Pentax K-S1 = a new GR/GXR + an adapter?

Mistral75 · 08-20-2014, 03:34 PM

Originally posted by stevebrot

Oh, yeah. Wasn't it you that posted this originally on the French PentaxOne forum? I read the original and the account sounded a bit fanciful at the time.

PentaxOne - Rumeurs 2013

Steve

Indeed, I am the one and only Mistral75

, both on Chassimages.com (where I posted 'this' originally), PentaxOne and Pentax Forums (among other forums I am contributing to).

**jeffshaddix** · 08-20-2014, 09:01 PM

Originally posted by Joshua A

In a perfect world, that would be an amazing idea. Unfortunately, as is know, the mirror placement and alignment is critical for both phase detection and visual focusing, and I find it extremely difficult to believe Pentax engineers could develop a foolproof removal-reattachment mechanism.

Was it Pentax that was looking into being able to move the sensor forward/back on the z-axis along with the typical SR? Such a technology would make fixing this problem simpler (though likely still with manual intervention).

---------- Post added 08-21-14 at 04:07 AM ----------

Originally posted by Mistral75

Originally Posted by Kunzite: I think Ricoh found out that modular things don't work/sell.

In that case, scrap interchangable lens cameras...j/k, couldn't help myself.

It'd be sad if Ricoh got the wrong idea by making the wrong thing modular.

Mistral, you got me pumped back in 2012 with that rumor - you gotta work some magic and make it happen.

**monochrome** · 08-20-2014, 09:09 PM

Is the K-02 in this form factor next?

Dr Orloff · 08-21-2014, 12:18 AM

Oh come on it has to be a fake. Nobody in their right minds would produce a camera in battleship grey.

Fogel70 · 08-21-2014, 01:22 AM

Originally posted by jeffshaddix

In that case, scrap interchangable lens cameras...j/k, couldn't help myself.

It'd be sad if Ricoh got the wrong idea by making the wrong thing modular.

Mistral, you got me pumped back in 2012 with that rumor - you gotta work some magic and make it happen.

APS-C/FF sensor cameras are too price sensitive to make a modular system like this. Ricoh has already failed on a modular system.
As both the mirrorless camera and the SLR adapter will need a lots of compromises in the design, it will not be a very competitive system.

FI the SLR adapter will be a low volume high margin accessory that most likely will cost as much as a complete DSLR, but the camera with adapter will not perform as good as a complete DSLR
The mirrorless camera need many compromises to make the SLR adapter to work. So it might not be of any interest for anyone not wanting to adapt k-mount lenses. These compromises might also limit future development on the mirrorless system. FI the geometry of the mirrorless camera can't be changed much or it will no longer be compatible with the SLR adapter. Register distance on the mirrorless camera might have to be extremly short (0 mm or it might interfere with the OVF), which will lead to larger than necessary mirrorlsess lenses.

So most users will be better served by separate DSLR and mirrorless systems, and in the end you will probably have to invest more on modular system like this than if having two dedicated systems.
And you probably end up always updating both camera and adapter to the latest version as FI improved AF will be dependent on both.

thibs · 08-21-2014, 01:54 AM

Originally posted by Fogel70

APS-C/FF sensor cameras are too price sensitive to make a modular system like this. Ricoh has already failed on a modular system.
As both the mirrorless camera and the SLR adapter will need a lots of compromises in the design, it will not be a very competitive system.

FI the SLR adapter will be a low volume high margin accessory that most likely will cost as much as a complete DSLR, but the camera with adapter will not perform as good as a complete DSLR
The mirrorless camera need many compromises to make the SLR adapter to work. So it might not be of any interest for anyone not wanting to adapt k-mount lenses. These compromises might also limit future development on the mirrorless system. FI the geometry of the mirrorless camera can't be changed much or it will no longer be compatible with the SLR adapter. Register distance on the mirrorless camera might have to be extremly short (0 mm or it might interfere with the OVF), which will lead to larger than necessary mirrorlsess lenses.

So most users will be better served by separate DSLR and mirrorless systems, and in the end you will probably have to invest more on modular system like this than if having two dedicated systems.
And you probably end up always updating both camera and adapter to the latest version as FI improved AF will be dependent on both.

Agreed, Fogel70. In the end the only viable (but maybe not likable, YMMV) compromise is making an adapter for use of SLR lenses on the mirrorless body, if possible with as much compatibility (at least DA/FA/F, KA would be nice, K/M is doubtful).
They will be slow to AF but that's it.

mmichalak · 08-21-2014, 08:38 AM

As others noted, when I looked at this, I noticed the same thing: It seems as if the "lens holder", and the OVF/flash is simply a "cap", that you lock onto the main body. To me it seems that the body is not formed from a single piece of plastic or metal.

As others noted, there are technical difficulties with this, i.e. I would be surprised if the users themselves can simply lock on different "caps"/adapters.

But what about Ricoh/Pentax themselves? This modular design would allow them to offer, (for example), two versions: the one shown here, and another one without the OVF, making it even less bulkier (think K01 replacement too

)...

So maybe the users cannot use different adapters themselves, but Pentax/Ricoh would save on resources by offering the same "main body" and a few different adapters to lock on to it.

Just a thought...

ElJamoquio · 08-21-2014, 09:13 AM

In one of the other pictures there's a shoulder-strap-lug that would make it difficult to slide the camera in-and-out, left-and-right.

The adapter could still go up and down. I find either possibility unlikely, though.

**Aristophanes** · 08-21-2014, 09:27 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

In one of the other pictures there's a shoulder-strap-lug that would make it difficult to slide the camera in-and-out, left-and-right.

The adapter could still go up and down. I find either possibility unlikely, though.

Unlikely from a cost perspective as well.

Odd photo, though.

Joshua A · 08-21-2014, 11:31 AM

Upon looking at the design more, I've come to the conclusion that the mirror box is not user detachable, aka the camera is designed with the mirror box in mind. On the other hand, as Pentax as shown previously with the K-7/645D and K-3/645Z, I think that they have designed the camera in such a way that if they decide to bring a mirrorless camera to the market (other than the Q), it would require the factory minimal retooling to produce a mirrorless body utilizing a similar body/design.

Edit:

I forgot to mention that it looks like if they did use this body for a mirrorless camera, it seems to look like it would have a smaller flange distance, nonetheless utilizing the K-mount for easy K-SLR mount lens adoption with all features included.

**monochrome** · 08-21-2014, 11:35 AM

What looks like a junction border appears to me to be a shiny decorative trim piece.that wraps around the camera.

ElJamoquio · 08-21-2014, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by monochrome

What looks like a junction border appears to me to be a shiny decorative trim piece.that wraps around the camera.

Concur.

**luftfluss** · 08-21-2014, 12:43 PM

Youtu.be

08-21-2014, 08:38 AM	#22
mmichalak New Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11	But what Pentax/Ricoh themselves? As others noted, when I looked at this, I noticed the same thing: It seems as if the "lens holder", and the OVF/flash is simply a "cap", that you lock onto the main body. To me it seems that the body is not formed from a single piece of plastic or metal. As others noted, there are technical difficulties with this, i.e. I would be surprised if the users themselves can simply lock on different "caps"/adapters. But what about Ricoh/Pentax themselves? This modular design would allow them to offer, (for example), two versions: the one shown here, and another one without the OVF, making it even less bulkier (think K01 replacement too )... So maybe the users cannot use different adapters themselves, but Pentax/Ricoh would save on resources by offering the same "main body" and a few different adapters to lock on to it. Just a thought...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Q-S1: a new production run of Q7	Marktax	Pentax News and Rumors	33	08-10-2014 03:10 AM
New lens for the K-5IIs or new GR?	Piscator	Ricoh GR	18	01-04-2014 07:35 PM
Rumors about a new Ricoh GXR camera surface online	Cynog Ap Brychan	Pentax News and Rumors	70	08-01-2013 06:57 AM
Can I use an old SMC PENTAX- M 1:1.7 50mm lense on a brand new K-01 or a K-5?	jjuanmartin	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	5	12-23-2012 04:38 AM
personal test and evaluation: Vivitar S1 90/2.5 + FD/K adapter	Pentaxor	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	07-11-2010 07:59 AM

08-20-2014, 03:34 PM	#16
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527	Originally posted by stevebrot Oh, yeah. Wasn't it you that posted this originally on the French PentaxOne forum? I read the original and the account sounded a bit fanciful at the time. PentaxOne - Rumeurs 2013 Steve Indeed, I am the one and only Mistral75 , both on Chassimages.com (where I posted 'this' originally), PentaxOne and Pentax Forums (among other forums I am contributing to).

08-20-2014, 09:01 PM	#17
jeffshaddix Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Colorado Posts: 1,473	Originally posted by Joshua A In a perfect world, that would be an amazing idea. Unfortunately, as is know, the mirror placement and alignment is critical for both phase detection and visual focusing, and I find it extremely difficult to believe Pentax engineers could develop a foolproof removal-reattachment mechanism. Was it Pentax that was looking into being able to move the sensor forward/back on the z-axis along with the typical SR? Such a technology would make fixing this problem simpler (though likely still with manual intervention). ---------- Post added 08-21-14 at 04:07 AM ---------- Originally posted by Mistral75 Originally Posted by Kunzite: I think Ricoh found out that modular things don't work/sell. In that case, scrap interchangable lens cameras...j/k, couldn't help myself. It'd be sad if Ricoh got the wrong idea by making the wrong thing modular. Mistral, you got me pumped back in 2012 with that rumor - you gotta work some magic and make it happen.

08-20-2014, 09:09 PM	#18
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Is the K-02 in this form factor next?

08-21-2014, 12:18 AM	#19
Dr Orloff Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Brighton, England Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 512	Oh come on it has to be a fake. Nobody in their right minds would produce a camera in battleship grey.

08-21-2014, 01:22 AM	#20
Fogel70 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Photos: Albums Posts: 3,062	Originally posted by jeffshaddix In that case, scrap interchangable lens cameras...j/k, couldn't help myself. It'd be sad if Ricoh got the wrong idea by making the wrong thing modular. Mistral, you got me pumped back in 2012 with that rumor - you gotta work some magic and make it happen. APS-C/FF sensor cameras are too price sensitive to make a modular system like this. Ricoh has already failed on a modular system. As both the mirrorless camera and the SLR adapter will need a lots of compromises in the design, it will not be a very competitive system. FI the SLR adapter will be a low volume high margin accessory that most likely will cost as much as a complete DSLR, but the camera with adapter will not perform as good as a complete DSLR The mirrorless camera need many compromises to make the SLR adapter to work. So it might not be of any interest for anyone not wanting to adapt k-mount lenses. These compromises might also limit future development on the mirrorless system. FI the geometry of the mirrorless camera can't be changed much or it will no longer be compatible with the SLR adapter. Register distance on the mirrorless camera might have to be extremly short (0 mm or it might interfere with the OVF), which will lead to larger than necessary mirrorlsess lenses. So most users will be better served by separate DSLR and mirrorless systems, and in the end you will probably have to invest more on modular system like this than if having two dedicated systems. And you probably end up always updating both camera and adapter to the latest version as FI improved AF will be dependent on both.

08-21-2014, 01:54 AM	#21
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by Fogel70 APS-C/FF sensor cameras are too price sensitive to make a modular system like this. Ricoh has already failed on a modular system. As both the mirrorless camera and the SLR adapter will need a lots of compromises in the design, it will not be a very competitive system. FI the SLR adapter will be a low volume high margin accessory that most likely will cost as much as a complete DSLR, but the camera with adapter will not perform as good as a complete DSLR The mirrorless camera need many compromises to make the SLR adapter to work. So it might not be of any interest for anyone not wanting to adapt k-mount lenses. These compromises might also limit future development on the mirrorless system. FI the geometry of the mirrorless camera can't be changed much or it will no longer be compatible with the SLR adapter. Register distance on the mirrorless camera might have to be extremly short (0 mm or it might interfere with the OVF), which will lead to larger than necessary mirrorlsess lenses. So most users will be better served by separate DSLR and mirrorless systems, and in the end you will probably have to invest more on modular system like this than if having two dedicated systems. And you probably end up always updating both camera and adapter to the latest version as FI improved AF will be dependent on both. Agreed, Fogel70. In the end the only viable (but maybe not likable, YMMV) compromise is making an adapter for use of SLR lenses on the mirrorless body, if possible with as much compatibility (at least DA/FA/F, KA would be nice, K/M is doubtful). They will be slow to AF but that's it.

08-21-2014, 09:13 AM	#23
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	In one of the other pictures there's a shoulder-strap-lug that would make it difficult to slide the camera in-and-out, left-and-right. The adapter could still go up and down. I find either possibility unlikely, though.

08-21-2014, 09:27 AM	#24
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by ElJamoquio In one of the other pictures there's a shoulder-strap-lug that would make it difficult to slide the camera in-and-out, left-and-right. The adapter could still go up and down. I find either possibility unlikely, though. Unlikely from a cost perspective as well. Odd photo, though.

08-21-2014, 11:31 AM	#25
Joshua A Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 273	Upon looking at the design more, I've come to the conclusion that the mirror box is not user detachable, aka the camera is designed with the mirror box in mind. On the other hand, as Pentax as shown previously with the K-7/645D and K-3/645Z, I think that they have designed the camera in such a way that if they decide to bring a mirrorless camera to the market (other than the Q), it would require the factory minimal retooling to produce a mirrorless body utilizing a similar body/design. Edit: I forgot to mention that it looks like if they did use this body for a mirrorless camera, it seems to look like it would have a smaller flange distance, nonetheless utilizing the K-mount for easy K-SLR mount lens adoption with all features included.

08-21-2014, 11:35 AM	#26
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	What looks like a junction border appears to me to be a shiny decorative trim piece.that wraps around the camera.

08-21-2014, 11:58 AM	#27
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by monochrome What looks like a junction border appears to me to be a shiny decorative trim piece.that wraps around the camera. Concur.