[biz-engineer]

what has al this about K-1 stock to do with a mirrorless Pentax?

Because when in liveview mode, the K1 is mirrorless and even shutterless when EFCS is enabled, those are optional, while on a mirrorless camera those are mandatory, if you want to use a mirror, you can't, but if people want no mirror why not sell them what they want, that's the difference between marketing and engineering.

[6BQ5]

This fake idiot has picked together different stuff i have said and put it together with some made up stuff. I hardly share anything anymore, and definitive not as a comment on Pentaxrumors


"New mount, short register, K adapter for compatibility" ? - I have never said that!

But i did say (in a totally different situation), that Ricoh are in for the long time. And there might be a little surprise or two in 2017.

So, there's maybe not a bad idea to save up some money anyway

Ricoh has become a strong enough force in the market to become a spook and spread rumors! I consider that an upgrade in Ricoh's status. And, what a compliment to you, kenspo! You have a fan club.

[reh321]

Because when in liveview mode, the K1 is mirrorless and even shutterless when EFCS is enabled, those are optional, while on a mirrorless camera those are mandatory, if you want to use a mirror, you can't, but if people want no mirror why not sell them what they want, that's the difference between marketing and engineering.

How often do you personally use LV? I use it on my K-30 only when the OVF isn't adequate for what I want to do, because holding the camera where I can see the LCD is awkward {I don't lug a tripod around with me} and actually seeing the LCD is difficult {which is why I pack a Hoodman in my "Q" kit}. Actual usability is another difference between marketing and engineering. When I do use the LCD on my Q-7 with the Hoodman, I often find it to be more useful than the OVF on my K-30; if Pentax were to sell a K-02 with the guts of a K-70, but priced under $850 {i.e., not more than $200 more than the K-70}. I would quickly buy it before I would buy a K-70.

---------- Post added 10-10-16 at 02:37 PM ----------

what has al this about K-1 stock to do with a mirrorless Pentax?

I believe they are nibbling around the edges of two important questions: what is the current demand for Pentax products, and what is Pentax's current production capability.

[biz-engineer]

actually seeing the LCD is difficult

The K1 has an outdoor mode, seeing the lcd in full sun isn't an issue. Not available on other models.

[kenspo]

And, what a compliment to you, kenspo! You have a fan club.

Haha...well as long as he/she/they dont get me into more trouble..finally on good terms with the big guys again

[asahi man]

He said that in July. There were two earthquakes. It took 4 weeks to resume full production after each. Production is back at full capacity.

After Photokina he said they cannot catch up with orders in the pipeline - as soon as a K-1 arrives at a shop it is sent to a customer to fill a backorder. He does not foresee Pentax having any stock in their warehouse before year end.

It is In Stock at B&H and Adorama.

This is till today the current Pentax situation.
The complete production is going directly to the shops,Pentax has nothing on stock.
They can only switch the delivery,if any reseller are cancel orders.

[Nicolas06]

This is till today the current Pentax situation.
The complete production is going directly to the shops,Pentax has nothing on stock.
They can only switch the delivery,if any reseller are cancel orders.

Hoping the hearthquake didn't disturb everything too much that very good for Pentax profitability and market response to K1!

[Nicolas06]

Because when in liveview mode, the K1 is mirrorless and even shutterless when EFCS is enabled, those are optional, while on a mirrorless camera those are mandatory, if you want to use a mirror, you can't, but if people want no mirror why not sell them what they want, that's the difference between marketing and engineering.

While I agree with you and that's a good thing, many people envision EVF and smaller form factor as potential benefit of mirrorless and this is typically only seen if there no mirror at all. (even if I guess you could have both EVF and OVF).

I can only say from trying some FF OVF that this is pleasure to use and from the fiew EVF I tried, that the experience isn't the same. It was not K1 FF, as there no many to try in shops where I live but I perfectly get that K1 and FF DSLR have a place.

But mirrorless have a place too. I really hope for myself that I'd be able to buy a mirrorless from pentax. That's something I would buy if:
- it has effective AF performance at least at the level of K3. Meaning K70 AF in liveview is not good enough.
- It is significantly smaller/lighter than my current K3.
- It has a good viewfinder.
- It is 24MP+ APSC or why not 36MP+ FF with good cropping mode experience in EVF. I'll think a bit of 24MP FF as 10MP APSC crop would be a bit limited.

The price is not that important, as long as I feel it match the feature set.

[biz-engineer]

While I agree with you and that's a good thing, many people envision EVF and smaller form factor as potential benefit of mirrorless and this is typically only seen if there no mirror at all. (even if I guess you could have both EVF and OVF). I can only say from trying some FF OVF that this is pleasure to use and from the fiew EVF I tried, that the experience isn't the same. It was not K1 FF, as there no many to try in shops where I live but I perfectly get that K1 and FF DSLR have a place. But mirrorless have a place too. I really hope for myself that I'd be able to buy a mirrorless from pentax. That's something I would buy if: - it has effective AF performance at least at the level of K3. Meaning K70 AF in liveview is not good enough. - It is significantly smaller/lighter than my current K3. - It has a good viewfinder. - It is 24MP+ APSC or why not 36MP+ FF with good cropping mode experience in EVF. I'll think a bit of 24MP FF as 10MP APSC crop would be a bit limited. The price is not that important, as long as I feel it match the feature set.

Currently , Live View implementation is not as evolved as EVF. If live view was implemented like EVFs, (such as auto switch On/Off of the LV display and sensor without flapping the mirror On/Off) that would be a progress. There is still room for software improvements on DSLR. I don't know why but from software standpoint, DSLR are lagging behind .

[VE2CJW]

Speaking of mirrorless, I have sold my K30 which was my second body and bought a Sony A6000 in its place. Frankly, I don't regret it because the A6000 is in fact more interesting in some ways than even my K3. Look at the specs, they are very surprising. I won't sell the K3 because I love it but the Sony is going to be taken out often. I am just not ready to have only one camera which doesn't have a pentaprism in place of an EV. At 71, I sometimes prefer something which is lighter to lug around.

[reh321]

Currently , Live View implementation is not as evolved as EVF. If live view was implemented like EVFs, (such as auto switch On/Off of the LV display and sensor without flapping the mirror On/Off) that would be a progress. There is still room for software improvements on DSLR. I don't know why but from software standpoint, DSLR are lagging behind .

Progress perhaps, but not enough. My "issue" with LV is the inconvenience of using it; my Q-7 is the equivalent of LV all the time, and it is inadequate much of the time, which is why I bought a K-30 instead of a K-01. I need a viewfinder, which allows me to hold the camera in a stable position against my face, not an LCD which requires that I suspend it in front of my face somehow {and hope that I can still see the screen}.

[Float]

if the camera is K-mount its going to be big and bulky again, just like the K-01 due to the deep flange distance of the K lenses.

I would prefer an MX-1 with EVF, non-collapsing prime lens with mechanical aperture ring, manual dials, and the APSC sensor from the Ricoh GRii.

I guess I basically described a GRii with EVF as well. We know we can have APSC compacts with properly small form factors but it involves using a lens designed for short flange distance, something K-mount cant really do.

I wonder if it would be possible to have an optical element inside the camera body that reduces the flange distance?

I have what is basically my ideal setup right now in terms of features, performance and build quality with an Olympus Pen-F and 17mm f1.8. The EVF is amazing, the cameras performance is superb and its a sexy piece of kit to boot. Pentax/Ricoh would need something up to par with this setup to make me switch back.

[mecrox]

[snip]

I have what is basically my ideal setup right now in terms of features, performance and build quality with an Olympus Pen-F and 17mm f1.8. The EVF is amazing, the cameras performance is superb and its a sexy piece of kit to boot. Pentax/Ricoh would need something up to par with this setup to make me switch back.

And therein lies the problem not only for Pentax but also for Nikon and to some extent Canon should Canon wish to start pushing hard with their EOS M line: they are up against a very high bar these days and straight out of the gate they would need to produce something that is not just good but really very good, with no obvious weaknesses and a decent choice of lenses and accessories. Not easy to do. Maybe, in fact, not doable at all in a way that would make sense financially.

[grahame]

if the camera is K-mount its going to be big and bulky again,....I would prefer an MX-1 with EVF,

A very short flange distance might end up a camera system like Sony A7: very thin camera, and very long lens. Look at the late G master lenses: Sony basically added the thickness of the camera back to the end of the lens. Unless you don't care the optical performance (like the edge of wide lenses on A7r) or stick with small sensor (like M4/3) or fixed lens (like GR).

I think K-01's body style has big space to improve: a deeper groove makes a much better grip without adding much thickness and can make the camera look much smaller.

[pathdoc]

if the camera is K-mount its going to be big and bulky again, just like the K-01 due to the deep flange distance of the K lenses.

Try calling a Pentax ME big and bulky. If only it could take a DA or DA XS 40/2.8; fortunately the SMC-M 40/2.8 is little bigger.

It all depends on how much you have to fit inside and what you are prepared to sacrifice. The trouble with "retro" is that too many people who want it also want full reversion to all automatic flagship functions. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You cannot cram the full functionality of a K-1 or K-3ii into an ME or MX body with present tech, and that's all there is to it, but if you ditch the autofocus capability, the rear screen, shake reduction/pixel shift, video, most auto-editing functions, etc. etc. and rewire the manual control knobs to pass the relevant orders to the sensor/processor, you might just fit a full-frame sensor in there that spits an acceptable raw file onto an SD or micro SD card for later perusal (as per film). I think the Leica digital without rear screen is an interesting thing, as anyone who buys it is putting their "retro" money where their mouth is, but the price is simply horrific (and IMO there's not a little pretentiousness to all of that; they charge that price because they know there are people stupid - IMO - enough to pay it just to have a Leica around their necks).