Originally posted by monochrome I was asking the question, not advocating - but - would an MILC with a 45.46mm flange focal distance and DA Limited Pancakes reworked with KAF4 and PLM motors be a sales leader? IOW
- Is size the singular differentiating benefit of MILC?
- How small is ‘small’ when a useful lens is mounted?
- How important is the aperture lever (backward compatibility) vs. a KAF4 MILC?
- Is the current consumer taste for one or two zooms worth Ignoring for MILC?
I don’t propose any answers, other than I personally believe the ergonomics of current MILC’s are horrible - close to unuseable.
Mirrorless short flange system (can) offer more flexibility and a larger range of products, which is what I believe many users like. In the same system there may be a very compact camera equipped with a pancake lens for a ILC that fit in a jacket pocket and also a larger DSLR sized camera better optimized for large lenses.
It seems you are only looking at smallest possible MILC, and not DSLR sized MILCs like Panasonic G9 that are about the same size as K1. Mirrorless can be smaller than DSLR, but they can be just as large too.
I also believe many users like systems that are optimized for both video and for photography. A system where most lenses are designed for autofocus in video.
Most system based on old SLR mount looks outdated for many new users that are looking to invest in a new system.
Trying to optimize a system both for old SLR users as well as new mirrorless users, that have different priorities are going to be difficult. It may just end up with a bad compromise that is poorly optimized for both types of users.