your good lenses cheap before they are only worth their weight in scrap metal.

[Andi Lo]

But does it have a coffee maker built in? The bulge on the K-3 is a teeny-tiny coffee maker, Nikon and Canon are doomed.

That reminds me of this

[bossa]

Pentax could easily bring out a new FF body right now as long as the mount wasn't k-mount. They could convert their existing FF lenses to the new mount thus cutting out 3rd party lens makers initially and hence make money off their own available lenses.
Whilst I think that is unlikely I do believe a new Pentax FF will be a modular SLR system like the LX (or even a mirrorless 645D Mk2 with a FF crop mode) with a possible mirrorless FF (K-5ish sized) low end model being eventually available as well.

Regarding innovation:
Improving or bypassing weak existing tech is always the consideration with weighted financial values acting as a filter.

Mirrorless and with on-sensor PDAF comes to mind as offering the most obvious cost cutting combined with the greatest potential for improved performance. An EVF of some description would obviously be next on this path but not necessarily built-in initially (as per the K-01).
Removing built-in lens motors and opting for a quiet screw drive would also help with the size of new FF lenses although it wouldn't seem all that glamorous.

[bossa]

Also, you do realize that eliminating the mirror on the 645d would result in virtually no size reduction, considering the registration distance of the lenses, don't you?

Of course I do but seeing that there really isn't a huge number of *new* lenses available for it I think it'd be worth considering an adapter for those and adding new lenses accordingly and moving on.

The more invested Pentax become in a redundant form factor the harder it will be to change up later.

I realize there are a number of issues to overcome if they went the mirrorless route but I believe it would be advantageous in the longer term if they did, even if it means waiting another year or so for the EVF tech to improve.

A mirrorless 645DMk2 with a shallow body form could allow the use of FF lenses in a crop mode for starters thus helping to transition to the format.

[Mazhe]

And Now for Something Completely Different

I'd re-photoshop this with a pentax logo... But it would not even look as nice as the first 645D

[Kunzite]

Pentax could easily bring out a new FF body right now as long as the mount wasn't k-mount. They could convert their existing FF lenses to the new mount thus cutting out 3rd party lens makers initially and hence make money off their own available lenses.
Whilst I think that is unlikely I do believe a new Pentax FF will be a modular SLR system like the LX (or even a mirrorless 645D Mk2 with a FF crop mode) with a possible mirrorless FF (K-5ish sized) low end model being eventually available as well.

Regarding innovation:
Improving or bypassing weak existing tech is always the consideration with weighted financial values acting as a filter.

Mirrorless and with on-sensor PDAF comes to mind as offering the most obvious cost cutting combined with the greatest potential for improved performance. An EVF of some description would obviously be next on this path but not necessarily built-in initially (as per the K-01).
Removing built-in lens motors and opting for a quiet screw drive would also help with the size of new FF lenses although it wouldn't seem all that glamorous.

You mean, it's much easier to make a body and research a new mount and convert K-mount lenses to the new mount, instead of simply making a K-mount body?
And Pentax users would be absolutely delighted with this compatibility break, they would all jump to the new mount encouraged by the lack of third party lenses.

Your idea about "innovating" through "cost cutting" is one I utterly hate. You don't innovate that way, you just cut corners.

[bossa]

Pentax users are the most tight-arsed camera users in the Universe and I suspect very few of them would really care simply because almost none of them own 645D's right now.

[bossa]

You mean, it's much easier to make a body and research a new mount and convert K-mount lenses to the new mount, instead of simply making a K-mount body?
And Pentax users would be absolutely delighted with this compatibility break, they would all jump to the new mount encouraged by the lack of third party lenses.

Your idea about "innovating" through "cost cutting" is one I utterly hate. You don't innovate that way, you just cut corners.

Apart from Australia, and a couple of other countries, there's still a WW recession going on so I suspect "cost cutting" or "streamlining" would be very high on the list of priorities for any manufacturer right now.

But my point was more that mirrorless offers an opportunity to get rid of mechanical parts that add costs to production and which really only serve the OVF at the moment. A decent EVF would make the mirrorbox redundant completely, but hey, I'm thinking out loud so keep your shirt on matey.

PS> But conversely a EFV would also add costs.

[Clavius]

Apart from Australia, and a couple of other countries, there's still a WW recession going on so I suspect "cost cutting" or "streamlining" would be very high on the list of priorities for any manufacturer right now.

But my point was more that mirrorless offers an opportunity to get rid of mechanical parts that add costs to production and which really only serve the OVF at the moment. A decent EVF would make the mirrorbox redundant completely, but hey, I'm thinking out loud so keep your shirt on matey.

PS> But conversely a EFV would also add costs.

Not to mention that a good EVF will ad a lot of costs. That's why implemention of such can't really be seen as cost cutting at all, but should be seen as an enhancement. A step forward to make use of its advantages other then lowering costs. Look at the rumored Sony FF OMD clone... (https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/non-pentax-cameras-canon-nikon-etc/238609...look-like.html) It's beautifull, very ergonomic, sturdy and mounts just about each and every lens out there. It's exactly the 3 points that got me into Pentax: beauty, ergonomics and (backwards) compatibility.

Edit: I'm obviously not an engineer, but the fact that there are no AF adapters from other mounts to E-mount makes me assume it's probably an egineering nightmare. But affordable AF adapters would work in Sony's advantage. The market for those is bigger then E-mount market itself, as it will pull lots of people over. Imagine being able to just use your precious KAF lenses (or canon or nikon lenses AF lenses) on E-mount. As a Sony user you then wouldn't have to stay with one foot in your old brand, because you have some nice lenses of them laying around.

[Barry Pearson]

You mean, it's much easier to make a body and research a new mount and convert K-mount lenses to the new mount, instead of simply making a K-mount body?
And Pentax users would be absolutely delighted with this compatibility break, they would all jump to the new mount encouraged by the lack of third party lenses.

Your idea about "innovating" through "cost cutting" is one I utterly hate. You don't innovate that way, you just cut corners.

I want Ricoh/Pentax to take a strategic view of its K-mount, and not drive down a blind alley that they (and we) will regret later. And I want their next camera to be a step along that strategic route. If this makes it more expensive, I'll still buy it as long as it offers me clear advantages over my K-5IIs. Such a camera would give me confidence to remain with Pentax.

I do believe that sooner or later Ricoh/Pentax will launch an EVF camera, and may use a short registration mount. But I would expect them to provide an effective (glass-less) converter to carry existing lenses over. It needs to be part of a strategy, not a tactic to cater for (hopefully) temporary financial conditions.

If Ricoh/Pentax aims down at a lowish price, I will not be able to get the camera I want from them. To encourage people like me to stay with them, they need to aim up to cater for our ever-increasing requirements. (I accept that people like me are only a small part of the market. But there is nothing to stop Ricoh/Pentax offering a 2nd-tier model for cost-conscious people, as they and everyone else does at the moment. It may irritate some people that they have become part of the 2nd-tier market).

[Uluru]

If Ricoh/Pentax aims down at a lowish price, I will not be able to get the camera I want from them. To encourage people like me to stay with them, they need to aim up to cater for our ever-increasing requirements.

K50 is about $700, to $770 with a kit lens. K-3 is rumoured to be $1300.
I hate the idea of having that wide gap of more than $550, filled with no K-mount camera at all.

And we've never had a camera filling that price range, which I find absurd.

If they want people to stay with the brand, get some better lenses and not only colourful kit plastic, add one more new body, seriously, in between K50 and the K-3. It doesn't need to be K50 / K-3 shaped. It can borrow some retro elements, and make it a contender with Oly Pen, Fuji XPro, etc.

[thibs]

Geez Uluru what's the problem with you since 2 days ago, you moan about everything....

Who said the K5-II would go away?

K500 - K50 - K5-II - K3

Seems allright to me, as long as they can keep prices sufficiently apart.

[Mistral75]

(...)

Edit: I'm obviously not an engineer, but the fact that there are no AF adapters from other mounts to E-mount makes me assume it's probably an engineering nightmare. But affordable AF adapters would work in Sony's advantage. The market for those is bigger then E-mount market itself, as it will pull lots of people over. Imagine being able to just use your precious KAF lenses (or canon or nikon lenses AF lenses) on E-mount. As a Sony user you then wouldn't have to stay with one foot in your old brand, because you have some nice lenses of them laying around.

There are, for instance for Sony's A-mount lenses and Canon's EF mount lenses. There is also an AF adapter to use F-mount Nikkor lenses on Nikon 1 bodies, another one to use Canon EF and EFS on EOS M and a third one to use 4/3 lenses on Panasonic and Olympus µ4/3 bodies.

When, as a third party, you want to design an adapter to use some manufacturer's lenses on some other manufacturer's bodies, it's a bit cumbersome since OEM jealously protect their interests and don't give access to their protocols.

Sony are a bit ahead of that: taking into account the relatively limited number of their E mount lenses and in order to increase the E mount's attractiveness, they grant a licence giving access to any and all specifications of the E mount to whatever manufacturer of lenses or adapters asks for it.

[Clavius]

There are, for instance for Sony's A-mount lenses and Canon's EF mount lenses. There is also an AF adapter to use F-mount Nikkor lenses on Nikon 1 bodies, another one to use Canon EF and EFS on EOS M and a third one to use 4/3 lenses on Panasonic and Olympus µ4/3 bodies.

When, as a third party, you want to design an adapter to use some manufacturer's lenses on some other manufacturer's bodies, it's a bit cumbersome since OEM jealously protect their interests and don't give access to their protocols.

Sony are a bit ahead of that: taking into account the relatively limited number of their E mount lenses and in order to increase the E mount's attractiveness, they grant a licence giving access to any and all specifications of the E mount to whatever manufacturer of lenses or adapters asks for it.

Ok, so it should be possible for Sony to market an AF PK to E adapter? If they do that, and market that pretty FF OMD-clone then there will be more people jumping then ever.