[mecrox]

I think you missed the point in your haste to pen a put-down on Apple. However, the metaphor was a poor one in the first place, because it assumed a mechanical solution was somehow inherently inferior in an age fascinated with electronics. In engineering, the simpler solution is often the more robust, no matter how unsophisticated it might look to those steeped in the narrowness of specialisation. I do realise, though, that if one's only tool is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.

Lol, shurely a simile? Or maybe not. You make a very good point. An extremely talented photographer in my town - see here - produces images of stunning quality using old 10" x 8" plate cameras, MF film cameras and the like. However, we live in an age when electronics has trumped all - because customers want the convenience and because manufacturers can produce circuit boards without moving parts (no servicing) in huge quantities for very little. I suppose an example would be wifi. No one has to use it. You can still take the card from your camera and put it into a PC or printer if you have one. But it's pretty clear which way the market has voted now even if in some cases it is going to mean even more lock-in with chipped lenses and software cages.

So whether one likes Apple - I'm not a great fan - they hit a goldmine by realizing before others that mechanical solutions are inherently inferior in an age fascinated with electronics - if you are a corporation after sales and profit. For each of us as individuals, the idea is pretty darn meaningless and absurd.

---

Last edited by mecrox; 08-27-2013 at 08:10 AM.

[gazonk]

Well, that's one opinion, but 400 USD for the body and 150 USD for a Chinese focal reducer, it looks to me like like the perfect camera for full frame M42 lenses Unlike the funky NEX wafer cameras nor the ubiquitous consumer APS-C DSLRs on the market.

How can a camera with so many ergonomic compromises to keep costs down be "perfect" (have a look at the preview over at dpr)? Except if you're on a very tight budget, as I said.

[Uluru]

So, he is to blame because Pentax and Ricoh people had different views? I'm sure he also caused the global economic crisis and the Fukushima disaster...

No, it can mean that behind the polished up outfit he could be just a company's hitman, who, after the work in Japan to fit the 'round peg' in a square hole, came to US to complete a new assignment. The fact he is the one that talks Ricoh's vision in English language may mean Ricoh does not inform its Pentax people at all, and many of them have left too. That's what we know from people who had contacts with Pentax USA.
Of course this may be not true, but I think we shouldn't accept the first 'pretty guy' picture either.

[konraDarnok]

How can a camera with so many ergonomic compromises to keep costs down be "perfect" (have a look at the preview over at dpr)? Except if you're on a very tight budget, as I said.

I stated the advantages I saw. You haven't cited any specific drawbacks you care about. It's the cheapest way to use old full frame lenses thus far. Looks awfully keen to me.

[monochrome]

So we may also conclude he wasn't the best man for the job?

I can tell you from experience that once-proud companies, brought low by management errors, when acquired by an aggressive newcomer with new ideas of how to manage (and obtain a better return on embedded capital) are deeply resistant to change. Nearly patholgically resistant. The acquired employees go through a form of the 5 Stages of Grief:

1. Denial
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance and Renewal

It took the new owners of my conmpany literally four years to overcome our resistance to their thinking (and even now our acceptance is at best merely grudging - we have to accept or we have to leave. It is that simple).

Buyers always think they are going to ride in and rescue the new company and will be welcomed and their policies embraced immediately. They are always surprised at the amount of resistance. They, also, have to let go of some of their identity to form something new, which is even harder for them.

They often suffer from a, "WE bought YOU, so shut up and do it," attitude.

[gazonk]

I stated the advantages I saw. You haven't cited any specific drawbacks you care about. It's the cheapest way to use old full frame lenses thus far. Looks awfully keen to me.

I pointed you to dpreview, but I can give you a few quotes:

"The LCD is more coarse than we're used to seeing these days, with disappointingly low 230,400-dot resolution; its 3-inch size amplifies the effect. The small EVF is also disappointing, and what appears to be a rubber pad around the outside is actually hard plastic, a hazard to glasses-wearers."

"Perhaps the most glaring miscue is that there's no infrared proximity sensor to switch between the LCD and EVF. "

"Reaching the Finder/LCD selection button over top of the mode dial is difficult thanks to the height of the dial."

[konraDarnok]

I pointed you to dpreview, but I can give you a few quotes:

"The LCD is more coarse than we're used to seeing these days, with disappointingly low 230,400-dot resolution; its 3-inch size amplifies the effect. The small EVF is also disappointing, and what appears to be a rubber pad around the outside is actually hard plastic, a hazard to glasses-wearers."

"Perhaps the most glaring miscue is that there's no infrared proximity sensor to switch between the LCD and EVF. "

"Reaching the Finder/LCD selection button over top of the mode dial is difficult thanks to the height of the dial."

I read the preview, and those points do not effect my assessment that this is very attractive camera to shoot 40 year old full frame glass with a telecompressor.

[gazonk]

I read the preview, and those points do not effect my assessment that this is very attractive camera to shoot 40 year old full frame glass with a telecompressor.

YMMV, as always...

[RobA_Oz]

Lol, shurely a simile? Or maybe not.

Simile is correct, I have to admit on rereading your post.

So whether one likes Apple - I'm not a great fan - they hit a goldmine by realizing before others that mechanical solutions are inherently inferior in an age fascinated with electronics - if you are a corporation after sales and profit. For each of us as individuals, the idea is pretty darn meaningless and absurd.

I think Apple's success was in realising that not everyone (probably most consumers) is a geek who likes to poke around in the code, or use a command line to get things done, or even push on a button to eject a disc, let alone connect an external device physically. However, they couldn't have succeeded unless they could do it at an acceptable price, in spite of what some might like to believe.

However, electronics is also removing one of our major senses from our interaction with our devices, and that is touch. Even people who weren't brought up with mechanical cameras find appeal in the tactility of a DSLR, which includes changing lenses, as well as just enjoying the pleasant sensation of well-crafted wheel controls or buttons, or even the texture of a good grip. Of course, if you don't appreciate that making a good picture takes time and effort, convenience trumps every time. I don't think the purported A-mount would make Pentax's fortune, in part because of the relatively small number of users who would appreciate its physicality, but it probably wouldn't hurt their reputation, either, if properly designed and presented.

[anthony mazzeri]

The big news and what was the uniqueness of this new system is the "Pentaflex" module, also purchased separately. Modern interpretation of Leica Visoflex the same time that his name refers to Asahiflex (see the first 60 years of Asahiflex in 2012), it has a mirror box, a mirror, an optical viewfinder, a flash shoe, a module AF phase detection, motor control autofocus targets K-mount and motor control cam adjustment of their diaphragm.

The module includes a bayonet Pentaflex K. It is mounted on the base unit which was previously removed the electronic viewfinder and snaps / lock in front of the bayonet A and above the rail mounting electronic viewfinder.

In other words, it lets you go a mirrorless A-mount DSLR in a traditional frame K.

If the Pentaflex turns the mirrorless + EVF Pentax A into a prism + viewfinder Pentax K, I assume that this is only possible because of the extra flange distance required by the K-mount allows the mirror to fit as per usual. Inversely, there can be no such optional prism and viewfinder for the new short-flange Pentax A lenses.

So in a nutshell, those who want to shoot full frame (or APSC in crop mode) but still use an optical viewfinder must stick with their old K mount lenses, while those who shoot full frame with the new A mount lenses can only do so using an EVF.

We can probably take this Pentaflex option as a sign then that no more full frame K mount lenses will be made as they commit fully to the A mount for the future. Otherwise why go to all the trouble to make it as an optional module on the Pentax A instead of just as a separate standalone full frame K mount camera? Because the latter would fuel expectations for new full frame K mount lenses to go with the new camera. The adapter option makes it clear it's just for retro fitting legacy lenses only - legacy as in they don't make them any more.

[anthony mazzeri]

I think Apple's success was in realising that not everyone (probably most consumers) is a geek who likes to poke around in the code, or use a command line to get things done, or even push on a button to eject a disc, let alone connect an external device physically. However, they couldn't have succeeded unless they could do it at an acceptable price, in spite of what some might like to believe.

Actually, Apple's success was founded purely on geeks. The Apple I was just a DIY circuit board. The Apple ][ which made Apple rich (the first time) was also a geek's dream with expansion slots and programming and Apple ][ users had the top off and wires and cables coming out of their machines more than even the most avid PC hacker has the casing off their gaming towers.

What you're talking about is actually Steve Jobs' dream to make computers easy to use consumer devices as commonplace as TVs in every home - which actually almost led to Apple's destruction and ruination (the first time). And got Jobs fired from his own company due to the poor Macintosh sales.

The problem was the computer in those early days was tied to production rather than consumption. So Macs were successful selling only to those non-geeks using it to create stuff with it like graphics or desktop publishers etc. He eventually achieved his dream wth the G3 iMac (+ iTunes) in 1999 and the accompanying iPod, using music as the main 'consumer' driving force. It just wasn't possible without that consumer content, so his real achievement was actually getting the greedy and conservative music industry on board to start his revolution, not actually any piece of hardware Apple could make. And so on it all goes now with more consumer products like the iPhone and iPad etc, it's all driven now by content and consumption.

So now the tables are completely turned and the production (as opposed to consumer) computers are the ones not selling as well any more. The new Mac Pro due to be released next month is actually the first new piece of workstation hardware from Apple since 2007, and it's almost like they're just doing it for old time's sake. They'll even be making them in the USA like the Apple ][ used to be, as they don't envisage they'll be selling that many to be needing a large production line.

[Barry Pearson]

If the Pentaflex turns the mirrorless + EVF Pentax A into a prism + viewfinder Pentax K, I assume that this is only possible because of the extra flange distance required by the K-mount allows the mirror to fit as per usual. Inversely, there can be no such optional prism and viewfinder for the new short-flange Pentax A lenses.

So in a nutshell, those who want to shoot full frame (or APSC in crop mode) but still use an optical viewfinder must stick with their old K mount lenses, while those who shoot full frame with the new A mount lenses can only do so using an EVF.

We can probably take this Pentaflex option as a sign then that no more full frame K mount lenses will be made as they commit fully to the A mount for the future. Otherwise why go to all the trouble to make it as an optional module on the Pentax A instead of just as a separate standalone full frame K mount camera? Because the latter would fuel expectations for new full frame K mount lenses to go with the new camera. The adapter option makes it clear it's just for retro fitting legacy lenses only - legacy as in they don't make them any more.

The more I think about that Pentaflex, the less likely it appears. As others have pointed out, there doesn't appear to be enough distance between a new flange position and the current flange position for the light to go from the mirror up to the screen. Even with a mirror and screen restricted to APS-C use this appears hard. But with a mirror and screen for FF, needing a larger amount of the current flange distance, it would be even harder. I suspect there would have to be so many compromises that anyone who needed an OVF would go elsewhere rather than use a Pentaflex. (Which makes me wonder again if this is a hoax that started off a bit plausible but then went too far!)

But I doubt if all new lenses would be only for the new flange distance. That would reduce their sales unnecessarily if there were no specific advantages in using the new distance. Sigma and others would probably still be selling into that market, and I doubt if Ricoh/Pentax would want to give it up. After all, Ricoh/Pentax are still launching lenses that don't even exploit all the features of the current K-mount.

[Asahiflex]

It's good to realize that the Leica Visoflex was only meant for special long Visoflex lenses, when a rangefinder was unusable for framing and focusing. So it was not a problem for the mirror mechanism to sit much more to the front of the camera than in a true SLR because the lenses were specifically made for the Visoflex.

Indeed, a SLR attachment in front of a MILC is higly unlikely to happen. Such a contraption would require special lenses which can only be used on that contraption.

[Kunzite]

I should note that Sony's LA-EA2 adapter is not a SLR attachment; the mirror is fixed, thus requiring less space (it doesn't have to cover the full area, either; just the AF points).

[Clavius]

We can probably take this Pentaflex option as a sign then that no more full frame K mount lenses will be made as they commit fully to the A mount for the future. Otherwise why go to all the trouble to make it as an optional module on the Pentax A instead of just as a separate standalone full frame K mount camera? Because the latter would fuel expectations for new full frame K mount lenses to go with the new camera. The adapter option makes it clear it's just for retro fitting legacy lenses only - legacy as in they don't make them any more.

I don't know about that. If they really fully wanted to commit to the A (mirrorless) mount, then they would market a mirrorless camera with good AF adapter for K-mount lenses, and not a modular system that can be either fully mirrorless / A-mount or fully mirrored / K-mount.

If this rumor is true, then it means Pentax doesn't know which way the future is going either. Mirrored or mirrorless. They want to be in on both deals and I can't blame them. Which results in their users being able to be in on both deals as well, guaranteeing backwards compatibility again.

But then I look at the new Sony A3000 again... If removing the mirror, mirrormechanism, mirrorbox, prism, VF optics, focus screen, shims, etc, saves THAT amount of costs... Then why not just buy two seperate systems? Both added up together will probably less expensive then the Pentax system described in this rumor.