Originally posted by Kunzite You might be certain, but you are wrong:
1. Improve DSLR with mirrorless ideas - Entering the large sensor MILC market can and should be done without giving up on DSLRs. "Killing a historic mount"? Nonsense, did Canon kill the EF mount?
Besides, there aren't many "mirrorless ideas", can't put an EVF (but perhaps add more information into the optical viewfinder e.g. via LCD overlay), and the live view mode is improving as new sensors are available. Instead, I would say
they should advance DSLR specific stuff - the optical viewfinder and the autofocus system. Enough resources reserved, and they can do it even with a MILC in their lineup.
2. Join existing mirrorless deal - First, such a deal would have to be an option - does Leica want others to make cheaper L-mount cameras and lenses? Second, it would have to be desirable for Pentax - would they like playing second fiddle to Leica?
I don't think that's such a great idea.
3. Fixed lens mirrorless - Those "new vintage cameras" most likely don't exist, thus they don't have to be anything.
Simultaneously launching two fixed lens cameras under the Pentax brand, APS-C (killing the GR?) and FF, are you paying attention to what Ricoh Imaging is doing? They don't take such stupidly huge risks. If they would do it, one camera at first, to see how it sells.
And individual cameras can't replace a system.
Let's give Ricoh Imaging more credit than that
I was analysing weird possibilities even within proposed ridiculous scenarios. In short, to clarify my stand:
1. I don't agree with the new mirrorless mount idea.
2. EVF overlay is possible in the DSLR. Variable semi-transparent mirror too, to narrow the gap between the purely mirrorless and purely DSLR worlds. CDAF and proper PDAF. With such techs inside a DSLR, ultra short flange distance loses all relevance. DSLR has an advantage here, by historic design.
To me, Pentax wins, all others lose and learn a valuable lesson. We have the camera that has best of both worlds.
3. FF mirrorless fixed lens camera, with attached (not retracting) lens, is no contender against the GR. GR has to be like it is; retracting lens, small, pocketable, etc. But a 35mm mirrorless FF camera with a (smallish) 40/2 lens on it, can be quite an interesting addition to the line that may be purchased — by anyone.
Let it have a pixel shift tech, 36MP, SR, etc. and it may become a fixed lens camera to people who have other systems, or Pentax. That camera can be a serious Trojan horse. Otherwise, luring anyone into the Pentax FF system just like that, to 'switch' or to consider Pentax purely on its K-mount legacy … it is a difficult job.
Other problem is the size of an FF DSLR. It is no vacation camera! K-1 alone is above 1kg of weight! Basic Pentax APS-C DSLR alone is now close to 700g with a battery! But a serious FF fixed lens mirrorless camera can be made at ~640 grams — the whole package.
Such a camera is the entry ticket into the FF world. Light, efficient, and let it cost like the K-1 alone. But at half the weight of a K-1 together with a lens, to many folks it will be
the FF Pentax to go.
That is why I think it is a good idea.
PS. If not Pentax, then there is a fair chance
Nikon will come with the same or similar fixed lens concept.
Rumour is that Nikon Europe has announced a "pretty exciting mirrorless news". I doubt they would scream aloud about a new N1 camera.