[pathdoc]

For heaven's sake. Go get an MX, some Portra and some M lenses and have the negatives scanned.

[Fogel70]

Then you ditch the LCD, because at the end of the day you really don't need it in a camera built to this philosophy. What do you need to know? Shutter speed, aperture, ISO. A hypothetical MX-D would have all that visible on the mechanical knobs. Exposure - over, under or dead on? The MX managed that with five LED lights in the viewfinder. All that remains would be to see whether all the electronics and the battery required to run them could be fitted in around the mirror/shutter mechanism. My guess is yes, if not now then easily within a few years.

Like I said, I'd like to give it to the junior engineers as a proof of concept design, and to let them wrestle with the issue of engineering/cost compromises before they're allowed to cut their teeth on a first-line DSLR.

Why use electronics at all, why not develop a camera and photo media that can capture image without any electronics. I believe that would be possible.

[pathdoc]

I believe that would be possible.

That would be my Pentax S1a.

[serothis]

@zoolander

The Df used the same sensor as the D4.

I took a good hard look at the Df. The major problem with the Df was that it was gimped so that it wouldn't cannibalize sales from the D4/D4s.

This was my wishlist for a Df2 but we could apply this to any "retro" camera pentax wants to attempt.

I like the dials. But they need to work. Ditch the locks (or be able to disable them); Ditch the PASM dial. Include "Auto" modes on the Iso/aperture/shutter dials. Example, if you want aperture priority, set aperture; set shutter/iso to "Auto". simple.

Ditch the top info info screen. Include a quick info check button on the back and use the main screen. (only active while button is pushed, behavior should be changeable in settings)

Internal guts need to be modern.

Connections, Ditch as many of the inputs as possble. 1 usb-c*, mic input, shutter release input.

*HDMI can be output over usb-c

There was more but that's what I could think of off hand.

[MJKoski]

I tried to use Df for something it apparently was not meant to do: compose with live view. There it failed 100%, they removed exposure simulation from Df. It is there in software BUT...lol...they removed the physical button (OK) which is used to activate it.

[Simen1]

My ten best guesses for 2017:

1. 645FF with 100 Mp, at 20K$

2. K-2 with fixed screen, flash, USB3, 3 control wheels, 24 Mp, 6fps, better AF tracking, 4K video, 900 gram and 1500$

3. K-3 III with USB3, Wifi and another round of groundbreaking new features

4. K-02 with WR and EVF

5. K-03 without WR and EVF

6. Theta S II with WR and 4K video

7. Delta - a triple Theta-rig with software to make 3D 360

8. D-FA primes. At least one limited

9. DA compact kit lens with PLM

10. No Q news

[ogl]

My ten best guesses for 2017:

1. 645FF with 100 Mp, at 20K$

8. D-FA primes.

10. No Q news

It's dream, not guess.

I think - it could be real - this three item above + K-3II's upgrade.

K-3II has USB3.0, by the way...

Ricoh won't produce K-02 and K-03.
It's useless to develop two cameras, one of them is without EVF and WR. EVF costs not much and WR is almost nothing.
And no any advantage of EVIL with K-mount. K-01 was the experiment and need to forget about it.

---

Last edited by ogl; 09-23-2016 at 04:42 AM.

[D1N0]

1. 645FF with 100 Mp, at 20K$

It needs a complete redesign of the MF body. Larger sensor, larger shutter, larger mirror, larger mirrorbox, larger pentaprism. I am not sure if Ricoh can stomach that.

[edri]

If there is a new mirrorless it must be with a shorter register distance. Otherwise it makes no sense. Since the main mirrorless advantage is the portability it would be wise to choose a smaller sensor 1inch or 4/3. A compact mirrorless with viewfinder, WR, sensor stabilization, other Pentax features, some WR zoom lenses, an adapter for K mount ... I want them. I would like to buy these until next summer. Pentax / Ricoh have you heard?

[Mistral75]

It needs a complete redesign of the MF body. Larger sensor, larger shutter, larger mirror, larger mirrorbox, larger pentaprism. I am not sure if Ricoh can stomach that.

Do you think they lost the blueprints of Pentax 645N II?

[MJKoski]

OR, then they drop the mirror from Z2. Complete redesign towards K-1 size.

[banep]

OR, then they drop the mirror from Z2. Complete redesign towards K-1 size.

"Dropping" is not so simple but it is not impossible.
My opinion is that important keystone towards that direction could be a new rumored "vintage mirrorless camera".

[Nicolas06]

If there is a new mirrorless it must be with a shorter register distance. Otherwise it makes no sense. Since the main mirrorless advantage is the portability it would be wise to choose a smaller sensor 1inch or 4/3. A compact mirrorless with viewfinder, WR, sensor stabilization, other Pentax features, some WR zoom lenses, an adapter for K mount ... I want them. I would like to buy these until next summer. Pentax / Ricoh have you heard?

Smaller sensor, there already Q, m3/4 market is crowded with lot of very nice and competitives bodies... And the biggest issue of a new mount is the lack of lenses. Many of the new mounts have simply no echosystem around them. Only m4/3 and E mount really start to have something and even that no match for Canon, Nikon or Pentax traditionnal mount, by far.

The lenses can be small on K mount. See DA21, DA40, DA70 as pancakes. DA15, DA35 macro, FA28, FA35, FA43, FA50, FA77 all theses lenses are either tiny or small. In zooms we have DA18-50, DA20-40. It can be done, no issue. On the opposite, neither Sony or Fuji can manage a DA70 or FA77 at the same size because of registration distance.

A K01 was still a much smaller/lighter body than a K3 or K1. The problem of K01 was terrible AF, no EVF, objectionnable design. There no reason theses issues could not be fixed.

[D1N0]

Problem with dropping the Mirror in 645 is lenses. Sure you can use adapters, but Pentax has the advantage over mirrorless systems it already has a full lens line up. So if you go mirrorless you need to make sure that works to your advangtage. Existing lenses should be fully compatible when adapted. Still they will have to sink a lot of money in a new lens line-up.

[ogl]

It needs a complete redesign of the MF body. Larger sensor, larger shutter, larger mirror, larger mirrorbox, larger pentaprism. I am not sure if Ricoh can stomach that.

I don't see any problem. 645Z body could be redesigned.

Problem with dropping the Mirror in 645 is lenses. Sure you can use adapters, but Pentax has the advantage over mirrorless systems it already has a full lens line up. So if you go mirrorless you need to make sure that works to your advangtage. Existing lenses should be fully compatible when adapted. Still they will have to sink a lot of money in a new lens line-up.

Hasselblad and Fuji have very compact lenses?