[RonHendriks1966]

I truly do not understand the imperative to change everything to a skinny, shiny hipster plate. Is it Apple deign envy?

I think you can even cramp that sensor in the box off the K-01

New mount on it, only electronic offcourse. No SR. Just the PRIME III inside.

Make it with 4 lenses:
- wide zoom 27-46mm/f5.0
- 55mm/f2.8 standerd lens
- portraitlens 90mm/f2.8
- 150mm/f2.8 telelens.

That is all you need for this. Even Ricoh could do that.

Looks even good I think: http://j.mp/AeTvjB#sthash.81qaTBD0.dpuf

The mount can be smaller then on 645Z because only for the 44x33mm crop sensor.

---

Last edited by RonHendriks1966; 04-19-2014 at 07:41 AM.

[Fogel70]

One bit of bad news. The AF points on this camera are not spread out across the whole frame. The AF system is exactly the same as the K-3 and the AF points are clumped in the middle of the frame.

Of course, this is probably too be expected and still much better than the AF of competing MF systems!

645Z also has CDAF in LV, which most likely cover the whole frame.
This might actually be a killer feature on a camera that often is on tripod. Combined with a Flucard it gets even better, where you just click on the remote screen where you want to focus.

[Mistral75]

I truly do not understand the imperative to change everything to a skinny, shiny hipster plate. Is it Apple deign envy?

They do at Leica anyway, see Leica T to be announced next Thursday .

[JPT]

They do at Leica anyway, see Leica T to be announced next Thursday .

Imagine if the DA Limiteds could be mounted on that body! Unfortunately, it is not possible, so I will have to be satisfied with the K-01. But I can completely understand the appeal of such a small ILC system if the lenses are good enough.

[monochrome]

They do at Leica anyway, see Leica T to be announced next Thursday .

. . . . But I repeat myself.

[Mistral75]

Imagine if the DA Limiteds could be mounted on that body! Unfortunately, it is not possible, so I will have to be satisfied with the K-01. But I can completely understand the appeal of such a small ILC system if the lenses are good enough.

They will be, with the appropriate adapter that will unfortunately add 25+mm to their own length.

The two first lenses announced together with Leica T will be:

- Vario-Elmar-T 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6 Asph and
- Summicron-T 23mm f/2 Asph.

But I am digressing and I wouldn't like monochrome (another Leica! ) having a stroke because of me .

[fretlessdavis]

I still don't understand the market for mirrorless cameras without optical viewfinders. I have yet to meet someone that would be willing to save some weight to lose out on an optical viewfinder. The electronic ones have come a long way, but they're still not fantastic, and still no replacement for an OVF.

SLR's, while being a bit bigger, are much more versatile-- they're much better with long telephotos, anything fast action, and simplicity/durability of the viewfinding system. The only downside is size and weight. 645 digital is meant for big prints with very fine detail-- much like film cameras in the 6x7-4x5 range, where tripods and careful focusing are very common. However, the 645 digital systems are more than capable of replacing 35mm for an all-purpose rig, as they're really not that much bigger. Compared to things that have been used in the film era, it's still a size down from 6x7 film cameras.

I don't understand why everyone would want to take such a high-end sensor, then cripple it by removing the SLR functions just to save a few ounces and a bit of space in the camera bag.

A mirrorless MF market doesn't make sense to me. For me to consider one, it would need at a bare minimum, pairings for optical viewfinders with the lenses, and ideally the hybrid OVF that Fuji has designed. That would leave us with something like a futuristic Mamiya 6/7 type camera. Unfortunately, this would have less versatility, than MF SLR's, and serious professionals shooting all types would still probably need to supplement with a MF SLR system.

Also, you have the complexities of the mirrorless systems. How many people here have completely worn out their shutters? I doubt most of us have. To me, the mirrorless system is trying to solve a problem that didn't exist in the first place. More complex electronics and screens, all to provide an inferior setup. Fuji has the real winner, but their system is incredibly complicated with lots of additional hardware and software. It also hasn't really been around to stand the test of time.

The mirrorless market seems to be limited to enthusiats-- and how many enthusiats are going to drop $5-$8k on a mirrorless MF body, just to have to buy brand new lenses for a mount that was just introduced that may or may not be around in a few years? What if it's a flop, and you just dropped $15k on a body and lenses, and no successor comes out? The Pentax 645 market has been strong since the film days, and the new lenses, with the exception of the newest 25mm, will work on the film cameras. This seems to be a much better market to target than reinventing the wheel with potentially no future.

However, if Fuji was able to come out with a series of Digital MF rangefinders-- and they include the hybrid viewfinder, or a straight rangefinder style viewfinder, and pair it with a fixed prime or fixed zoom, a la the GA645 series, I'd sell all my gear to buy one. For what I do, it would be about perfect. For the strictly landscape and travel shooters, it would be fantastic. It wouldn't be able to replace a MF SLR, but it would be a good companion to it. I think it's still too early to tell what the DMF market will be, and sticking to what can work for everyone is a much better decision on Pentax's part.

I think they really have designed the ultimate field camera, while still retaining professional studio features, at a price point that's with in reach of more enthusiasts and working professionals. This is what I think the market needs, not something way new and different that has a limited audience and requires a new mount that isn't fully compatible with the high-end glass already on the used market for pennies on the dollar. Actually, more like quarters on the dollar with Pentax gear.... but it's still at a price point that's attainable by many more than the existing DMF sysetms.

[Aristophanes]

I still don't understand the market for mirrorless cameras without optical viewfinders. I have yet to meet someone that would be willing to save some weight to lose out on an optical viewfinder. The electronic ones have come a long way, but they're still not fantastic, and still no replacement for an OVF.

Same market as the iPhone, the world's most dominant camera system.

Suffice to say the majority of the market has voted with feet and $$s they no longer require or want any viewfinder.

[fretlessdavis]

Same market as the iPhone, the world's most dominant camera system.

Suffice to say the majority of the market has voted with feet and $$s they no longer require or want any viewfinder.

The iPhone market isn't who is going to be buying digital MF cameras. The iPhone market is going to continue using the iPhone/Droid/Nokia camera phones. Trying to cater a high end piece of specialized equipment to the iPhone market would likely be a total failure.

[monochrome]

Trying to cater a high end piece of specialized equipment to the iPhone market would likely be a total failure.

It likely won't be a failure. Doesn't mean we have to understand what goes on in the minds of other people though, and what do we care, really, so long as there remain full-body dSLR's for us to buy.

My son once said, "What do I care if every model on earth is 6' tall and weighs 105 so long as there are still regular, pretty girls around for me to ask?"

[fretlessdavis]

It likely won't be a failure. Doesn't mean we have to understand what goes on in the minds of other people though, and what do we care, really, so long as there remain full-body dSLR's for us to buy.

My son once said, "What do I care if every model on earth is 6' tall and weighs 105 so long as there are still regular, pretty girls around for me to ask?"

Good point. I guess if there *is* a market for mirrorless MF (I still can't wrap my head around why there would) then they should take advantage of it. If they can triple the volume of that 51mp Sony Sensor in sales, it will only drive down production costs, leading to a potential drop in price, or a larger variety on the market.

[Na Horuk]

Mirrorless has some advantages, like less parts (no mirror, prism), which means fewer things can fail, lighter/smaller camera. It can also mean lower costs. I think lots of photographers could get "hooked" into MF if a less expensive MF camera came out, and sacrificing the mirror and OVF might be worth it. Not to mention how many MF photographers use the camera mostly in studio setups, often with tethering. In those cases OVF might not be that critical. And videographers would use live view anyway (we are yet to see how attractive a MF's video capabilities are)

[Aristophanes]

The iPhone market isn't who is going to be buying digital MF cameras.

Most certainly is. iPhone buyers are the most likely consumers on the planet to have disposable income AND play in technology bot for hobbies and for employment or investment.

A major goal of all photographic equipment makers is to get you to buy more than one system.

[thibs]

Same market as the iPhone, the world's most dominant camera system.

Suffice to say the majority of the market has voted with feet and $$s they no longer require or want any viewfinder.

Ignorance is no vote.

---------- Post added 19-04-14 at 20:16 ----------

Mirrorless has some advantages, like less parts (no mirror, prism), which means fewer things can fail, lighter/smaller camera. It can also mean lower costs. I think lots of photographers could get "hooked" into MF if a less expensive MF camera came out, and sacrificing the mirror and OVF might be worth it. Not to mention how many MF photographers use the camera mostly in studio setups, often with tethering. In those cases OVF might not be that critical. And videographers would use live view anyway (we are yet to see how attractive a MF's video capabilities are)

IMO if there's a situation where an OVF is critical, it IS studio (among others) but then I maybe just be too conservative

---------- Post added 19-04-14 at 20:19 ----------

Mirrorless has some advantages, like less parts (no mirror, prism), which means fewer things can fail, lighter/smaller camera. It can also mean lower costs.

I don't believe that (anymore): a properly designed mechanical system works as long or longer than an electronic one.
And a mechanical system tends to warn before it breaks, which is a feature in my book.

It's not as if electronic chips didn't wear out... if anyone believe this, he's being badly abused.

[jon404]

Well, I'm still excited about stuffing that new 51 MP sensor into a K-01. THAT would rock the boat! Whole bunch of FF Pentax lenses out there that would cover it, sort of, probably. A little vignetting for that nice old-timey look. But seriously, if it's possible, might be worth doing.

Leica! Somewhere in Germany, or maybe in a secret lab in Kiev, Leica Camera AG technicians are firing up their brand-new 3D printer -- loading it with magnesium-impregnated polystyrene pellets -- pressing the high-voltage On switch -- a shower of sparks -- and then! Enter Marc Newsom from stage right, to sign the red-hot smoking Leica T shell with a special diamond-tipped pen! Es ist ein neues Design-Konzept -- guaranteed to obsolete that skinny iPhone -- and turn all those Apple-lovers green with envy!

Other people's wars. Me? I want a 51 MP K-01... a bright orange one!