[Uluru]

Certainly not everything, lenses such as the 16-85 WR arrived without even meeting the roadmap.

That is the terrifying thing! Instead, they should have released brand new DFA* 35mm. Because one more 'convenient' zoom is what throws the entire system in the state of higher and higher inconvenient entropy.

---------- Post added 07-14-2017 at 10:03 AM ----------

Hmm but if they launch a new mount what does that mean for retaining their current users? If I have to rebuy all my lenses in a new mount, I might as well look at Nikon or Canon or Sony...
Adapters are nice enough but still a workaround I'd rather not use. They are sort of in a hardspot as a result of the design aspects due to the mirror if they ever wanted to go mirrorless. To redesign a new camera system and lens system when they are so slow on offering D-FAs for their current system tells me not to hold my breath on any new Pentax mirrorless. I think they continue full steam ahead with the K-1 and K mount until it either takes on too much water or runs aground... provided it doesn't end up as smooth sailing. Success for the old K mount, using DSLRs, in the new market is still a possibility.

All manufacturers are bound to have a mirrorless-like-kinda-sorta system. If they keep on K-mount, and DSLRs, they will not be very successful, only please certain old people for a while. If they modernise K-mount, and simplify cameras and make them lighter too, then they will drop support for some old tech, it is inevitable. Screwdrive support will most likely be gone in some new cameras.

If with modernisation of the K-mount they introduce new, lighter lenses suitable for new tech cameras (hybrid DSLR/mirrorless), then we will see a parallel lineup of cameras developing. KP and K-1 will be traditional DSLRs, and the new line — however named — will be future oriented, simpler, and with new lenses built for it.

There is a chance for fresher start. Those lenses must work for PD and CD focusing, so they must be brand new. They are still K-mount lenses, theoretically, but totally reworked for the new line of cameras in mind.

There will be some confusion, and that is inevitable. But the current trend is even worse, and not supportable.

---

Last edited by Uluru; 07-13-2017 at 05:09 PM.

[mee]

That is the terrifying thing! Instead, they should have released brand new DFA* 35mm. Because one more 'convenient' zoom is what throws the entire system in the state of higher and higher inconvenient entropy.

---------- Post added 07-14-2017 at 10:03 AM ----------




All manufacturers are bound to have a mirrorless-like-kinda-sorta system. If they keep on K-mount, and DSLRs, they will not be very successful, only please certain old people for a while. If they modernise K-mount, and simplify cameras and make them lighter too, then they will drop support for some old tech, it is inevitable. Screwdrive support will most likely be gone in some new cameras.

If with modernisation of the K-mount they introduce new, lighter lenses suitable for new tech cameras (hybrid DSLR/mirrorless), then we will see a parallel lineup of cameras developing. KP and K-1 will be traditional DSLRs, and the new line — however named — will be future oriented, simpler, and with new lenses built for it.

There is a chance for fresher start. Those lenses must work for PD and CD focusing, so they must be brand new. They are still K-mount lenses, theoretically, but totally reworked for the new line of cameras in mind.

There will be some confusion, and that is inevitable. But the current trend is even worse, and not supportable.

But your POV assumes only old people use DSLR and only young people use Mirrorless. And further that mirrorless is the future. I don't think that is inherently the case.

What Ricoh have shown in the latest trade shows are giant D-FAs for the K-1. They can't even get these out of the door on a quick rate, so I don't know how you expect them to turn around and start making lighter mirrorless suitable lenses.

If they go for a brand new mount, that again poaches any sales of Pentax. I mean if they expect us to adapt our current K mount lenses to this proposed mirrorless system, then one can just as easily adapt F or EF lenses to it too. They open the door to the customer using a broad range of competitor's lenses. After awhile if one has a number of (for example) EF mount lenses, then it is very easy to say "I might as well get a Canon body to go with my Canon lenses" and adios Pentax.

So they'd shoot themselves in the foot since they are not big enough to accommodate such occurrences right now. They'd have to make their own lens lineup attractive enough to counter the desire to adapt other system's lenses. Plus that would cost a ton in research and development to front such a system and, again, they can't currently even fully support what they already have on the market.

In the end, they'll always be playing a game of catch up if they keep shifting their priorities around. They need to stick to one system and just develop that one system. I think that system is K mount and full frame. Because one can use Full frame lenses on crop bodies so they are covering both systems optically. If anyone wants small and light that isn't happening any time soon beyond what is already launched.

[Uluru]

But your POV assumes only old people use DSLR and only young people use Mirrorless. And further that mirrorless is the future. I don't think that is inherently the case.
What Ricoh have shown in the latest trade shows are giant D-FAs for the K-1. They can't even get these out of the door on a quick rate, so I don't know how you expect them to turn around and start making lighter mirrorless suitable lenses.

They have to have something that looks and performs as a new technology. Some elements discovered in mirrorless camera development must find ways into DSLR. If they introduce hybrid EVF/OVF, as they say they work on it, it means that the mirror must be semi transparent, and then it means that AF must work too under such a condition. It means some lens must then support PDAF and some sort of CDAF. Etc. One complication leads to another.

The switch from screw-drive to SDM, then DC, PLM, etc. all of it mean complications, because all those various things a camera must support. That itself is a big complication. From an engineering point of view, one solution is best. But we have too many already. With each new day, if things are not resolved, there will be more complications. Because, let's say, 40% of people would want 18-55 to be PLM too, and 50mm prime too. Some would wish a new DC zoom, some SDM primes. Some want small form factor of screw-drive lenses. Etc. So how many versions of same FoVs we end up having through totally different technologies?

Things are getting more and more complicated, lens system becomes a big scramble, and current users demand all that mess to increase, and increase in complexity and entropy. And that is Achilee's heel of Pentax — their traditional users are a hindrance. I am among them too, and I hate that fact. Because of such users and their random demands, Pentax system will never be up to date in any particular field, and if it is in some segments, then full of annoying quirks and overcomplications.

I can bet that right now, because of all that, those poor guys are working so hard, on a most complicated and impossible camera world has ever seen.

It is not fair by any stretch of imagination. But you ask for it, and have to live with all that comes with it.

[Jeff Lopez]

can anybody explain this to me??
Pentax DSLR
Why would the K3ii be cheaper than a k5iis?

[The Squirrel Mafia]

can anybody explain this to me??
Pentax DSLR
Why would the K3ii be cheaper than a k5iis?

Same with the K-500. Why is it way more expensive than the K-50?

[reh321]

What Ricoh have shown in the latest trade shows are giant D-FAs for the K-1. They can't even get these out of the door on a quick rate, so I don't know how you expect them to turn around and start making lighter mirrorless suitable lenses.

If they go for a brand new mount, that again poaches any sales of Pentax. I mean if they expect us to adapt our current K mount lenses to this proposed mirrorless system, then one can just as easily adapt F or EF lenses to it too. They open the door to the customer using a broad range of competitor's lenses. After awhile if one has a number of (for example) EF mount lenses, then it is very easy to say "I might as well get a Canon body to go with my Canon lenses" and adios Pentax.

I'm seeing Nikon users have exactly the same discussion now. Realistically, any established DSLR branch has only two choices:

(1) use old "DSLR" mount

(2) Canon solution - new mount, but provide converter for old "DSLR" mount

[mee]

I'm seeing Nikon users have exactly the same discussion now. Realistically, any established DSLR branch has only two choices:

(1) use old "DSLR" mount

(2) Canon solution - new mount, but provide converter for old "DSLR" mount

Indeed. I think it is the conundrum for all of them entering the mirrorless market with APS-C or FF based bodies. They are all defenseless against the lens adaptation issue. Sigma and Tamron sit back and laugh.. because they're going to support all of them and their R&D and manufacturing is miniscule (cheapo adapter and scale up Canon variants). Actually I guess Canon is probably laughing too.. I'm sure a decent number of Sony shooters alone have at least a couple of Canon's lenses despite not owning a single Canon body.

It is another reason I think Ricoh won't join the mirrorless hypetrain anytime soon. It makes more financial sense, for them in particular, to stay with DSLRs since they can defend their mount and it costs them nothing to do so. They probably appreciate Sigma and Tamron otherwise not seriously supporting K mount, because that means more Pentax lens sales (in theory) for Pentax shooters since there is no where else to go for K lenses.

I mean Tamron signed a sweet deal to sell their 24-70mm and 15-30mm in K mount likely for a lot more than they would have made had they just offered them on their own in K mount... it was guaranteed money instantly. Not manufacturing a batch and hope they sell. Which is probably why they cost more than F and EF variants of the same lens.. Ricoh has to make up for the money they paid Tamron to be able to use their designs. At least, that's my guess.

Which is why I'm surprised we don't have more D-FA announcements than what we've seen... roadmap or otherwise. Sigma and Tamron aren't thus far interested filling the massive holes in the K lineup, so it is an opportunity for Pentax to reap the rewards should they decide to.

It is such a messy, dynamic situation!

[Kunzite]

I'm simply stating what you said, even quoting your very words. If you mean something differently then I'd suggest you say something different. Because otherwise you are suggesting that I should read between the lines, and I'm not doing that.

I'm glad you added that extra wording this time. Because, without it, you are saying something entirely opposite.

Mee, you're mistaken about this. OTOH I've made a mistake myself, in the initial post but corrected in a following post: it's "roadmaps are not meant to keep us up to date". Is that the reason for your creative interpretation?

I never said, on this forum or elsewhere, that the roadmap is untruthful in any way; on the contrary, I'm expecting those lenses.
I never accused Ricoh of lying; on the contrary, I take issue with such empty accusations (because lying is a serious matter, and so are accusations about lying). I hate when people tries to put such nasty words in my mouth. And, generally, when they insist I meant the exact opposite of what I'm writing.
"Extra wording" was included even in my initial response to Rondec. My position was always consistent, and in direct contradiction with your interpretation. I told you, it's your interpretation that's wrong.
Last but not least, "roadmaps are not meant to keep us up to date" is not the same thing as "roadmaps are meant to trick us". It simply means they're published with a different scope (which scope was mentioned in the initial response to Rondec).

In any case, you either accept this or you'll never will, so I'm done here.

[Jonathan Mac]

Not looking into smaller, lighter mirrorless options is a mistake no matter which manufacturer is concerned (except possibly Leica) as it will cost market share in the long run. In the case of Pentax they risk finding themselves in a similar situation to when SLRs went digital and they were on the verge of not making it - I'm not sure, with their much smaller market share, that they would survive a second round of that game.

Make no mistake - in the not-too-distant future virtually all large-sensor cameras will be mirrorless and OVFs will be a relic. Anyone who gets left behind in that trend will disappear unless they create a Leica-style retro niche for themselves.

With regards to the K3 II, I believe a replacement will be along soon and it will not hold too many surprises other than a price-point significantly higher than the K3 II when it was released. I'd estimate around 30%.

[Uluru]

Make no mistake - in the not-too-distant future virtually all large-sensor cameras will be mirrorless and OVFs will be a relic. Anyone who gets left behind in that trend will disappear unless they create a Leica-style retro niche for themselves.
.

Leica has DSLRs, rangefinder and mirrorless systems. Even if "all world goes mirrorless", so to speak, many will still crave for something different, like the good ol rangefinder, or pentaprism. Those things are classics, like good Italian handmade shoes are.
For example, new Leica M10 came with a much brighter rangefinder than previous models, and people are going bananas about it; the line for the M10 is miles long. Then, great part of charm of the Fujifilm X100 series, its almost cult status, is its hybrid OVF/EVF. Not a single EVF camera has such a devout following, as those cameras with some classic charm.
Let someone make a DSLR with 100% view 1.0x magnification pentaprism, and a few fine lenses, and people will go crazy about it. When EVF becomes commodity, people will crave for rarity, and pay for the unique experience.

It is all about unique experience.

[Rondec]

We can argue about it, but I think the road maps are the bare minimum that Pentax expects to accomplish. They are completely separate from internal projects that are being worked on and are therefore more fuzzy. Whether they produce confidence is up to the individual who looks at them. I tend to take them at face value and think that eventually I will see these pieces of glass, although I may have to wait awhile.

Do I wish glass would come quicker? I guess so, although I'm just glad there is new development going on. There was a time under Hoya where every new project seemed to revolve around sealing existing consumer lenses like the DA 55-300 and 18-55. Nice, but certainly not treading new ground.

[Kunzite]

Not looking into smaller, lighter mirrorless options is a mistake no matter which manufacturer is concerned (except possibly Leica) as it will cost market share in the long run. In the case of Pentax they risk finding themselves in a similar situation to when SLRs went digital and they were on the verge of not making it - I'm not sure, with their much smaller market share, that they would survive a second round of that game.

Make no mistake - in the not-too-distant future virtually all large-sensor cameras will be mirrorless and OVFs will be a relic. Anyone who gets left behind in that trend will disappear unless they create a Leica-style retro niche for themselves.

Make no mistake: MILC propaganda is nothing more than attempted self-fulfilling prophecy. Endlessly repeating that DSLRs are dying/dead and MILCs are the future, with the purpose of promoting one technology (or brand) by "hurting" another. In short, FUD.
It's somewhat annoying to keep hearing that on a DSLR brand's forum. So, even if you have the most honorable intentions... please don't!

Reality check: DSLRs still outnumbers MILCs significantly. DSLRs are the bread&butter for Ricoh Imaging, it would be insane to abandon them - unless the result is guaranteed and quick; but:
Reality check: Going MILC is not a reliable recipe for success. Samsung failed. Olympus, I think they barely turned around? Panasonic doesn't look too well, and Pentax Q and Nikon 1 could be dead.

I believe Ricoh Imaging will have their own large sensor MILC, eventually. But now, there are other priorities... the K-mount/D FA line must be developed, at least to the point where they won't have major gaps (like the lack of modern primes).
Don't forget: we are keeping them afloat by buying their products.

[D1N0]

It is very tiresome that all of a sudden we can't carry around DSLRs any more just because there are smaller camera's around so carrying a dslr is so hopelessly out of fashion we need to be seriously ridiculed. It is like an army of pubescent boys is trying to force dslr users to conform or be ousted from popularity. Pentaxians are of course used to that because we used to get that from people who couldn't imagine shooting with anything else than a Canon. Nikon was looked down upon but Pentax completely flabbergasted those people and sent them into a show of disdainful superiority exhibition of how good their Canon is and how much of a fool you must be to choose such a insignificant brand.

[mecrox]

But your POV assumes only old people use DSLR and only young people use Mirrorless. And further that mirrorless is the future. I don't think that is inherently the case.

What Ricoh have shown in the latest trade shows are giant D-FAs for the K-1. They can't even get these out of the door on a quick rate, so I don't know how you expect them to turn around and start making lighter mirrorless suitable lenses.

If they go for a brand new mount, that again poaches any sales of Pentax. I mean if they expect us to adapt our current K mount lenses to this proposed mirrorless system, then one can just as easily adapt F or EF lenses to it too. They open the door to the customer using a broad range of competitor's lenses. After awhile if one has a number of (for example) EF mount lenses, then it is very easy to say "I might as well get a Canon body to go with my Canon lenses" and adios Pentax.

So they'd shoot themselves in the foot since they are not big enough to accommodate such occurrences right now. They'd have to make their own lens lineup attractive enough to counter the desire to adapt other system's lenses. Plus that would cost a ton in research and development to front such a system and, again, they can't currently even fully support what they already have on the market.

In the end, they'll always be playing a game of catch up if they keep shifting their priorities around. They need to stick to one system and just develop that one system. I think that system is K mount and full frame. Because one can use Full frame lenses on crop bodies so they are covering both systems optically. If anyone wants small and light that isn't happening any time soon beyond what is already launched.

Ricoh had an opportunity to begin again when they acquired Pentax in 2011. That was the moment when they could have wiped the slate and started out on new-generation mirrorless cameras with new-generation, automated production lines to make them on. Instead Fuji occupied the space Pentax could have moved into and Pentax continued along the path of the DSLR under its old management, more or less. So far as we know, Ricoh kept the old Pentax management largely as it was. Without major changes of personnel, I doubt we are going to get major changes of strategy and technology.

So I think we should expect Pentax to continue along the path of the DSLR. Starting a line of mirrorless cameras now would cost a fortune. There is little indication Ricoh has that kind of money anymore and anyway the market is crowded with extremely competent players. This doesn't rule out a few one-off kind of cameras here and there, like the excellent and greatly respected Ricoh GR series, but the big moment for a new direction passed a few years ago now and either Ricoh or the old Pentax management or both killed it off.

My own guess is that Ricoh in its present rather dire condition may sell on Pentax to another company or simply run it for a few more years and then wind it down, one hopes elegantly, with staff reassigned to Ricoh's new ventures in industrial cameras and optics. The Pentax user base has remained remarkably loyal and continues to do so but it's not getting any younger and the trend with traditional DSLRs like this is all one way. Not yet by any means, but eventually - and quite possibly on the far side of a spell with the OVF replaced with an EVF or hybrid VF on a DSLR-style body.

So, I would be amazed if the next Pentax camera wasn't a very good DSLR. The platform is very sophisticated these days. With the incredibly advanced sensors and electronics now available, the new Pentax camera will likely be better at imaging than any previous Pentax camera has ever been. But it is starting to come on borrowed time. As for the DSLR offering a workable long-term platform on which to base a business over five, ten, twenty years to come - no, I don't think it does. It's improbable Ricoh think it does either. So: you pays your money and you makes your choices.

[Kunzite]

Ricoh had an opportunity to begin again when they acquired Pentax in 2011. That was the moment when they could have wiped the slate and started out on new-generation mirrorless cameras with new-generation, automated production lines to make them on. Instead Fuji occupied the space Pentax could have moved into and Pentax continued along the path of the DSLR under its old management, more or less. So far as we know, Ricoh kept the old Pentax management largely as it was. Without major changes of personnel, I doubt we are going to get major changes of strategy and technology.

Fujifilm launched their X system in January 2012, that is, 3 months after Ricoh took over Pentax. Work on the X system started years earlier (3, at least - but I think 5 is more reasonable).
Are you trying to say Ricoh could've done it instantly?

I challenge the idea that going mirrorless instead of supporting the K-mount was a better strategy. And, of course, "guessing" that Ricoh might sell "Pentax" is FUD.