Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-13-2015, 05:20 PM   #91
Senior Member
Matthew Saville's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California
Posts: 250
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
I don't know. My SLR from 1981 is still fine and working and I enjoy it tremendously.
K-7 from many years ago is still fine and working.
I see many istD's in perfect order.
Lenses from 1970's still work on my SLR and DSLR.

But any mirrorless camera I own looks obsolete. Feels cheap. It is made to be expendable.
I know that my 1981 SLR will outlive any modern digital K, and any mirrorless.
And my lenses will most likely live to be used in 30 years.

The reason I like K mount is that I can rely on lenses to deliver superb picture, both on digital and film cameras. In case of increased radiation that cripples EM devices, and when digital cameras simply refuse to work, film camera and a suitable lens will always be there to make a picture. Only skill needed would be to develop film.

SLR just works.
Yeah, from the feel of it, the K-3 isn't going anywhere any time soon. And you can get a new shutter for just a few hundred bucks, as long as they still keep the parts around...

Heck, I still have an Asahi Pentax from god knows when, and it clicks just fine! :-D

=Matt=

---------- Post added 03-13-15 at 05:26 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by noser Quote
I shot for 15 min with a buddies 5DMk2, and I was really surprised the VF wasn't as big and bright as my Pentax 135 film bodies. I'm curious as to the reason as well. Even if the reason is that since I wasn't shooting them side by side I was just remembering it wrong.
This is true across the board. Neither does a full-frame Nikon DSLR have a VF nearly as big as my 1980's FM2.

I think it has mainly to do with pressure to 1.) perfect autofocus, and, 2.) save weight / space. The latter is obviously self-explanatory, (albeit sad) however I can't recall why the former is mutually exclusive from having a big bright VF. I just thought it was the ground glass getting brighter that was because they "stole" the light for improving PDAF technology.

=Matt=

03-13-2015, 06:23 PM   #92
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary, AB CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by Matthew Saville Quote
Yeah, from the feel of it, the K-3 isn't going anywhere any time soon. And you can get a new shutter for just a few hundred bucks, as long as they still keep the parts around...

Heck, I still have an Asahi Pentax from god knows when, and it clicks just fine! :-D

=Matt=

---------- Post added 03-13-15 at 05:26 PM ----------


This is true across the board. Neither does a full-frame Nikon DSLR have a VF nearly as big as my 1980's FM2.

I think it has mainly to do with pressure to 1.) perfect autofocus, and, 2.) save weight / space. The latter is obviously self-explanatory, (albeit sad) however I can't recall why the former is mutually exclusive from having a big bright VF. I just thought it was the ground glass getting brighter that was because they "stole" the light for improving PDAF technology.

=Matt=
The AF idea I could see affecting brightness. I seem to recollect the MF's were brighter than AF's, but I'm not near my film cameras at the moment. I'll give it a shot in a few days...

QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
Yeah, even the ME Super (0.95x 92%) people rave about here is inferior to an MX VF (0.97x, 95%).
I think I'm remembering the MX... but I also picked up this odd duck SF10 AF film body for the 28-80 attached to it, so I'll compare them when I get back.
03-13-2015, 07:55 PM   #93
npc
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 305
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
The reason I like K mount is that I can rely on lenses to deliver superb picture, both on digital and film cameras. In case of increased radiation that cripples EM devices, and when digital cameras simply refuse to work, film camera and a suitable lens will always be there to make a picture. Only skill needed would be to develop film.
Lol, if radiation rises to that level, you'll have much bigger problems to worry about than cameras not working, Or more likely none, because you will be dead.
By the way have you ever seen those warnings on the airport x-ray scanners about putting cameras through the scanner? They are there because this relatively small level of radiation damages film, not digital equipment.
03-13-2015, 10:00 PM   #94
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
I don't know. My SLR from 1981 is still fine and working and I enjoy it tremendously.
K-7 from many years ago is still fine and working.
I see many istD's in perfect order. I thought of getting one.
Lenses from 1960s and 1970s and 1980s still work on my SLR and DSLR.

But any mirrorless camera I own looks obsolete the next day. Feels cheap. It is made to be expendable.

I know that my 1981 SLR will outlive any modern digital K, and any mirrorless. And that it can be repaired, made to work.
And my lenses will most likely live to be used in the next 30 or 100 years.

The reason I like K mount is that I can rely on lenses to deliver superb picture, both on digital and film cameras. In case of increased radiation that cripples EM devices, and when digital cameras simply refuse to work, film camera and a suitable lens will always be there to make a picture. Only skill needed would be to develop film.

But it would be impossible to make today's mirorless lenses to work again of a film body of any sort, even made from scratch, because they need lots of software and computing quirks to deliver any decent image quality. Mirrorless is fine for a limited time, in limited circumstances, but it is the dead end for photography.
I pretty much agree with everything you've said - except for the last but

The old film cameras are gorgeous items of machinery in my opinion, to see them sold for $50 or less is an insult to these marvelous items, and it pains me to see them sold for so little.

But modern plastics/composites and bits of metal have replaced all-metal construction in many items. Neither you or i are going to be able to turn back that clock. The only thing I disagree with, politely, is that its a dead end. Many of these plastic/metal digital cameras can turn out amazing images. Tonight, i just varnished a canvas print that was made with a plastic printer and a plastic camera. And its gorgeous in my admittedly biased opinion. My advice is: enjoy the lovely images that your skill and cameras can produce - and don't worry so much as to whether they employ plastic or metal construction.

Enjoy the spring!

03-13-2015, 10:58 PM   #95
Veteran Member
anthony mazzeri's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 312
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Somewhere on one of these threads I read that Ricoh's sales in Japan are larger than the entire rest of the world. Q does OK in Japan, even if we in the 'rest of the world' don't appreciate it very much. It seems that Ricoh believes they do have a mirrorless offering - it just isn't the one we want.
I think it's still important to differentiate between Ricoh and Pentax when it comes to mirrorless, because Ricoh did indeed have a well-received mirrorless offering before the Pentax acquisition - the GXR Mount A12 which used the Leica M-mount. Which they have since abandoned... for what? They're certainly not been working on any Pentax models because there's not one iota of Ricoh DNA yet to be seen in any Pentax camera yet, not even a glimpse of Ricoh's excellent firmware.

The fact remains that the entire Ricoh team previously responsible for the ongoing GXR A12-28, A12-50, A-16, P10, S10, Mount A12, G700, GRD, CX and PX series before the Pentax acquisition have so far only come up with the single, solitary GR since. As good as this one camera is, they've gone from a rate of 5 complete cameras a year to just this one in four years so it does raise the question of what else have they been doing with their time these past several years? Obviously it must be some sort of ongoing 'project X' that's requiring all their efforts.

My prediction is a Ricoh MILC, likely a KAF bellows-mount.
03-13-2015, 11:35 PM   #96
JPT
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,186
QuoteOriginally posted by anthony mazzeri Quote
I think it's still important to differentiate between Ricoh and Pentax when it comes to mirrorless, because Ricoh did indeed have a well-received mirrorless offering before the Pentax acquisition - the GXR Mount A12 which used the Leica M-mount. Which they have since abandoned... for what? They're certainly not been working on any Pentax models because there's not one iota of Ricoh DNA yet to be seen in any Pentax camera yet, not even a glimpse of Ricoh's excellent firmware.

The fact remains that the entire Ricoh team previously responsible for the ongoing GXR A12-28, A12-50, A-16, P10, S10, Mount A12, G700, GRD, CX and PX series before the Pentax acquisition have so far only come up with the single, solitary GR since. As good as this one camera is, they've gone from a rate of 5 complete cameras a year to just this one in four years so it does raise the question of what else have they been doing with their time these past several years? Obviously it must be some sort of ongoing 'project X' that's requiring all their efforts.

My prediction is a Ricoh MILC, likely a KAF bellows-mount.
I agree with most of this. One point to adf is that Ricoh has a factory in China that used to make all those cameras, but now only makes the GR. That's seems a bit strange unless they are planning to close it.

I think mirrorless is a more natural fit for Ricoh as a brand, and their control system is perfect for it. The APS-C lens units provide a good starting point for lenses and they have a number of patents for other focal lengths.

The thing is, they have demand for other focal lengths and they can either make a lot of separate cameras like Sigma, make a MILC, or try again with the GXR concept.
03-13-2015, 11:52 PM   #97
Veteran Member
anthony mazzeri's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 312
QuoteOriginally posted by JPT Quote
I agree with most of this. One point to adf is that Ricoh has a factory in China that used to make all those cameras, but now only makes the GR. That's seems a bit strange unless they are planning to close it.

I think mirrorless is a more natural fit for Ricoh as a brand, and their control system is perfect for it. The APS-C lens units provide a good starting point for lenses and they have a number of patents for other focal lengths.

The thing is, they have demand for other focal lengths and they can either make a lot of separate cameras like Sigma, make a MILC, or try again with the GXR concept.
Too true. They already have the excellent (equivalent) 28mm and 50mm macro and the 24-85 zoom plus leaf shutter technology and firmware from the GXR/GR so it's not a big leap at all to split them off into 3 distinct lenses and a new body for any new (APSC) MILC system. Add in Pentax's sensor stabilization which also already exists would allow them time instead to develop other additonal new lenses from scratch too.
03-13-2015, 11:57 PM   #98
JPT
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,186
The part I don't agree with is that they would do it with any variant of K-mount. It might attract a handful of Pentax users, but the complexity and cost would put off everyone else. An AF adapter would work just as well for people who wanted to use K-mount.

03-14-2015, 01:16 AM   #99
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,428
It would be a short time solution serving a limited number of people.
New mount and adapters, that's the solution for those wanting mirrorless. The problem is, it doesn't work at all for anyone else
03-14-2015, 03:08 AM   #100
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,963
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
I pretty much agree with everything you've said - except for the last but

The old film cameras are gorgeous items of machinery in my opinion, to see them sold for $50 or less is an insult to these marvelous items, and it pains me to see them sold for so little.

But modern plastics/composites and bits of metal have replaced all-metal construction in many items. Neither you or i are going to be able to turn back that clock. The only thing I disagree with, politely, is that its a dead end. Many of these plastic/metal digital cameras can turn out amazing images. Tonight, i just varnished a canvas print that was made with a plastic printer and a plastic camera. And its gorgeous in my admittedly biased opinion. My advice is: enjoy the lovely images that your skill and cameras can produce - and don't worry so much as to whether they employ plastic or metal construction.

Enjoy the spring!
Mirrorless cameras will be around for a long time. It feels like the big reason why they exist, though, is because they are smaller than SLRs. However this also makes them a little more unwieldy when you stick a fast zoom on one. It feels like they are cameras specifically designed to be shot with primes and slowish zooms. I do shoot a lot with primes, but I like f2.8 zooms as well.

Sony for whatever reason (probably wisely) has not designed any f2.8 zooms for the e mount, although you can use alpha mount zooms with the adapter, which from photos looks like a ergonomic nightmare.

I still like a good OVF as well and don't really relish the thought of having to use an electronic viewfinder. But these days, most people don't want to use a viewfinder at all and would rather use the back LCD. I guess the world changes and we just have to deal with it.
03-14-2015, 04:00 AM   #101
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
QuoteOriginally posted by anthony mazzeri Quote
I think it's still important to differentiate between Ricoh and Pentax when it comes to mirrorless, because Ricoh did indeed have a well-received mirrorless offering before the Pentax acquisition - the GXR Mount A12 which used the Leica M-mount. Which they have since abandoned... for what? They're certainly not been working on any Pentax models because there's not one iota of Ricoh DNA yet to be seen in any Pentax camera yet, not even a glimpse of Ricoh's excellent firmware.

The fact remains that the entire Ricoh team previously responsible for the ongoing GXR A12-28, A12-50, A-16, P10, S10, Mount A12, G700, GRD, CX and PX series before the Pentax acquisition have so far only come up with the single, solitary GR since. As good as this one camera is, they've gone from a rate of 5 complete cameras a year to just this one in four years so it does raise the question of what else have they been doing with their time these past several years? Obviously it must be some sort of ongoing 'project X' that's requiring all their efforts.

My prediction is a Ricoh MILC, likely a KAF bellows-mount.
Ricoh bought Pentax because they saw the GXR with M mount makes no sense. K mount has future, it can be expanded and many innovations put into it. M mount is what it is, same as screw mount from the Spotmatic era.

So from any practical point, GXR was axed because Ricoh has K-mount, 645 mount, Q mount. Good riddance.

GR was the only camera worth preserving, yes, as it is Ricoh's best. It should be preserved and improved upon.

Likewise, many cameras Pentax had are now gone, those endless compacts, etc. Even the latest MX-1 seems to be .. what .. gone too?

Anyway, life goes on. I look forward to a 35mm-50mm GR (thereabouts). If they don't deliver it, then Ricoh, even with Pentax, haven't learned a thing.
03-14-2015, 05:37 AM   #102
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,913
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Mirrorless cameras will be around for a long time. It feels like the big reason why they exist, though, is because they are smaller than SLRs. However this also makes them a little more unwieldy when you stick a fast zoom on one. It feels like they are cameras specifically designed to be shot with primes and slowish zooms. I do shoot a lot with primes, but I like f2.8 zooms as well.

Sony for whatever reason (probably wisely) has not designed any f2.8 zooms for the e mount, although you can use alpha mount zooms with the adapter, which from photos looks like a ergonomic nightmare.

I still like a good OVF as well and don't really relish the thought of having to use an electronic viewfinder. But these days, most people don't want to use a viewfinder at all and would rather use the back LCD. I guess the world changes and we just have to deal with it.
How many of the many millions who own a mirrorless camera have any interest In big zooms? Probably very few, hence not really a widespread problem. There will always be someone who complains that their monster f2.8 long tom whatever is imbalanced but all that means is they bought the wrong camera for their intended usage. Everyone else will be quite happy with their primes or their relatively slow and thus not very large walkabout zooms and will never notice.

If you want small, svelte, convenient and packed with helpful tech then mirrorless cannot be beaten, IMHO, provided one doesn't fool oneself that it will also be ideal for fast-frame sports or wildlife photography at 600mm, etc. Even in that case things will likely improve. Mirrorless is still in the getting it right phase. None of this means the DSLR doesn't have its place too. Clearly it does, especially as a very robust jack of all trades even if, case by case, other solutions sometimes now offer equal or better.

Last edited by mecrox; 03-14-2015 at 05:47 AM.
03-14-2015, 08:43 AM   #103
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 83
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
Anyway, life goes on. I look forward to a 35mm-50mm GR (thereabouts). If they don't deliver it, then Ricoh, even with Pentax, haven't learned a thing.
An 43mm equivalent would be ideal, but I am not so sure if there are enough buyers for a normal fixed camera. Nowadays normal perspectives have become a bit of acquired taste.
03-14-2015, 12:30 PM   #104
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,418
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Mirrorless cameras will be around for a long time. It feels like the big reason why they exist, though, is because they are smaller than SLRs. However this also makes them a little more unwieldy when you stick a fast zoom on one. It feels like they are cameras specifically designed to be shot with primes and slowish zooms. I do shoot a lot with primes, but I like f2.8 zooms as well.

Sony for whatever reason (probably wisely) has not designed any f2.8 zooms for the e mount, although you can use alpha mount zooms with the adapter, which from photos looks like a ergonomic nightmare.

I still like a good OVF as well and don't really relish the thought of having to use an electronic viewfinder. But these days, most people don't want to use a viewfinder at all and would rather use the back LCD. I guess the world changes and we just have to deal with it.
people who are buying into mirrorless today are looking more towards the future. Today it is true that a 70-200 F/2.8 FE lens would be comical on an A7. I expect that in 2015-16 we will see the release of an A9 that is built to compete with the bigger DSLRs. Much larger batteries and a lot more processing power. Faster AF and frame rates. Then Sony will have a mirrorless FF system that offers a level of compactness that DSLRs can't compete with and an option for the larger "pro level" body. Sony can make the body as large as they want to balance with big F/2.8 zooms and I think they will when the technology is ready. In the long run there is considerably more flexibility with the mirrorless mount.

Given the new Fuji F/2.8 zooms I expect that Fuji will also introduce a larger higher Spec body in the near future. A body with the size and processing power of the Samsung NX-1.
03-14-2015, 01:28 PM   #105
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 1,120
"In case of increased radiation that cripples EM devices, and when digital cameras simply refuse to work, film camera and a suitable lens will always be there to make a picture."

Now THAT'S a creative argument against digital cameras!
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
argument, bit, boring, cameras, designs, dpr, dpr interview, dslr, enemy, experience, film, food, heat, images, interview, k-01, lenses, mirrorless, mount, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, representative, ricoh, slr, space, tirade
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Imaging-Resource Interview With Ricoh luftfluss Pentax News and Rumors 61 03-08-2015 04:07 PM
Interview with head of Ricoh Imaging JPT Pentax News and Rumors 53 10-06-2014 11:46 PM
PF Interview with Ricoh Imaging at Photokina 2014 PF Staff Homepage & Official Pentax News 10 09-17-2014 06:10 AM
Imaging Resource's interview with Ricoh Kunzite Pentax News and Rumors 141 03-21-2014 02:29 AM
An Interview with Ricoh/Pentax from Imaging Resourse unkipunki Pentax News and Rumors 2 03-15-2014 01:32 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:44 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top