[Mistral75]

I think Mistral75 already answered that. He said his friend was invited to examine the camera outside its glass display case. One can reasonably infer that they talked about the particulars. Mistral75 also said it was up to his friend to reveal or not reveal those particulars on PF.

Exactly. Thank you for taking the time to read my message and explain it to rullrich.

[mee]

The main goal is to attract new user..both pros and serious photographers. Not to please old timers.

Thank you for succinctly stating what I was trying to.

------------

And yes, it is shoehorning. Because if you're shoving in old tech you're squeezing out new tech as a result... they only have time and money to do so much. I doubt pleasing the 14 people who would want this is going to net them much. Versus the hundreds and thousands of 25-50 year olds looking for a modern system with modern features.

[UncleVanya]

Thank you for succinctly stating what I was trying to.

------------

And yes, it is shoehorning. Because if you're shoving in old tech you're squeezing out new tech as a result... they only have time and money to do so much. I doubt pleasing the 14 people who would want this is going to net them much. Versus the hundreds and thousands of 25-50 year olds looking for a modern system with modern features.

Yes. There aren't any hipsters out there buying morrorless systems and mounting manual glass to them and praising the lenses. Oh wait that's not true.

I think you miss the fact that Nikon has done this in the Df. The idea that there isn't a market is unproven. I think it should be a low priority but one that is possible in the future. It could attract new buyers and cause old timers to upgrade early.

But it is not a priority right now.

[mee]

Yes. There aren't any hipsters out there buying morrorless systems and mounting manual glass to them and praising the lenses. Oh wait that's not true.

I think you miss the fact that Nikon has done this in the Df. The idea that there isn't a market is unproven. I think it should be a low priority but one that is possible in the future. It could attract new buyers and cause old timers to upgrade early.

But it is not a priority right now.

And the Df took off like gangbusters.. right?

I think your proof is pretty solid that it is a BAD idea for Ricoh. Maybe one day we'll get a K-1000 style body with digital hardware but I can't imagine it is anywhere on the horizon for Ricoh right now. Esp when they are contracting out lens designs just to get the FF system afloat.

[Zygonyx]

Do you also hope you'll be able to tell us?

Probably so
I dislike personnally pretending or hiding things that i know, unless i signed some NDA (which is unlikely in a foreseable future), or unless the source asks for confidentiality or "of the record" kind of thing (which is exceptionnally scarce).

[Nicolas06]

Your original argument that I criticised was not about whether some technology is still being sold or not. The argument I criticised was the idea of abandoning backward-compatibility on the basis that some technology is "old" / "outdated".

AF screw drive is more modern than non AF lenses. There also still many screw drive lenses that you can buy new today including recent redesign of the DA ltd something like 2 years agos and K3 improved the in body screw drive motor compared to previous body. This isn't by any mean old and latest refinement in screw drive is arround 2 years old then.

Now for how many years did Pentax didn't introduce a new A lens? 25 years? 30 years? And M and K lenses? 35 years? 40 years?

From a pragmatic point of view, Pentax need to have minimal support of manual lenses or they would loose money from some people if they wouldn't have that. More so because of Samyang, Voigtlander or Zeiss to me than for K or M lenses. But they already support this.

On the contrary, they absolutely need 100% to fully support screw drive in all their K-mount camera for at least 10 more years if they want to stay in business.

[rullrich]

@mistral75: I didn't want to be offensive and I admit that I did not read your post carefully enough. There's so much hearsay that I hope this time it's right what the famous friend says.

@mee: Of cause it's not a necessity to have an aperture coupler, but it would have been a nice feature to have. I use modern and old timer's glass on my K-5, and I don't have any problem to use the green button, I just found your iPhone-tape analogy a litte bit too far fetched.

[UncleVanya]

And the Df took off like gangbusters.. right?

I think your proof is pretty solid that it is a BAD idea for Ricoh. Maybe one day we'll get a K-1000 style body with digital hardware but I can't imagine it is anywhere on the horizon for Ricoh right now. Esp when they are contracting out lens designs just to get the FF system afloat.

Actually I think Nikon has indicated the Df is a success. It is not intended to be a high volume product.

[Mistral75]

@mistral75: I didn't want to be offensive and I admit that I did not read your post carefully enough. There's so much hearsay that I hope this time it's right what the famous friend says.

(...)

No hard feelings. If I had been told directly, I would have reported what I would have heard (except if told otherwise). SInce it's a friend of mine (a die-hard Pentaxian who runs a small Pentax-dedicated forum by the way) who has been told, off the records (even "off off" it seems) and in his capacity as former colleague, I won't embarrass him nor those who told him and I leave it to him to publicly report what he considers appropriate.

But there seem to be so many people aware of the main details of the K-1, at least at Ricoh Imaging France (which is also Ricoh Imaging Europe), that I can't imagine we won't hear much more about the camera in the near future.

[mee]

@mee: Of cause it's not a necessity to have an aperture coupler, but it would have been a nice feature to have. I use modern and old timer's glass on my K-5, and I don't have any problem to use the green button, I just found your iPhone-tape analogy a litte bit too far fetched.

Considering cassettes were from the 80s and the M series lenses were from the late 70s/early 80s I'd say it was on target.

---------- Post added 11-10-15 at 09:21 AM ----------

Actually I think Nikon has indicated the Df is a success. It is not intended to be a high volume product.

Of course they will indicate it a success. Would they do anything less? They have shareholders and all.

And your own comment agrees with my PoV.. it is a very niche product. Nikon started over a decade ago by filling the modern side of the market with cameras and lenses and then MUCH later (only recently) backfilled for the vintage/legacy/old lenses with a niche body catering to those old lenses/shooters.

I can't see Ricoh doing it any different. Because, quite frankly, it won't sell anywhere close to what the modern body will sell. You can argue that until you are blue but it is true.

[eyeswideshut]

Some make it sounds like adding a tiny little feeler gauge will push Pentax over the edge. Maybe time to revisit:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/200075-pentax-ri...-petition.html

[Class A]

And yes, it is shoehorning. Because if you're shoving in old tech you're squeezing out new tech as a result...

"Shoehorning" has a connotation of "forcing", as in "squeezing". Nothing of this sort is required to add an aperture coupler.

What you apparently mean is "misguided" or "adverse to growing the customer base".

While I don't believe that developing an aperturer coupler would imply a lot of sacrifices regarding other developments, I don't take issue with the idea that an aperture coupler should not be high on the priority list. In fact, as I already said multiple times I do agree that the priority should be low as the financial viability is doubtful.

But a case of "shoehorning" it wouldn't be, hence my objection.

And the Df took off like gangbusters.. right?

I reckon Nikon made money from it. And if not, I can image a number of reasons that have nothing to do with our discussion.

Be that as it may, just look at Fuji whose success appears to be mainly built on providing a retro experience. Why wouldn't Pentax be able to ride that train in a less brain damaged way as well?

Anyhow, I think I provided my point of view and saying more won't be constructive.

[luftfluss]

Considering cassettes were from the 80s and the M series lenses were from the late 70s/early 80s I'd say it was on target.

Cassettes are long, long, long insufficient to store programs (because of capacity) or access them in a timely and reliable manner. "Legacy glass" captures more or less the same amount of data as new lenses.

[BrianR]

I don't think a "selfie flip" is out of the question though - the top hinge doesn't appear to have a flip-stop. Even if not all the screen is visible it might still be useable for selfies, or more interesting applications though I'm struggling to think of any at the moment!

Instead of "selfie" use, how about for "self portraits"? Self portraits were once a time-honoured pastime of photographers (and other artists).

[pathdoc]

The 645 digitals, I am told, kept the aperture coupler - it would be interesting to know why this was done for the MF cameras but not the APS-C's.

Until someone who's looked into the mirror box can tell us for certain one way or another, I'm hoping for a pleasant surprise with the full-frame. The change in format up from APS-C offers the perfect opportunity to reintroduce it, if in fact they are going to do so. Alternatively we may have to wait for the FIFTIETH anniversary of the K mount.