[zoolander]

compatible with the K-mount... i.e. you could mount a K-mount lens, with the disadvantage of the lens not working the way it was supposed to. Pentax will then have to provide a simple adapter that just increases the registration distance, transmitting everything else, including the screw drive AF pin.


This way buyers can make use of the short registration distance by mounting all sorts of lenses on the camera (think people coming from Canon or Nikon), Pentax can make use of the short registration distance with new lenses designed for this, and it all still works with our old lenses.

I looked at buying a Canon EOS-M. It comes with an adapter for EF lenses, BUT the performance of EF lenses on the EOS-M is atrocious ! (Just search youtube). Sony's A7 range can come with either the A-mount adaper, or Canon EF adapter (plus Nikon etc no AF). But the EF leses perform terribly on the A7 (Just search youtube). The Sony A-mount adapter for the A7 has the translucent mirror in the adapter and a Phase detect sensor - which means you lose 30% light, and your A7 becomes an SLT (real bad low light performance) ..............

After all my research, companies that have existing SLR ranges, do not provide proper backwards compatibility to their new Mirrorless camera range. They are forcing you to buy the native mirrorless lenses. Now those lens ranges are small and very expensive ...........

Which begs the question, what will Pentax do. With the K-01 we had true backwards compatibility, and fairly ordinary AF speed. I think it was a good camera, just a bit ugly. If Pentax turns the the K-S1 into a mirrorless camera, and offer a new lens mount, I doubt we'll get the full backwards compatibility with an adapter. So Perhaps the K-01 wasn't so bad after all.

So if the SLR manufacturers are scared of ruining their SLR business, by making their own mirrorless cameras, then they're actually ruining their own business. If the EOS-M, had have had real good auto focus, I would have bought it for the access to EF lenses.

So if Pentax makes a mirrorless camera again, then they'd better embrace backwards compatibility - this is a mistake of Sony and Canon.

Mirrorless and SLR's cameras have to coexist together in harmony (yes I know that was clichéd). But literally that is the problem. Pentax, Canon and Sony are afraid of mirrorless because it will cause their SLR business losses. But at least if they offered proper backwards compatibility, they won't lose business to Fujifilm.

For me, if I get a mirrorless camera, its either going to be a Fujifilm or a K-01. With a fujifilm, its got a pretty good lens line up, and good AF speed. With the K-01 I'll have a slower AF, and can use my existing lenses, but at least I didn't throw away extra money duplicating on Canon or fuji gear.

But maybe Ricoh might throw its hat in the ring, and transform the GR with a new lens mount - now I'd like to see that (and a K-02 !).

[lytrytyr]

Unless they drop the K-mount. If they do a mirrorless APS-C or FF camera, they'd be wise to drop the K-mount. Just make sure to make it fully compatible with the K-mount... i.e. you could mount a K-mount lens, with the disadvantage of the lens not working the way it was supposed to. Pentax will then have to provide a simple adapter that just increases the registration distance, transmitting everything else, including the screw drive AF pin.

One manufacturer recently tried to put screw drive macro extension tubes on the market.*
They did not work very well, and reputable dealers have stopped offering them.
So I do not think that a screw drive adapter would be a good idea.

The more I use my two K-01 cameras, the more I appreciate them.
They are not perfect (especially for action or burst sequences),
but they are very good at what they do.

*https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/264093-new-auto-ext...-q-mounts.html

[Fogel70]

I looked at buying a Canon EOS-M. It comes with an adapter for EF lenses, BUT the performance of EF lenses on the EOS-M is atrocious ! (Just search youtube). Sony's A7 range can come with either the A-mount adaper, or Canon EF adapter (plus Nikon etc no AF). But the EF leses perform terribly on the A7 (Just search youtube). The Sony A-mount adapter for the A7 has the translucent mirror in the adapter and a Phase detect sensor - which means you lose 30% light, and your A7 becomes an SLT (real bad low light performance) ..............

For me, if I get a mirrorless camera, its either going to be a Fujifilm or a K-01. With a fujifilm, its got a pretty good lens line up, and good AF speed. With the K-01 I'll have a slower AF, and can use my existing lenses, but at least I didn't throw away extra money duplicating on Canon or fuji gear.

So do you say that an adapter on Sony A7 that loose about 1/3 stop of light has so bad low light performance, that you will get APS-C cameras with even worse low light performance?

---------- Post added 07-11-14 at 14:59 ----------

One manufacturer recently tried to put screw drive macro extension tubes on the market.*
They did not work very well, and reputable dealers have stopped offering them.
So I do not think that a screw drive adapter would be a good idea.

The more I use my two K-01 cameras, the more I appreciate them.
They are not perfect (especially for action or burst sequences),
but they are very good at what they do.

*https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/264093-new-auto-ext...-q-mounts.html

I don't think there would be any problem with screw drive on the adapter, there seems to be no problem on screw drive in the Pentax DA 1.4x TC.
But I really doubt a mirrorless camera with new mirrorless optimized mount will have a built in AF-motor. So the K-mount adapter have to have AF-motor built in to support AF on screw drive lenses.

Another way is to use optics to for AF on the adapter (like on Pentax 1.7x TC), then it would AF on manual focus lenses too.

[monochrome]

Unless they drop the K-mount. If they do a mirrorless APS-C or FF camera, they'd be wise to drop the K-mount. Just make sure to make it fully compatible with the K-mount... i.e. you could mount a K-mount lens, with the disadvantage of the lens not working the way it was supposed to. Pentax will then have to provide a simple adapter that just increases the registration distance, transmitting everything else, including the screw drive AF pin.


This way buyers can make use of the short registration distance by mounting all sorts of lenses on the camera (think people coming from Canon or Nikon), Pentax can make use of the short registration distance with new lenses designed for this, and it all still works with our old lenses.


The camera should have a properly pronounced grip etc., which will make it look very funny without a lens, but which will make it very nicely balanced and nice to hold when with (that's a bit of an issue with the Sony NEX series... they were too thin... really sexy, but to use with anything but a small prime. Such a camera could have a lot of space for batteries, to make up for the lack of an optical viewfinder.


To be honest... if Pentax would rebadge a Samsung NX1 with a K mount and the Pentax SR system (with SR activated for video!) I'd be really happy. That's all I want. Isn't it ironic...
So basically an extremely fast BSI/ISOCELL enabled sensor (larger photosites + incoming light rays can come at a very sharp angle, the sensor can be fully read 240 times a second), connected to a smartphone based processor (but optimized for cameras), with the next gen video codec and a host of video functionality at enthusiasts and professionals, electronic viewfinder with a very, very low lag between what's happening and what you see, and plenty of small AF sensors placed spread out over the whole sensor.

Ricoh gets exactly nothing out of this strategy. Their competitors get all the profit with none of the investment.

[kadajawi]

Ricoh gets exactly nothing out of this strategy. Their competitors get all the profit with none of the investment.

Why? Pentax would gain new customers buying Pentax cameras, as they can do so without having to rebuy all their lenses --> big hurdle stopping almost everyone from switching system. The next lenses these people would buy wouldn't be from foreign brands though, for use with an adapter, they would be from Pentax, native for this camera, as that way you'll get all the benefits. People can gradually grow into the brand, without having to get everything new at once.


For Pentax owners it's the same, just that their lenses work better with the new mirrorless Pentax... but again, it's even better if you get native lenses for that camera.


Doing a K-01 again is IMHO a bad idea, cause that really limits your user base to existing Pentax owners... and if I see 2 cameras, that are equally good, one being a K-01 style Pentax, and the other another brand, but with a shorter flange distance... I might buy that camera instead. The shorter flange distance is really a draw for me.


That such an adapter by some random company doesn't work doesn't really mean that it won't work if Pentax does it... maybe they just lack the engineering, the patents, ...

[totsmuyco]

After all my research, companies that have existing SLR ranges, do not provide proper backwards compatibility to their new Mirrorless camera range. They are forcing you to buy the native mirrorless lenses. Now those lens ranges are small and very expensive ...........

That is precisely my point in shifting from Olympus to Pentax. Olympus lenses are the best I've seen so far. However, the 4/3 system didn't make that much revenues and the only compromise to 4/3 users is the EM-1. Though it is a great camera it is quite expensive. After that I believe there will be no more support for 4/3 lenses. As shown, the EM-10 does not support 4/3 lenses.

What I want is a system which will allow me to use what I have and grow into the system building my arsenal little by little. That's how I grew into my system during my film days and Pentax's backward integration shows that it aims to support older lenses thus minimizing obsolescence. I believe the K-01 would have been a fine camera if Pentax would have further developed its features. I'm not into mirrorless myself. However, I do hope that if Pentax goes mirrorless, it will be a native K-mount system.

[kadajawi]

That is precisely my point in shifting from Olympus to Pentax. Olympus lenses are the best I've seen so far. However, the 4/3 system didn't make that much revenues and the only compromise to 4/3 users is the EM-1. Though it is a great camera it is quite expensive. After that I believe there will be no more support for 4/3 lenses. As shown, the EM-10 does not support 4/3 lenses.

What I want is a system which will allow me to use what I have and grow into the system building my arsenal little by little. That's how I grew into my system during my film days and Pentax's backward integration shows that it aims to support older lenses thus minimizing obsolescence. I believe the K-01 would have been a fine camera if Pentax would have further developed its features. I'm not into mirrorless myself. However, I do hope that if Pentax goes mirrorless, it will be a native K-mount system.

But that would make the camera uninteresting for me. I do want backward compatibility, but not at the cost of giving up the advantage of mirrorless. What's the advantage of going mirrorless if you give up one of the main advantages of it? Might as well get a camera with a mirror...

[totsmuyco]

Like what I have said, I'm not into mirrorless myself. Some guys here would like that they would be able to use their K-mount lenses without the use of adapters as what the K-01 was intended to be. As I am just starting to build up my Pentax arsenal, I would like to have the same thing in case Pentax would go mirrorless. Cost is a huge factor to me.

[monochrome]

Lenses are where the profit is, not cameras. Lenses are where the patents are, not cameras. Selling a box that lets other companies sell their highest-profit items to use with it is corporate suicide. Selling a box that abrogates the backward-compatibility social contract unless the loyal customer accepts an adapted interface is corporate arrogance.

Dropping K-mount for a short-flange mirrorless mount is a business decision, win or lose. Playing both ends against the middle is a mistake.

[noser]

Since there have been all kinds of suggestions I was going to post this big write up about this really cool mirrorless design with a big screen and smartphone processor and big interface and stuff, but it looks like Pentax already chose the next re-badge product:

Pentax Smart Phoblet Thingy

Slap some LED's on that sucker, and it's good to go. Might have to up the MP a bit. Maybe.

But does include the math bundle, so they can learn to count their profits.

[zoolander]

So do you say that an adapter on Sony A7 that loose about 1/3 stop of light has so bad low light performance, that you will get APS-C cameras with even worse low light performance?

No, I'm saying that the bottom of the line Fujifilm X-A1 DOES have better low light/High ISO performance than an A7. Just compare it on Imaging Resources: Imaging Resource "Comparometer" See ISO 6400 and higher. You'll find that DP review concurs.

You Tube

You Tube

I made a similar point on another thread - Why does Sony make a "Mirrorless camera" like the A7 range, then the adapter it offers to give you backwards compatibility with Sony A-mount and Minolta lenses ....... has a translucent mirror. If I'm going mirrorless, then I'd like to go mirrorless. I do not want a reflex mirror because of mirror slap, nor a translucent mirror which deflects 30% of the light on the phase detect sensor. I've owned a Sony SLT, and in dim light it was grainy as hell, while my K-5 just shone.

---------- Post added 11-08-14 at 09:45 PM ----------

Since there have been all kinds of suggestions I was going to post this big write up about this really cool mirrorless design with a big screen and smartphone processor and big interface and stuff, but it looks like Pentax already chose the next re-badge product:

Pentax Smart Phoblet Thingy

Slap some LED's on that sucker, and it's good to go. Might have to up the MP a bit. Maybe.

But does include the math bundle, so they can learn to count their profits.

Yeah I get it, the K-S1 is stupid and a kids toy. Maybe you also don't like Pentax binoculars or surveying equipment ! Do you go to MacDonalds to buy a big mac, and when you see the happy meal on the menu ....... you scoff ? Kids need to eat too !

I don't get why people deride a product because its pitched at a segment like new DSLR users. Isn't it a good thing that pentax is trying to get new customers.

[kadajawi]

Lenses are where the profit is, not cameras. Lenses are where the patents are, not cameras. Selling a box that lets other companies sell their highest-profit items to use with it is corporate suicide. Selling a box that abrogates the backward-compatibility social contract unless the loyal customer accepts an adapted interface is corporate arrogance.

Dropping K-mount for a short-flange mirrorless mount is a business decision, win or lose. Playing both ends against the middle is a mistake.

Using a third party lens through an adapter will ALWAYS be a compromise. No AF for example. The K mount adapter by Pentax for the new mount could include AF, so even if you are going to buy a non K mirrorless mount lens you'll be more likely to buy a Pentax lens, unless Pentax really doesn't offer an alternative. The new lenses, directly meant for the new mirrorless mount, are preferable over the K mount lenses though because they can be smaller, lighter, and don't require the use of an adapter. So Pentax would mostly turn lenses where it is beneficial to be small and light (kit lens, always on lens, pancake perhaps) into K mirrorless lenses.


I don't think this would be a bad business decision for Pentax, as they can get customers from other brands without leaving them too many hurdles in the way (at least they can use their lenses, more or less), while giving Pentax owners a path too that doesn't inconvenience them too much, and giving everyone the incentives to buy new lenses in the end.


Not sure why the Sony, at least with a sensor that has PDAF sensors on it, needs to have an adapter with a mirror. Doesn't make too much sense to me... maybe the adapter was designed for the time before sensors themselves gained good dedicated AF sensors?

[Fogel70]

No, I'm saying that the bottom of the line Fujifilm X-A1 DOES have better low light/High ISO performance than an A7. Just compare it on Imaging Resources: Imaging Resource "Comparometer" See ISO 6400 and higher. You'll find that DP review concurs.

Many users complain about Fuji camera having to use longer exposure time at the same ISO as other cameras, which might explain why Fuji high ISO compares well.

By our tests, the X-T1's measured sensitivities are around 1/2 - 2/3EV lower than marked, which is unusual for a modern camera. This means that for any given light level, the X-T1 has to use a significantly slower shutter speed, brighter aperture or higher ISO to get an image of the same brightness as an accurately-rated camera.

It's unusual to see this sort of discrepancy and we're disappointed that Fujifilm persists with a system that, while technically compliant with the ISO standard, ends up appearing rather disingenuous.

Fujifilm X-T1 Review: Digital Photography Review

[reh321]

Using a third party lens through an adapter will ALWAYS be a compromise. No AF for example.

The Canon converter to mount EF/EF-S lenses on an EF-M (the native mode for their mirror-less system) is said to be "Fully compatible with all lens functions, including image stabilization and autofocus" and costs roughly $100.

[ElJamoquio]

Heck even my Sony adapter to Canon lenses has (allegedly poor) autofocus.