[Digitalis]

Why does Pentax have to produce a mirrorless camera at all? the market for 35mm mirrorless is already being served, adding one more camera system is just...boring. Fuji have produced their MF alternative for the X system , that is all the GFX is..on paper it is on par with the 645D. It is nothing special: contrasted with the Leica S Typ007, which IS something special.

Pentax/Ricoh has to find a niche in photography that isn't being served, they have done well with the Theta, GR, and the Q...what else is out there?

---

Last edited by Digitalis; 10-09-2016 at 03:17 AM.

[Zygonyx]

I just hope nothing else than an improved K-02

[reh321]

Why does Pentax have to produce a mirrorless camera at all? the market for 35mm mirrorless is already being served, adding one more camera system is just...boring. Fuji have produced their MF alternative for the X system , that is all the GFX is..on paper it is on par with the 645D. It is nothing special: contrasted with the Leica S Typ007, which IS something special.

Pentax/Ricoh has to find a niche in photography that isn't being served, they have done well with the Theta, GR, and the Q...what else is out there?

I believe that the lower tier market is tilting toward MILC. If my opinion is correct, that is why Pentax "has to produce an MILC at all" - to stay relevant in that market.

[RonHendriks1966]

I believe that the lower tier market is tilting toward MILC. If my opinion is correct, that is why Pentax "has to produce an MILC at all" - to stay relevant in that market.

Actually it isn't. Under 599 euro it is old models dslr that are popular. D3300, D5300 and 1200D that run the list. Followed by 750D, 100D and 1100D.

[reh321]

Actually it isn't. Under 599 euro it is old models dslr that are popular. D3300, D5300 and 1200D that run the list. Followed by 750D, 100D and 1100D.

The relevant phrase is "is tilting". Let's see what the results are a few years from now, looking at current models, not old inventory at sell-out prices under an arbitrary limit.

[RonHendriks1966]

The relevant phrase is "is tilting". Let's see what the results are a few years from now, looking at current models, not old inventory at sell-out prices under an arbitrary limit.

What do you considder lower tier market? I thought of low price, but maybe I misread...

[reh321]

What do you considder lower tier market? I thought of low price, but maybe I misread...

Yes, typically lower price, but also a certain level of functionality, and I'm not quite sure where/how to draw the line.

---

Last edited by reh321; 10-09-2016 at 11:57 AM. Reason: expand thought

[RonHendriks1966]

Yes, typically lower price, but also a certain level of functionality, and I'm not quite sure where/how to draw the line.

Well looking at announcements in 2016 there are more cheap dslr then milc.

https://www.dpreview.com/products/slrs/all?sort=chronological&view=grid

Also is the average unit price for milc more expensive ten for dslr according to cipa's manufacturers sales price.

[reh321]

Well looking at announcements in 2016 there are more cheap dslr then milc.

All Interchangeable Lens Cameras: Digital Photography Review

Also is the average unit price for milc more expensive ten for dslr according to cipa's manufacturers sales price.

Comparing Canon 6Ti to Canon M5, I'm guessing that manufacturers believe they can charge a premium for EVF. I don't know how true that is, but it is one of my reasons for not being sure where/how to draw a line. The M5 is the first serous test of the market by Canon / Nikon / Pentax. How that works out may tell us a lot about the market, just as the Canon SX-50 revealed a serious bridge camera market that Nikon has since moved into.

[RonHendriks1966]

Comparing Canon 6Ti to Canon M5, I'm guessing that manufacturers believe they can charge a premium for EVF. I don't know how true that is, but it is one of my reasons for not being sure where/how to draw a line. The M5 is the first serous test of the market by Canon / Nikon / Pentax. How that works out may tell us a lot about the market, just as the Canon SX-50 revealed a serious bridge camera market that Nikon has since moved into.

The well known saying......."only the Sun shines for free".

[Zygonyx]

OVF + Compact and mostly unergonomic shape = common markeMILCery.

[rodaballo]

Why does Pentax have to produce a mirrorless camera at all? the market for 35mm mirrorless is already being served, adding one more camera system is just...boring. Fuji have produced their MF alternative for the X system , that is all the GFX is..on paper it is on par with the 645D. It is nothing special: contrasted with the Leica S Typ007, which IS something special.

Pentax/Ricoh has to find a niche in photography that isn't being served, they have done well with the Theta, GR, and the Q...what else is out there?

I agree. And the niche is that of the Sony RX1. Let's call it Ricoh G.

[reh321]

What do you considder lower tier market? I thought of low price, but maybe I misread...

Yes, typically lower price, but also a certain level of functionality, and I'm not quite sure where/how to draw the line.

There has been a lot of talk here comparing the new K-70 to the older K-3 still being sold; most of us recognize that they were designed for seriously different levels of user. That difference is what I was trying to encapsulate by referring to "lower tier". When I compare different models, it is obvious that certain ones all group together in this lower tier, and I belief the M5 fits in with those much better than with the group the K-3 competes with, as is dramatized by this comparison:
Side by Side Comparison: Digital Photography Review
What I have been trying to say in this discussion is that I believe a new generation of MILCs will compete with the K-70, but those who are naturally drawn to the K-7, K-5, K-3 line shouldn't be concerned that this line will be replaced by a MILC anytime soon.

[Nicolas06]

A FF 20/2.8 lens for mirrorless can be more compact than FA 20/2.8 as can all other lenses up to tele. And for zoom lenses the shorter register distance makes it easier to design more compact retractable zoom lenses.

All new mirrorless lenses being smaller is a bit optimistic when you hava DA21, DA40, FA43 in the current DSLR line up... In term of pure of ergonomics smaller than a pancake isn't really practical. And everything past 50mm is a tele and doesn't benefit. You wouldn't get any smaller pancakes anyway for short focal length, but you would get significantly bigger 55 and 70 lenses where a pancake design would not work anymore for short registration distance.

Not sure why you compare a K01 with A7. A APS-C DSLR like camera without EVF vs a FF frame mirrorless with EVF. Add a FF sensor and EVF to K-01 and see what you will end up with. Or you can compare K-01 with the smallest APS-C E-mount cameras that are half the weight and 1/3 of the size of K-01.

K01 is K-mount so with same registration distance and all. It could fit an FF sensor because anyway the K-mount can fit it and was there. There no need for bigger mirror, bigger OVF because theses are simply not present. Their neither a need for more space for AF sensor as thoses are directly on the sensor. The K01 is similar to A7 in size and the latest cameras in A7 serie also have FF sensor, SR and much more powerfull processing than the best pentax has. If Sony can fit it, Pentax surely can. The limiting factor isn't the mount or registration distance. At worst the mount would protrude a bit like it does on K01 or on a K3.

There are many other brand on mirrorless that are much more successful than Sony in designing compact lenses. Which make a very good business opportunity for anyone designing a much better optimized FF mirrorless system than Sony.

Well Leica is a bit expensive and that's the only other manufactuer that has an FF mirorless. Sure Leica design is great but we can't all afford it. As for Olympus/Pana/Canon/Nikon their mirrorless line doesn't cover FF so that's a bit easier and not comparable in quality. Also, the best registration distance isn't an absolute but relative to the sensor size and once you remove the mirror box, there really nothing that prevent you to have lens that protrude a bit inside the body as long as they are dedicated for this mirrorless line. The only really constraint for that would a different back hood and that's about it.

[Fogel70]

All new mirrorless lenses being smaller is a bit optimistic when you hava DA21, DA40, FA43 in the current DSLR line up... In term of pure of ergonomics smaller than a pancake isn't really practical. And everything past 50mm is a tele and doesn't benefit. You wouldn't get any smaller pancakes anyway for short focal length, but you would get significantly bigger 55 and 70 lenses where a pancake design would not work anymore for short registration distance.

With short register distance you can design lenses significantly faster that Pentax pancakes without the lenses getting bigger.

Samsung 10/3.5 a pancake fisheye lens
Samsung 16/2.4 is half the size of Pentax DA 15/4
Samsung 20/2.4 is the same size of Pentax DA 21/3.2
Samsung 30/2 faster pancake than any Pentax.

The reason for me to get a mirrorless system is because they can give advantages not possible not possible on a K-mount camera. It's not that I want to replace my DSLR system with it.

K01 is K-mount so with same registration distance and all. It could fit an FF sensor because anyway the K-mount can fit it and was there. There no need for bigger mirror, bigger OVF because theses are simply not present. Their neither a need for more space for AF sensor as thoses are directly on the sensor. The K01 is similar to A7 in size and the latest cameras in A7 serie also have FF sensor, SR and much more powerfull processing than the best pentax has. If Sony can fit it, Pentax surely can. The limiting factor isn't the mount or registration distance. At worst the mount would protrude a bit like it does on K01 or on a K3.

With an EVF sticking out of the back of a FF Pentax K-mount camera, I would expect it to be more the size on Sigma Quattro than Sony A7 II.
Compact Camera Meter

Well Leica is a bit expensive and that's the only other manufactuer that has an FF mirorless. Sure Leica design is great but we can't all afford it. As for Olympus/Pana/Canon/Nikon their mirrorless line doesn't cover FF so that's a bit easier and not comparable in quality. Also, the best registration distance isn't an absolute but relative to the sensor size and once you remove the mirror box, there really nothing that prevent you to have lens that protrude a bit inside the body as long as they are dedicated for this mirrorless line. The only really constraint for that would a different back hood and that's about it.

Lenses protruding into the camera is not a very good design. It's just a way of trying to work around the disadvantage of using a long register mount. But why use a long register distance at all then?
- Lenses would no longer be compatible with K-mount.
- Optical design would be severely limited as the lens elements would have to be very small if the lens protrudes into the mount. It would only be possible on very slow lenses.
- The lenses will only look small when on camera, but in the bag the will take much more space.