[monochrome]

Except for that its not true.

Interview with Pentax Executive Vice President Jim Malcolm:
Question: So do you see Pentax in the next couple of years being a viable competitor to Canon and Nikon?

Answer: No doubt about it. I have no hesitation, in my mind and in my business direction, that in the future—whether it’s three years or five years out—that there will be three dominant imaging companies on a global basis and it will be Canon, Nikon, and Pentax/Ricoh.

The reason I say that with such confidence is if you really look at Ricoh, which is our parent, Ricoh as a company is more than half the size of Canon and is twice the size of Nikon. And they’re already a dominant imaging company. They have a global footprint, they have office automation, and obviously the printer business and copier business is their heart. So if you had to compare Ricoh as a company we’re much more similar to that of Canon than we are of Nikon.

I have heard the same, personally, directly from Jim just over a year ago - except the time frame. When we spoke he said 'intermediate term,' which in my business is 5 - 7 years. Ricoh believes there is room in the market for three full-line camera manufacturers and they believe the Pentax and Ricoh brands (combined) will be #3 over that time horizon, with of course a long-term goal to be #1.

I personally believe Ricoh aspires for Pentax to compete on a reputation and quality target just above Nikon and they sort of ignore Canon. They intend to be a better value than Nikon based on similar features, better ergonomics, construction and Pentax's unique image quality, at a SOMEWHAT better price (but price is not the distinguishing characteristic).

Everything in the above paragraph was said to me except the first sentence - that part I inferred. I have no rational basis for that - it is just a gut feeling.

---

Last edited by monochrome; 08-12-2014 at 09:42 AM.

[IchabodCrane]

Except for that its not true.

Interview with Pentax Executive Vice President Jim Malcolm:
Question: So do you see Pentax in the next couple of years being a viable competitor to Canon and Nikon?

Answer: No doubt about it. I have no hesitation, in my mind and in my business direction, that in the future—whether it’s three years or five years out—that there will be three dominant imaging companies on a global basis and it will be Canon, Nikon, and Pentax/Ricoh.

The reason I say that with such confidence is if you really look at Ricoh, which is our parent, Ricoh as a company is more than half the size of Canon and is twice the size of Nikon. And they’re already a dominant imaging company. They have a global footprint, they have office automation, and obviously the printer business and copier business is their heart. So if you had to compare Ricoh as a company we’re much more similar to that of Canon than we are of Nikon.

Does anyone here really care about positioning in the "imaging business"? Sure, they could end up #3 in the imaging business but I don't think that will make any PF participant ecstatic if it only translated to #6 or so in the "photography" or, better yet, "camera" business.

[lytrytyr]

This is what the k-50/500 replacements should look like IMO. Mirrorless

I disagree.

The reason I bought a K-50, to augment my K-01 cameras,
is to handle the instant action shots that mirrorless can't do.

[konraDarnok]

I disagree.

The reason I bought a K-50, to augment my K-01 cameras,
is to handle the instant action shots that mirrorless can't do.

Depends on how good Ricoh's phase detect SR mechanism is. The hybrid system in the A6000 from what I've seen is beyond SAFOX IXi+ or SAFOX XI for that matter.

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

[kadajawi]

Yep, two sensors in one camera. This is what the patent that I mentioned was about. Why use the 16MP or 24MP sensor for the tiny live view screen? Just exposing it to dust and heating it up for nothing. These days a tiny, flat smartphone has GPS, Wifi, Bluetooth, movement sensors, two cameras, many speakers and microphones, LED lights, high quality LCD screen (with low reflection, and can even be read with polarized glasses), for a pretty affordable price. Why would a camera with two specialized sensors be so outrageous? It could solve a lot of problems, remove compromises and deliver better live view as well as photos

No idea, am not an engineer. Fans directed at the sensor might be a bad idea, but there are other methods. Heatsinks, with fans that don't blow into the mirror box at all, some sort of circulation, etc.

Not sure they are "the best", though they may be pretty good and fairly affordable. I'm just saying. With film, you can choose which type you want - for B&W, for portraits, for nature, for dynamic range, for grain.. choose the film that best fits your needs. With digital sensors, its it is as if the sensor is perfect and objective - but it isnt! It still has all of its properties and biases, we just take them for granted. A different type or brand of sensor could produce photos with different properties. Lots of people prefer the colours of older CCD sensors. Foveon sensors produce some nice photos, too (but they have many limitations, I know). I think it is wrong to assume that Sony sensors are the only (or best) option

It would be outrageous cause APS-C sized sensors are expensive. And you can't fit in a smaller sensor for liveview, cause the field of view would be different. I'd like the idea of a 2 MP ginormous pixels sensor in my camera (heck, and you thought the A7S would be good in low light conditions? ), but it's expensive, troublesome, stuff that can break, and the gains aren't so big.


A heatsink works... if you don't stabilize the sensor. You wouldn't want to increase of the sensor too much. Also where should the heat go to? Cooling fins on the outside of the camera? Again, no stabilization...


Using a K mount as is would mean big lenses, big cameras, and being limited to ONE type of lenses. I want to be able to attach any lens ever made, which means move the mount as close to the sensor as possible. A Pentax K mount adapter giving FULL K mount functionality would be great, but I want to be able to use other lenses too.


Btw., what's so likable about the Fuji cameras is IMHO not just the looks, it's more about the way they feel and are used. They are pleasant to touch and to take photos with you. They inspire you to go out and take photos. A lot of them. At least that's how I felt when I tried some of them. Pentax does that too, at least more so than Canikon, which is why I'd like to stay with Pentax.

How many professional sportsphotographers are there anyway?

Not that many I'd guess, but they do are great advertising. A sea of Pentax cameras at sports events would raise brand awareness and confidence. I'd still say it isn't worth it.

I once suggested this very idea to a Pentax Exec. He directly stated Pentax will not open its proprietary technology (release an API) to developers.

How much would an API really give away? If I'm not mistaken they'd have to give access such as displaying a live feed from the sensor, retrieving raw and JPEG images, access to exposure (i.e. let the software tell the camera which aperture to use etc.), access to the sensor data like accelerometers inside the camera, and the ability to tell the camera where the sensor should be. It's not exactly opening up proprietary technology, is it?


I can then only hope that some other brand, probably Sony will open up. I'll be the first to switch brands.


Apple didn't want to give away too much control in the first place, believing web apps are more than enough. Well, they quickly changed their mind. And without the App Store, iOS/the iPhone would be unimportant. Android was not an alternative to many people due to the lack of apps. Palm OS died because they were too late, and had no apps. Blackberry died too. Windows Phone struggles for survival, without Microsoft backing them it too would be gone. People buy a phone for the apps they can run on it. The hardware and built in software is just the basis. I would say the camera market is similar, though not yet there. There's still a bit of time to get in there.


And again, to the traditionalists I'll say: There's nothing in a camera with an API that would stop you from using the camera exactly the way you want to use it. You can still use it as a very basic image capturer. Heck, Pentax could have a mode in the camera that limits and deactivates features you don't want. Accessory makers could create lens mounts/attachments that let you use a proper aperture ring, with the mount communicating with the camera via BT for example.

A few commenters have mentioned connected cameras and open software, but it still isn't clear what they hope to achieve with this. I think everyone has a different understanding of how deep they want this to go. Does it mean wi-fi and the ability to upload images direct to websites? Does it mean that the camera just becomes an empty shell of hardware for Google to provide an OS for? Or something in-between. I think you have to specify what you want the camera to be able to do as a result of this technology.

Samsung has perhaps gone furthest with connected cameras. While their phones have done week, I don't think their Android cameras have done so well. I should say that being in Japan, I've never had the chance to try out an NX camera. Sony has a system where the user can download apps onto the camera, but it got criticised for making the user download things that normally come pre-installed. It sounds like most users just ignore it. Most other companies seem to just provide ways to connect with a smartphone. For me that would be enough, but ideally the camera would be able to initiate the connection and not require me to take out the phone at all.

From a strategic point of view, I do think camera makers need to be careful about how much control they cede to software makers like Google. If they end up just making commodity hardware, they'll end up like PC makers, with no control over the functions of the device. If that's the way the camera industry goes, I guess it would be a much less interesting place for Japanese companies to be, because there will always be a cheaper maker for commodity hardware elsewhere.

That's a good question. To me I don't think Pentax should give up any control over what happens inside the camera, on a software side. What I propose is just the possibility to extend functionality beyond what is available right now, through the use of external processing and software. Simply give other applications the ability to retrieve data from the camera (video, images and access to sensors like the accelerometer, where the camera has measured things to be in focus), as well as control every single aspect in the camera. Where it focuses too, and at what speed the motor turns. The shutter speed. Aperture. Position of the sensor. etc. The result would hopefully not just be, as Sony and Samsung have done it, the ability to upload photos to Facebook or to run some fancy filter. I'm not interested in that, some might be, but I couldn't give a f***. If anything I'd want to be able to do that straight from the camera. Share to facebook option, like with the printing option where you connect your camera to a printer.


I'm interested in creating a high end tethering support. Put the camera on a tripod in a studio, and have some elaborate software control flashes and camera, taking a series of photos that are used to create a perfect photo. That sort of work. If a photographer wants to do focus stacking because it's a macro and he can't stop down enough (without losing sharpness), he has to do that manually. If he additionally wants to to exposure bracketing, yes, there's a mode for that, luckily. But what if he also wants to increase the resolution (or shoot wider, or with a look closer to FF (or with a FF camera closer to MF)) by shifting around the sensor from one corner to another? Exposure bracketing is activated. Ok, set the sensor to the upper left corner, first focus point. Take a set of photos. Move the sensor by using the menu to the upper right corner. Take a set of photos. Then the lower row. Change focus. Start again. Then final focus point, and again move sensor etc. 20 minutes later you're done, hopefully you haven't ever moved the camera one mm while touching it all the time, and hopefully the light hasn't changed by now (it probably has, I know from experience). Hopefully you haven't forgotten a shot, which would mean a reshoot or lots of Photoshop. That too has happened to me. Great if you can't shoot again.
How would that process look with an API and a proper app? Select the options in the app. Compose the photo, using the preview function that moves the sensor around, the software takes the screen grabs and stitches it preliminary so you know what you're going to get. The app could measure exactly from where to where an exposure row is needed by recording a video with shifting shutter times and looking at white and black levels, analysing them. Then it analyses the depth of the whole scene, by doing contrast detection throughout the focal range. It shows you a 3D scene that you can move in to select what has to be in focus. Or, simpler, you tap on the screen where focus has to start, and where it has to end. Done. Press start. 30-60 seconds later the camera has captured all the photos you need. Maybe the scene has lots of fine, colourful detail. It will be a moire nightmare. Except it wouldn't, cause you select the stack pixel option. That's 3 more photos per photo, in order to make sure every single pixel has all colour information. Think Foveon sensor. (If the camera has an electronic shutter it could even be possible to do all of this really fast, at maybe 3-4x the regular exposure speed, not sure if this could be done handheld though). I have spent 30, 40 minutes taking all the photos needed for a single shot, and that didn't even involve focus bracketing. Being able to cut that down to a few minutes at most? How great would that be?!


Or another option, you set up your frame, and press take 3D photo on the app. The camera will then take 2 photos in 2 different sensor positions.


There are endless possibilities, and implementing all of them IN CAMERA would make for a ridiculously complicated and bloated camera. Having Pentax develop all of it... can they even think of all the possibilities? Imagine only Apple or Google being able to write software for their phones. The devices wouldn't be nearly as useful!


As for making a modern film camera... wouldn't that go against the idea of using a film camera? If I'm getting a camera to shoot film, it will be a Nikon FM2 (that's my first one, sooooo... fond memories). No electronics apart from a very rudimentary exposure meter. I might want a better exposure meter, but that's it. I want everything to be mechanical about it. Having a regular FF sized sensor in there? Not sure I'd want that. And where would they put the sensor when you want to take a photo on film?

We wouldn't know, and that's the beauty of an open platform. People will come up with things for the camera to do -- some very useful, some purely for novelty. For example, I've thought it would be nice to have a hyper focal mode. You could write an app for that. How about a brenizer method mode? Stitching the photos into a nice medium format style RAW file. I could also imagine the ability to un-cripple M and K lenses. Why can't the camera meter the instant after the aperture is closed to get proper exposure? It's just a matter of timing. One press of the shutter button should be able to stop down meter and then take a picture. There's no need for a green button.

People asked similar questions when personal computers were invented "What could people possible do with this?" Turns out quite a lot, and none of it was predictable. The stuff I'm imagining is pretty obvious.

I like those ideas, though I'd like to point out that Canon had that hyper focal mode (point at what is closest that has to be in focus, press AF, point at what has to be the furthest away, press AF, camera does the rest) in their film cameras already. Later their highest end DSLRs had it AFAIK, while lower end cameras had a useless fully automatic mode (aDEP?). Pentax should offer the real deal in camera. Sometimes the camera should make it hard for people to take a photo, sometimes it should make it easy. Especially if it is to achieve the exact result you want. And exactly. You could do a lot with it. Not everyone will want/like every feature that becomes possible through an API, but many will hopefully find one feature they actually like a lot, and that makes them buy the camera.


This stuff will eventually come to serious cameras. The question is when, and who it will be. Who used to dominate the smartphone business? RIM (Blackberry), Microsoft, Palm and Nokia. A few years later, and apps (and too much pride, too much ignorance and being way to slow to move and adapt) have changed that landscape to RIM being on life support (changing their business model), Palm being dead (well, LG has them now to create smart TV interfaces... I'd rather be dead), and Microsoft having taken over Nokia, with Nokia having lost their OS and identity, and Microsoft using the incredible amounts of cash they have to push themselves back into the market. If it weren't Microsoft they would have had the same fate as the other players. Now it's Apple and Google dominating.


Oh, and I too think Pentax should be supporting and sponsoring great photographers AND videographers. But they don't just have to be great, they need to have a following. And the sponsoring must be of free will, as in the sponsored photographer needs to look like he chose Pentax because he likes the gear. Basically send these people review units, get them to try the camera for a while and let em decide.


I think that amongst the big three there will be Sony. If it will be Canon, Nikon and Sony, or Nikon, Sony and Pentax, or however else, no clue. Sony is doing well and growing, Pentax... isn't. I see Sony cameras everywhere. In stores. In the hands of people on the street, sometimes more so than Canon or Nikon. Pentax is rarely in a store, and almost never in the hands of people on the street.


@konraDarnok: What does phase detect have to do with SR? Phase detect is an auto focus method, while SR is shake reduction. They have nothing in common.


Also, I think one of the reasons why instant actions aren't the forte of mirrorless is the lag. There's always a delay between what you see on the screen and what happens in real life. Hopefully they can fix that, but I don't know they will.

[RonHendriks1966]

If you want to see some of the best wildlife photos in the world head over to FredMiranda and see what the retired guys do without compensation, a D800e and a 600mm lens. A retired guy kitted out will sell far more cameras using such free advertising than any self-appointed "pro" these days. Marketing is cutting out that middleman.

There is now less paid photography work than 20 years ago. The mainstays of photojournalism and studios have shrunk with virtually no replacement. The DIY capacity has simply wiped out huge swathes of paid photography. This is not the only industry where this has happened.

Well I still think that Ricoh should present better images with their new camera's and lenses at start. For that you need to hire a photographer. I think the images that came with the 645Z and new 28-45mm lens are embarrassing in quality and not serving the camera.

---------- Post added 12-08-14 at 19:28 ----------

Yep, two sensors in one camera. This is what the patent that I mentioned was about.

One full frame sensor for imaging making and the second smaller sensor for the selfies in the K-1.

[konraDarnok]

@konraDarnok: What does phase detect have to do with SR? Phase detect is an auto focus method, while SR is shake reduction. They have nothing in common.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/269097-patents-sens...160-645-a.html

They do now. Ricoh has patented sensor shift phase detect AF. Whether it appears in any new cameras, or how well it works, remains to be seen.

[alamo5000]

Well I still think that Ricoh should present better images with their new camera's and lenses at start.

Agreed! And do it on a persistent basis too!

[lytrytyr]

Depends on how good Ricoh's phase detect SR mechanism is. The hybrid system in the A6000 from what I've seen is beyond SAFOX IXi+ or SAFOX XI for that matter.

It's not so much a question of how fast AF and/or SR might be.
For rapid action, I prefocus manually, and disconnect SR.
The problem is the currently inevitable shutter lag with mirrorless.

There's a curious reversal of roles from the film days.
Back then, "mirrorless" rangefinders were faster,
and the SLRs, where the mirror took time to flip, were slower.

[cali92rs]

I really don't think that Pentax needs to enter the FF fray.
They have a great head start when it comes to APS-C. But dominate that arena. Have the high performance, f1.4 prime lenses . Yes they will be big and expensive...but it will change the perception from being a cute, Japanese only brand to a high performance brand.
Commentators like Thom Hogan says he likes the advantage that APS-C brings when shooting telephotos. He is not the only one that shares that sentiment. Well, create more telephotos. Big 300/400mm f2.8s. You already have the TC for them. Yes, they will also be expensive, but it will also bring brand recognition and will also change perception.
Also, get the word out about that "reach advantage". Play up the strength and advertise it.
Create a flexible flash system that rivals Nikon's CLS.
Release a T/S lens and Ultra wide angle primes. Ye, they won't be big sellers...but one of the advantages that Nikon and Canon have is that If I buy into their system, I know I can get pretty much any lens for any situation that I can think of.
A lot of the Canikon customers were/are disgruntled because the D300/7D were left to languish. I'm sure Pentax could've poached some of those guys if they only had the complete lens lineup and flash systems that Canikon offers.

The perception by a lot of consumers...and commentators...is that if you don't have a full frame, you can't be considered a serious camera company. I think what is going on is that Canikon are considered serious more because of the options they have for every situation and that is due more to their flash and lens choices rather than sensor size choices.

[konraDarnok]

It's not so much a question of how fast AF and/or SR might be.
For rapid action, I prefocus manually, and disconnect SR.
The problem is the currently inevitable shutter lag with mirrorless.

There's a curious reversal of roles from the film days.
Back then, "mirrorless" rangefinders were faster,
and the SLRs, where the mirror took time to flip, were slower.

I thought this is why focus tracking and burst mode were invented? No more prefocusing, no more quick draw reflexes. And honestly, if you look up the charts, mirrorless is winning the shutter lag race. Usually when people bring this up, it's about the refresh rate of the electronic viewfinder, not the shutter lag.

[pghwarrior23]

For the US market anyway... get the Pentax Q into Target stores and Best Buy so people can feel the build quality and size. Then get a Kim Kardashian or someone like that to be spotted using the Pentax Q all over the globe (or in an advertisement) and get Oprah to give them away on her show. Instantly you sell millions of them!!

Seems like many of the comments I have read on here blur the marketing approaches for serious photographers or pros with general consumers. If Pentax/Ricoh is going after both markets then obviously the marketing needs to be a bit different. I definitely agree with getting the cameras in the hands of and endorsed by some extreme outdoor pros that value the weather conditioning and ruggedness and tell their followers about it or big time fashion photographers using the MF could be huge for the pros. Chase Jarvis endorses a camera or one of the other big names says "I am switching from my big heavy Canon/Nikon gear to the light weight but still awesome Fuji system" and MANY take notice and also shift or at least consider shifting.

I also hear a LOT of Nikon users that say they LOVE their D700 and wish that there was a low light modern beast like it that Nikon seems to be ignoring. Sony kind of went this direction but doesn't have the lenses with the recent FF announcement. Less megapixels but a low light BEAST! I'd love to see Pentax get a big swatch of those D700 users to come to Pentax for the camera they have been craving...a low light beast, rugged semi-pro body, fast lenses, and a photographers camera (aka video is not that important). Wedding photographers would really appreciate the less weight of gear and yet low light performance that only the crazy heavy gear can only provide currently.

I also think there is room in the lineup for a pro model above the K-3 whether FF or not. Something to appeal to sports photographers and journalists. A lighter weight beast of a camera that a journalist in the deserts of Afghanistan or a sports photographer covering a yachting race or dirt track race can have confidence in. 12 fps, 300,000 or more shutter life, pro support, pro lenses with killer fast AF, etc.

Of course I'd love to see a FF Pentax too as it gives an upgrade path for those with a K-3. 645Z is not an upgrade path with a massive leap in cost. $1800-2000 mirrorless FF camera with the retro styling of and build quality of Fuji mixed with innovations of Sony with ability to use the massive inventory and lenses of Pentax's past. Sure there would be a need for a 24-70 and a 70-200 f/2.8 but I can get those from Sigma too.

Rerelease of the DA* version 2.0 lenses seems like a logical step with HSM like performance..silent yet fast and accurate. LOVE my DA* 50-135 but man do I wish it was WAY faster!

And lastly I'd love to see more f/1.4 glass!! How many options does Pentax have? Two?

[Aristophanes]

I thought this is why focus tracking and burst mode were invented? No more prefocusing, no more quick draw reflexes. And honestly, if you look up the charts, mirrorless is winning the shutter lag race. Usually when people bring this up, it's about the refresh rate of the electronic viewfinder, not the shutter lag.

Face detection has become HUGE even with top-end equipment.

Predictive focus tracking is evolving to be like matrix metering.

With electronic shutters a difficult thing, leaf shutters in mirrorless were supposed to save the day (going back to go forward), but they have their issues with certain lens and optical formulations (as we see with the focal plane shutters on Fujis).

EVFs are not quite there for me. Ever tried the OVF of a Fuji GF670? Oh my....

---------- Post added 08-12-14 at 04:00 PM ----------

The perception by a lot of consumers...and commentators...is that if you don't have a full frame, you can't be considered a serious camera company. I think what is going on is that Canikon are considered serious more because of the options they have for every situation and that is due more to their flash and lens choices rather than sensor size choices.

So Fuji and Olympus are not serious?

Keep in mind that Fuji, Sony, and Olympus were THE definition of consumer grade camera makers in the days of film. In AF SLR world Pentax (and Minolta) duked it out with Canon while Nikon was the more elite brand (until Canon started making its sewer pipes). Olympus ducked out of SLRs due to AF problems and went gonzo on the P&S market while Fuji mostly stuck to P&S and medium format (Texas Leicas and their massive studio kit).

The camera market has never seen any sort of rigid duality.

[cali92rs]

So Fuji and Olympus are not serious?

I can't directly comment about Olympus, but I can with Fuji.
I have an X-T1 and I frequent some Fuji boards. There are a lot of pros that are using Fuji right now....but from what I've seen is the majority see Fuji as their second system. The system pros use when not doing "serious" work.
The flash system is miles away from being serious. They have a 50-140mm f2.8 on the lens roadmap, but they are missing telephoto primes.

They have made serious strides in the past 3 years, but they still have a way to go.

And remember, there are rumors of both FF and MF mirrorless cameras being talked about.
Those may never materialize, but it still goes to show that FF, right or wrong, is seen as the professional format, and until that perception is changed, people are not going to stop clamoring for one. It is up to the camera manufacturers to change the perception of the public, not the other way around.

[philbaum]

A few commenters have mentioned connected cameras and open software, but it still isn't clear what they hope to achieve with this. I think everyone has a different understanding of how deep they want this to go. Does it mean wi-fi and the ability to upload images direct to websites? Does it mean that the camera just becomes an empty shell of hardware for Google to provide an OS for? Or something in-between. I think you have to specify what you want the camera to be able to do as a result of this technology.

Samsung has perhaps gone furthest with connected cameras. While their phones have done week, I don't think their Android cameras have done so well. I should say that being in Japan, I've never had the chance to try out an NX camera. Sony has a system where the user can download apps onto the camera, but it got criticised for making the user download things that normally come pre-installed. It sounds like most users just ignore it. Most other companies seem to just provide ways to connect with a smartphone. For me that would be enough, but ideally the camera would be able to initiate the connection and not require me to take out the phone at all.
.

We wouldn't know, and that's the beauty of an open platform. People will come up with things for the camera to do -- some very useful, some purely for novelty. For example, I've thought it would be nice to have a hyper focal mode. You could write an app for that. How about a brenizer method mode? Stitching the photos into a nice medium format style RAW file. I could also imagine the ability to un-cripple M and K lenses. Why can't the camera meter the instant after the aperture is closed to get proper exposure? It's just a matter of timing. One press of the shutter button should be able to stop down meter and then take a picture. There's no need for a green button.

People asked similar questions when personal computers were invented "What could people possible do with this?" Turns out quite a lot, and none of it was predictable. The stuff I'm imagining is pretty obvious.

Thank you to both of these posters, i think they are on the right track.

Thanks to JPT about Samsung, i didn't know about them - have to take another look at them. The only knowledge i have of this is from Sony allowing their apps to be downloaded to Nex6 and subsequent models, even the A7 series. At one time, they announced that they were going to release app writing tools to user groups, don't know if that happened. All i know is there are 15 apps on their Playmobile site: https://www.playmemoriescameraapps.com/portal/ (by the way, hate the term playmobile :-))

The only one i've installed so far is the Smart Remote Control. Works quite well and starts up in seconds, but one has to start up the app on the camera and also on the smart phone.


Everytime a new camera comes on the market from any manufacturer, there is this tremendous effort to review it, and then this frustration grows that this featue or that feature is not all it could be. Well apps provide a bit more flexibility than not having them at all. Sony seems to limit what their apps can do and thats a shame. Its like buying a car, and then limiting driving to one city. If i spend 3 grand on a full frame camera, i would want more flexibility in how it performs than the use of maybe 3 custom buttons that can be assigned to limited functions.

People love the apps that they can get for smart phones and the software they can get for laptops. Its way past time for cameras to be so rigid in their customization for the consumer. Today's smart phone user, is going to be less patient with cameras that have very very limited customization.

Folks might want to have an example of how i plan on using my remote control. For one thing, those shots that are taken on the floor looking down the length of the cathedral, musum or library, now i can place my camera on the floor and use my smart phone to choose the focus point, zoom the lens (for either of their 2 powerzoom lenses), and what exposure to use, WB and all the usual parameters. Another use i plan on making of it is to build a camo housing to take bird photos that i hope to lure in fairly close. In either of these cases, i don't need to lie down on the ground or on the floor of a building to take these photos, i can do most adjustments from my smart phone. Up to 125 feet away.

These conservative old time camera companies like Nikon, Canon, Pentax just don't seem to be on the leading edge of today's consumers and culture. This is an opportunity for Pentax - hope they take it.