[Kunzite]

Mistral, that's the thing - you know him so you trust him. I don't know him - all I have is your posting history (which makes me more trustful in that story, than if it were a regular single-source rumor).
But, despite my "in God we trust, everyone else we verify" thinking - which saves me from trouble pretty much every day; tough job, programming - I love hearing such inside stories so please, keep posting whatever you can find out (and you're allowed to say).

That Rolleiflex, THAT's a modular solution! Unfortunately Franke&Heidecke went belly up...

[JimmyDranox]

I still dream for a Pentax FF with interchangeable sensor, and with/out interchangeable mount, one K, and another for a new mirrorless mount system. And I think is doable. Maybe the cost of the first unit will be higher, but one body with one, or two additional sensor will be cheaper than 2 cameras.

Now I go to wash my face with cold water, to wake up from my dreams

[Mistral75]

(...)

That Rolleiflex, THAT's a modular solution! Unfortunately Franke&Heidecke went belly up...

...and some executives from Franke & Heidecke set up DHW Fototechnik to buy the IP rights and manufacture some models, including Rollei 35, Rolleiflex et Rolleiflex Hy6. Their business model is to sell at very high prices high-end models to a high net worth clientèle, mainly in South-Eastern Asia, and tons of cheap Chinese compact cameras and accessories, again at premium brand prices.

Their latest high-end model is the Rolleiflex Hy6 Mod2, presented at Photokina 2012 and CP+ 2013 and launched in March 2013.

Rolleiflex Hy6 Mod2



In 'Rolleiflex Hy6 Mod2', 'Hy' is for Hybrid: the camera can be used with both film and digital (e.g. Leaf Credo) backs.

[ogl]

Looks really cool

[thibs]

I still dream for a Pentax FF with interchangeable sensor, and with/out interchangeable mount, one K, and another for a new mirrorless mount system. And I think is doable. Maybe the cost of the first unit will be higher, but one body with one, or two additional sensor will be cheaper than 2 cameras.

I think that's where you're mistaken. I don't think it will be cheaper.
I wouldn't be surprised if the price of the sensor module would be almost the price of a competing product with the camera around the sensor.

[johnmflores]

I still dream for a Pentax FF with interchangeable sensor, and with/out interchangeable mount, one K, and another for a new mirrorless mount system. And I think is doable. Maybe the cost of the first unit will be higher, but one body with one, or two additional sensor will be cheaper than 2 cameras.

Now I go to wash my face with cold water, to wake up from my dreams

LOL. The problem with the interchangeable sensor idea is that future sensors may incorporate technology that overwhelms the older body, i.e., more megapickles, greater bit depth, wider gamut color space, faster processing, etc… Likewise, the technology inside the camera body evolves-faster processors, better power management, wifi, etc...

So while the idea may work ok for the first iteration or two, it's easy to see that five years down the road Pentax may end up with three bodies, 4 sensors, and compatibility issues between all of them.

[konraDarnok]

LOL. The problem with the interchangeable sensor idea is that future sensors may incorporate technology that overwhelms the older body, i.e., more megapickles, greater bit depth, wider gamut color space, faster processing, etc… Likewise, the technology inside the camera body evolves-faster processors, better power management, wifi, etc...

So while the idea may work ok for the first iteration or two, it's easy to see that five years down the road Pentax may end up with three bodies, 4 sensors, and compatibility issues between all of them.

That and bodies just aren't what they used to be. SLR's are still machines to some extent. . .but almost everything outside of the mirror box is virtualized. The buttons and switches just go to a patch of circuit board, and practically nothing is cheaper to produce than a circuit board. And used prices reflect this. For 1000$ I could buy a body for every system out there right now. They're almost disposable in this regard. Glass is the only thing that holds value. No one expects to hold on to a body the way they did in the film era -- when a good mirror box, shutter, and film transport meant something.

[mee]

New mount makes me wonder.. does the potential K mount adapter support the AF and weather sealing? If no or there isn't one at all, and hypothetically claiming this new system exists, then it better be really really really incredible. I mean Canon, Nikon, and now Sony have many FF bodies on the market with fairly well storied lens mounts (and thus a number of lenses available).

The cost to getting into any one of those would be much cheaper than starting fresh with a Pentax on a new mount (and thus brand new lenses). Really cheap comparatively if going for Used gear.

Of course, and again, all hypothetically stating.

[ElJamoquio]

Any adapter can be WR'd, just like current T/C's can and are WR'd.

[mee]

but then the gap changes the focusing? Almost like putting the lens on extension tubes.. right?

[JimmyDranox]

but then the gap changes the focusing? Almost like putting the lens on extension tubes.. right?

No. An adapter is calculated to mach the distance to the sensor.

[mee]

No. An adapter is calculated to mach the distance to the sensor.

That is confusing to me. I thought the further you moved the lens away from the sensor, the closer the focus for a lens? That has been my experience with using various lengthed extension tubes. There is also a minor-to-major loss of light. I guess in a small mount adapter that wouldn't be too bad though.

However, are you saying an adapter is calculated to match the distance to the sensor and resolve this issue? I thought this was a physical property more than one of electronics.. but if they can counter that then ok. Still I don't see why they wouldn't offer a lens mount that had the K and new mount electronics since the supposedly new 'A' mount would be FF anyways. Plus having to route the screw drive through the adapter or potentially losing screwdrive support.

[monochrome]

If they're abandoning K-mount and native backward compatibility gor the FF camera (which would be odd considering K-mount is already a FF mount) why would they bother with screwdrive? Wouldn't they just pass the electrical impulses through and limit the adapter to focus motor lenses, and make all their new FF lenses SDM (or whatever the replacement technology is)?

So many of the the DA* lenses become HD DA Pro and the rest are consigned to APSc bodies.

[Uluru]

If they're abandoning K-mount and native backward compatibility gor the FF camera (which would be odd considering K-mount is already a FF mount) why would they bother with screwdrive? ..

They are not abandoning anything. It just takes them forever to do anything, that's all.

[THoog]

However, are you saying an adapter is calculated to match the distance to the sensor and resolve this issue? I thought this was a physical property more than one of electronics.. but if they can counter that then ok. Still I don't see why they wouldn't offer a lens mount that had the K and new mount electronics since the supposedly new 'A' mount would be FF anyways. Plus having to route the screw drive through the adapter or potentially losing screwdrive support.

Yes, an adapter has to mount the lens at its designed register distance/flange focal distance for the lens to work as designed (e.g., macro tubes may get you closer focus, but the lens can no longer focus to infinity). The adapter has to be as long as the K-mount register distance (45.46mm) minus the new mount register distance, unless it has some internal optics like a speed booster.

In addition, most of the KAF pins are there to communicate the smallest and largest apertures of the lens (NOT the current aperture setting, mind you- just the largest and smallest it is capable of). A mechanical linkage opens and closes the aperture, based on how far the camera thinks it should move the arm. That's a 1980s way of doing things - most new mounts communicate digitally between the camera and lens, and the lens does the work. So do you force the new A mount to still use an 'old' linkage method, or do you put the servo motor and mechanical bits in the adapter? Do you keep the screwdrive motor in the camera body, or put that in the adapter, too? (Sony did just that for the non-motored-lens-Alpha-to-E-mount adapter.)

Backward compatibility is a great selling point, but how much size/weight/cost/complexity can you afford to add to a camera body that might not ever mount a K-mount lens (especially if the whole point is to make it smaller/cheaper)?