[Aristophanes]

That isn't the only reason that people go for mirrrorless. More importantly, it isn't the only reason that camera makers go for mirrorless, in spite of doubts among their users.

Here is a recent article with a provocative title "The demise of the DSLR" but making some useful points about both users and makers. The comments are worth reading too.

I've never been one for replacement theories. I see the DSLR segment getting smaller. Not everyone wants a small camera but there is generally more market elasticity with a smaller form factor.

The whole moving parts thing is a bit of a canard. If you want a real OVF experience because an EVF will not do then there is going to be more moving parts. But the DSLR is such a sunk cost, sophisticated product there may not be much room for improvement, but it may be low enough cost already. Keep in mind the mirror box system itself originally shoved aside simpler, much cheaper systems.

So far the least profitable companies are Olympus and Fuji, while Canon and Nikon are the most profitable. The market will fracture, no doubt, with the DSLR share shrinking. As in the past most of us will own 2 cameras (Canon and Olympus used to advertise their RF and SLR products together sometimes) and most brands want you to do that in-house. Nikon FX-DX-CX, Canon EOS and EOS-M. And so on.

[Billy Joe]

Ricoh has publicly stated that they want to compete directly with Canon & Nikon in the professional market and they are using Pentax to attempt that goal. I say attempt, because Sony has said the same thing and it hasn't really worked out for them.

Why would they bury Pentax? That makes absolutely no sense.

Yeah, but Sony does not have deep pockets like Ricoh...

[Aristophanes]

Yeah, but Sony does not have deep pockets like Ricoh...

Huh?

Sony is huge. Running in red ink with unhappy shareholders, but is a massive conglomerate.

[Barry Pearson]

DA 40 XS on the adapter is shorter than the 06 zoom.

K to Q adapter: 145 grams
DA 40mm XS: 52 grams

06 Telephoto zoom: 90 grams.

Weight and flexibility (15mm to 45mm) and convenience are important factors. (Does the DA 40 XS on the K to Q converter auto-focus?)

[glanglois]

Yeah, but Sony does not have deep pockets like Ricoh...

Sony has deep pockets from only the insurance/financial and entertainment activities, mostly insurance/financial. The consumer electronics unit (including camera-related gear) continues to lose a lot of money.

Vocal shareholders are calling for the consumer electronics piece to be sold/spun off - it's a drag on corporate profits and therefore constrains the profitable investments that Sony wants to make in other areas.

I expect that major Sony investors are continuing losing interest in dumping even more money into money-losing televisions, cameras, etc. and will demand cutbacks or eliminations of those lines fairly soon. Please note: "fairly soon" to an American like me is rather different than "fairly soon" to a very large, bureaucratic Japanese corporation.

PS: The business-to-business sensor market is a far different business than consumer "stuff".

[asaru]

Pentax as a force for anything died when the Asahi Optical Company ceased to exist.

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

Pentax as a force for anything died when the Asahi Optical Company ceased to exist.

I was going to make a comment on this, but then I sighed and thought, "why bother?". Seems to me there are two sorts of people in the world in general, and this forum in particular. Those who make the best of what they have, and those who are not satisfied with anything. I struggle to think of what photographic need I have that my K-5 cannot meet. I wish I had one when I was a young man: my photography would have been orders of magnitude better. I appreciate that there are cameras out there that are perhaps more capable than the K-5 for some uses (fast tracking autofocus comes to mind), but this doesn't hold me back in the slightest, as such is not paramount to my needs. What my K-5 does give me is a phenomenally capable camera, with a set of small, very decent prime lenses and not-too-big zooms that I can happily trot about with all day without feeling I'm lugging a sack of bricks around. If Pentax (or third-party lens makers) doesn't give you what you absolutely need, look elsewhere.

Stop complaining, start taking the great pictures your gear is capable of!!

[Billy Joe]

"I was going to make a comment on this, but then I sighed and thought, "why bother?".................................................................................

That is my favorite post ever...

[philbaum]

Sony has deep pockets from only the insurance/financial and entertainment activities, mostly insurance/financial. The consumer electronics unit (including camera-related gear) continues to lose a lot of money.

Vocal shareholders are calling for the consumer electronics piece to be sold/spun off - it's a drag on corporate profits and therefore constrains the profitable investments that Sony wants to make in other areas.

Without all the money made from electronics manufacturing over the years, there would be no insurance financial or entertainment activities. But Sony managers have received the message about making a profit, here's a quote from a camera reviewer about the new A3000 camera:

Since Sony launched its first mirrorless cameras -- the Alpha NEX-3 and NEX-5 -- back in early 2010, its E-mount has gone on to become extremely popular. With the Sony A3000, the consumer electronics giant asks -- and answers -- a question: Does the typical mirrorless form factor cause some photographers to look elsewhere?

After all, mirrorless cameras typically focus on pared-down size, and can be less comfortable in-hand than an SLR due to smaller grips. They also don't look like the cameras pros use. Sony clearly thinks there's some merit to the argument that potential mirrorless customers want SLR-like handling, and it's launched the incredibly affordable A3000 to help coax those photographers to make the leap away from a mirror-based camera.

Sony A3000 review: First impressions of the SLR-like, incredibly affordable E-mount mirrorless camera

Sony's camera manufacturers have taken decisive action with the less popular SLT camera line and pretty much looks like it'll be remodeled into e-mount cameras like the A3000. Further, the Nex cameras were lacking e-mount zoom lenses to supplement the primes. With a recent announcement of several zooms, its clear that Sony is backing the e-mount's popularity and responding to requests from its consumer base.

When i read that Pentax was not going to make any successor to the K01, I decided to try out the Nex line, and am glad i did. The Nex cameras are an excellent complement to my K5. With recent Nikon announcements, its clear that Nikon, Canon, and Pentax (with the notable exception of the Q cameras), hit duds with their initial attempts at mirrorless ILCs. IMO, Sony hit a home run with their unusual Nex line and they continue to hone it.

I'm convinced that Ricoh is a good home for Pentax cameras and recent announcements indicate that progressive steps are being taken, in the same way as Sony is honing the Nex line. Some people believe that all problems should be solved in one year's time, but thats seldom consistent with reality, IMO.

PS - i'm not pushing the A3000 at all, i quote the review of it only for what it says about Sony's overall strategy. Personally, i'm not interested in the A3000.

[thibs]

Sony's camera manufacturers have taken decisive action with the less popular SLT camera line and pretty much looks like it'll be remodeled into e-mount cameras like the A3000.

Common, they just priced a NEX at a price it should have got from the beginning (IMO of course).

Though it sports an "a-serie" name, users will have fun using A-mount on the cam and notice it doesn't work.
On a nomenclature point of view, this is laughable. Hear me, I completely understand what and why they are doing this. But this is also very confusing IMO.

[Aristophanes]

Nikon's mirrorless 1 series hit #1 in sales in Japan over all other brands.

Frankly, mirrorless has not done all that well outside of Asia, even the NEX. Their traction has been slow for a few reasons:

- Value. Prices have been too high for what you get and what you lose (OVF).
-Size. Not everyone wants a small form factor.
- Sensor size. Fuji and Sony get it right, but m43 is increasingly looking like the middle child. Nikon 1 at least makes a serious case do the smaller sensor.
- ILC. Guess what? Maybe more people want a bridge camera?
- Less "pro". No doubt this has been a factor.

[philbaum]

Common, they just priced a NEX at a price it should have got from the beginning (IMO of course).

Though it sports an "a-serie" name, users will have fun using A-mount on the cam and notice it doesn't work.
On a nomenclature point of view, this is laughable. Hear me, I completely understand what and why they are doing this. But this is also very confusing IMO.

Agreed. Its a mystery why they used the Alpha designation to apply to both their large DSLRs and the Nex. The Nex really had little in common with the main ALpha series, no IBIS, small form factor, No evf in many cases, smaller mount, etc.

Nikon's mirrorless 1 series hit #1 in sales in Japan over all other brands.

Frankly, mirrorless has not done all that well outside of Asia, even the NEX. Their traction has been slow for a few reasons:

- Value. Prices have been too high for what you get and what you lose (OVF).
-Size. Not everyone wants a small form factor.
- Sensor size. Fuji and Sony get it right, but m43 is increasingly looking like the middle child. Nikon 1 at least makes a serious case do the smaller sensor.
- ILC. Guess what? Maybe more people want a bridge camera?
- Less "pro". No doubt this has been a factor.

I had the impression N1 was doing well, at least many thought highly of its quick AF. But here's the announcement of Nikon's rethinking the N1:
Nikon rethinks 1 System and cuts 2013 forecast citing poor sales: Digital Photography Review

I agree with you, the value of these higher priced but smaller bodies is not there when you look at what the standard DSLR carries. And there was no good reason for that, IMO. For example, if Sony had put their Alpha menu system into the Nex vice their madeup confusing menu system that they thought would appeal to PS owners, their cameras would have rated higher. It was probably no more cost to reuse an existing well function menu system, but they chose to put in a difficult one instead. Silly. (I'll hand it to Sony however on the new RX100 Mk II, they put in a menu system designed to appeal to enthusiasts) Pentax did far better with the K01, reusing their excellent DSLR menu system.

Nevertheless, I like the smaller size and weight - now have 2 of those danged Nex cameras.

Bridge cameras - my older brother just bought one as he really wanted the 24x zoom of the Panasonic. Tiny little sensor however. I guess i'm an APS sensor SNOB

[JPT]

Nikon's mirrorless 1 series hit #1 in sales in Japan over all other brands.

Frankly, mirrorless has not done all that well outside of Asia, even the NEX. Their traction has been slow for a few reasons:

- Value. Prices have been too high for what you get and what you lose (OVF).
-Size. Not everyone wants a small form factor.
- Sensor size. Fuji and Sony get it right, but m43 is increasingly looking like the middle child. Nikon 1 at least makes a serious case do the smaller sensor.
- ILC. Guess what? Maybe more people want a bridge camera?
- Less "pro". No doubt this has been a factor.

It may be true that the J1 was the best-selling individual model in Japan last year, but that was because almost all Nikon 1 sales were consolidated into the one body. The best selling manufacturer overall was Olympus (shared between many new and old models on the market), with Sony second. As a system m4/3 was the biggest seller in Japan by some margin. You can still find plenty of J1s, V1s and J2s on sale in Japan, so I don't think Nikon will be happy with its performance.

People in Asia appear to want smaller cameras with large sensors. Asia accounts of 4bn of the 7bn people on this earth, has the second largest nominal GDP of any continent after Europe and the highest by purchasing power parity. So, saying they aren't very popular outside Asia is a strange way of dismissing the attraction of smaller cameras. Especially since Ricoh makes most of its money in Japan, the thought of being left out of a big chunk of the home market must be a cause for concern.

But I used the phrase "smaller cameras", because I think the way this discussion is being framed as "mirrorless vs. reflex" is kind of false and typical of the way internet discussions go these days - tech websites hype a new technology, and then commenters pick their side and start arguing over it. In reality, users want certain benefits and it's up to manufacturers to decide how to deliver them. If you want a small camera with a big sensor, a mirror won't fit, so manufacturers don't have a choice there. If you are making a large camera, there is a choice and so far most companies have decided that the reflex design will work best. If the technology develops, they will of course reconsider.

My current ideal camera would be the size and shape of the MZ-3 to use with the Limited lenses. This seems to be on the border where either reflex or mirrorless or reflex technology would make most sense. The camera could probably be smaller overall and have a bigger viewfinder with mirrorless but on the other hand the OVF would be more pleasant to use in sunlight. If Ricoh made such a camera, I would respect their design decisions and at least look at it with an open mind, regardless of what technological solution they chose. Ultimately, I want the camera to do something for me and I don't care how it does it.

[asaru]

Pentax as a force for anything died when the Asahi Optical Company ceased to exist.

I was going to make a comment on this, but then I sighed and thought, "why bother?". Seems to me there are two sorts of people in the world in general, and this forum in particular. Those who make the best of what they have, and those who are not satisfied with anything. I struggle to think of what photographic need I have that my K-5 cannot meet. I wish I had one when I was a young man: my photography would have been orders of magnitude better. I appreciate that there are cameras out there that are perhaps more capable than the K-5 for some uses (fast tracking autofocus comes to mind), but this doesn't hold me back in the slightest, as such is not paramount to my needs. What my K-5 does give me is a phenomenally capable camera, with a set of small, very decent prime lenses and not-too-big zooms that I can happily trot about with all day without feeling I'm lugging a sack of bricks around. If Pentax (or third-party lens makers) doesn't give you what you absolutely need, look elsewhere.

Stop complaining, start taking the great pictures your gear is capable of!!

A rather long comment for someone who didn't want to bother -- especially as a reply to a single sentence.

It's OK, I have enough gear to keep me going -- and I rather like the fact none of it was built after 1985. That's all. Compared to Asahi Pentax, however, Ricoh has, quite literally, done very little for photography. I don't see that changing.

Now excuse me. I have better things to do than to argue with people who need to justify their toys to strangers.

[monochrome]

Now excuse me. I have better things to do than to argue with people who need to justify their toys to strangers

Uhm, that was a bit bold, I'd say.