[Rondec]

Wow. This thread turned to a "what is wrong with Pentax" fest pretty fast. If I were going to say, I would say that the issues have more to do with presence in stores -- it is really poor in North America and not good enough entry level gear to get folks in. I warrant that most folks that I know who purchased a 6D or 5D MK -whatever started off with Canon's cheap APS-C gear. And mostly because it was there when they went into Best Buy.

As for the whole screw drive thing, I don't think it is a big deal. The DA limiteds and FA limiteds are the primary lenses at this point that are screw driven and most people buy in based on zooms, which at this point almost all have in lens motors. The K-1 even makes the screw drive motor sound quieter -- I guess because it is a bigger camera. Anyway, I'd like Pentax to fix the purple fringing on the FA limiteds, but otherwise they are fine.

[following.eric]

I'm not business man or that knowledgable on camera engineering. But at the end of the day photo quality will trump all. If you offered the best AF system and compatibility with all lens and a 1.2mp sensor, would it sell?

Could Ricoh use the Ricoh brand to develop a modern and competitive mirroless Camera to rival Fuji, olympus and sony and use the same tech that would allow a Ricoh mirrorless and an adapter to work with difference lens brands like Canon...just like current Mirrorless cameras with an adapter allow vintage lenses to work and pentax lenses to work. If Mirrorless is the future and what the current buyer wants then Ricoh could push that front. Creating innovative mirrorless kmount cameras that would bring in revenue and support the company. Also would increase demand for New Pentax k-mount lenses.

With this added forwarded thinking move, money and new lenses would trickle down to the Pentax brand that would focus on quality (image quality) dslr cameras. There would be more lenses due to the success of Ricoh mirrorless taking bigger market share and there would be more money to put towards dslr development. They don't need to release a new pentax every year, just nail it and get it right.

Think of it like car companies. Many companies have two brands. One for massive worldwide sales and high production numbers to create revenue and another brand to implement luxury and quality. BMW fuels Bentley. Toyota fuels lexus. Lamborghini funny enough is owned by VW and Audi. Companies need revenue to survive and having two brands could work in there favour. Ricoh fuelling Pentax.

but hey, i'm just a red k50 guy.

[Mistral75]

"BMW fuels Bentley"

Rolls-Royce. Bentley belongs to Volkswagen.

[kenspo]

Thanks for the info Kenspo and not only on KP but for your general presence in here

Do you have any updates for the new DFA* 500/4 and the accompanying TCs?

Your possible replies (to make it easier for you):

A. What is this? Are we talking about lenses?
B. The NDA comes in here (the big grin is part of your answer and means a lot)
C. Better continue sleeping or get your morning coffee and we talk again later...
And the answer i would love:
D. Yep, I've tried the proproduction version! It's marvelous!

Thank you for that mate

Hmm I think I'll answer A

[following.eric]

"BMW fuels Bentley"

Rolls-Royce. Bentley belongs to Volkswagen.

I knew I should have double checked that one. I'm sure though that the new Bentley SUV thingy has a chassis from the bmw. Just assumed bmw owned them. Hopefully it made sense either way.

[Mistral75]

The Bentley Bentayga is erected on the VW group’s MLB architecture shared with the Audi Q7 and the next Porsche Cayenne (and the Skoda Superb and Kodiaq and... and...).

[/OT]

[iheiramo]

Backwards compatibility is added value and scare no one away.

As i have been trying to say..this doesn't appeal to many new users..But pleasing some of the existing users.

I'm quite new to Pentax. Bought K-30 and 18-135 lens kit about 4 years ago after my first DSLR, an entry level Nikon, was stolen with the 2 lenses I had. I think you both are right. At least in my case.

I bought into Pentax system because of IQ and weather sealing. I read about backwards compatibility, but didn't really understand the meaning of it as I had no knowledge of legacy glasses. At that point I thought it to be a positive thing, but it didn't effect the decision. Production lens line up was no problem for me. There were far more lenses than I had plan to buy. Actually my original plan was to live with just the kit lens.

AF on the other hand was the critical point against the brand, but in the end thought that I probably could live with it (as I have), but the AF of 5 years older Nikon was better than the one in K-30. My wife still thinks that she took better photos with Nikon. Too often K-30 missis the focus or focus somewhere else than wanted. In my opinion AF is the main weakness to concentrate if Pentax wants to attract more casual photographers. I know it has improved a lot since K-30, but it's not good to have it mentioned negatively in reviews.

Now that I have better information about legacy glasses, have bought some and have found what they have to offer I'm somewhat hooked and the backwards compatibility is one of the main reasons why I will stay with Pentax also in the future. At least as long as they keep producing camera bodies that provide great IQ for the money.

[Pål Jensen]

They could have placed them on the mating surfaces, as Asahi Optical did with the K-A mount. It would even have been easier for them, the breech-lock mechanism ensuring the actual mating surfaces remain fixed when mounting and dismounting the lens.

I think Canon wanted to get rid of their FD mount, its mechanical linkages and pins, its costly and slow to use breech-lock, etc. They could have adapted their mount to support auto-focus, as did other manufacturers, they instead chose to make a clean break with the past and design a completely new interface with support for electrical signalling and control (and a larger diameter to facilitate the design of some lenses, including perspective control lenses).

There is no space for electrical contacts; just look at the FD mount on the camera. They did make AF for the FD mount. The contacts where on the outside of the lens mount; very awkward with huge motors in huge lenses because there were no space for a drive shaft.
The diametre of the FD mount was the smallest in business. They opted for a new (EOS) mount with a diametre approaching the 645 format in order to make lenses of higher optical quality and ease of making faster lenses according to Canon at the time...
Pentax have had no need to change the K-mount. In fact, less need than Nikon have for changing theirs. Canon had no choice....

[noelpolar]

Wow, thought I'd missed a thread about something... 5 pages later... turns out I was wrong....haha

[Mistral75]

Pål Jensen, the above are your opinions and I respect them as such even though I don't share them. Let's move on: we are totally off topic there.

[Glorfindelrb]

Backwards compatibility is added value and scare no one away. If Pentax doesn't attract sufficient new users it isn't because you can use older lenses on their bodies.

As i have been trying to say..this doesn't appeal to many new users..But pleasing some of the existing users. It seems that you claim to have better knowledge about Pentax, the marked and the users then we who work with it on a daily basis. Do you have facts to support that, or is it just your personal opinion you try to cover up as facts?

Why would he need fact to support this simple logical assertion. Do you provide any fact that "being able to use old lenses on current bodies" scare people away ?
Maybe the lack of current lenses could, maybe that doesn't put a real pressure on Pentax to introduce new lenses, maybe some technical constraints for allowing this backward compatibility are but surely the fact that you can use old lenses is not a limitation. You'll need to be pretty sick to be scared by that.

On the ability to push new lenses, I think they are aware of that but the solution need time to be implemented.
On the technical constraints, it's mainly an issue to go mirrorless or eventually to get slightly lighter body. KAF4 solves this but again they will need to wait some time to capitalise on a KAF4 lenses base. Losing the mechanical lever on a DSLR will not attract anyone new.

[Zygonyx]

...and it won't accelerate new lens design nor production

[mee]

And Canon were big enough and successful enough to p*** off all the FD lens owners and get away with it, Mistral.

But will Pentax/Ricoh Imaging profit more from moving in a direction that may upset current (old school) K mount owners versus pleasing (and thus adding) new owners into the userbase?

That is another one of those risks. I think the 'old guy Pentaxian' is a very small pool (that is sadly shrinking) compared to the ocean of Canikony buyers. So it might not be that bad in the long run for Pentax to move in adopting new technology. Where else are the old Pentaxians going to go? Canon or Nikon? They won't get any better if better is what they perceived Pentax as once offering.

Besides, as monochrome mentioned, One can buy a K-1 and a bunch of vintage lenses NOW so there is no harm to them if the whole system is turned on its head tomorrow.

So this is much ado about nothing for the old style Pentaxian. There is already an abundance of old K mount for sale second hand right now. No waiting.

[gm4life]

What backward compatibility needs to be ditched to move forward exactly? The AF motor? The Aperture lever? They are not obstructing development of in lens solutions. Changing the mount would aggravate a lot of users and rob them of the single reason they are staying with Pentax. Mirrorless will always have a different mount than DSLR. Are DSLR customers stopping Ricoh moving into mirrorless? Maybe but it is Ricoh's choice to mainly be a DSLR company. There is much that can be improved, without changes to to mount that would destroy backward compatibility with older K-mount lenses. Like improving AF, Video and wireless integration. Adding a touch interface (That's not compatible with old fashioned people ). Backward compatibility is a strength. It's not holding Ricoh back to try new stuff.

Amen to this post!

[mee]

Wow. This thread turned to a "what is wrong with Pentax" fest pretty fast. If I were going to say, I would say that the issues have more to do with presence in stores -- it is really poor in North America and not good enough entry level gear to get folks in. I warrant that most folks that I know who purchased a 6D or 5D MK -whatever started off with Canon's cheap APS-C gear. And mostly because it was there when they went into Best Buy.

As for the whole screw drive thing, I don't think it is a big deal. The DA limiteds and FA limiteds are the primary lenses at this point that are screw driven and most people buy in based on zooms, which at this point almost all have in lens motors. The K-1 even makes the screw drive motor sound quieter -- I guess because it is a bigger camera. Anyway, I'd like Pentax to fix the purple fringing on the FA limiteds, but otherwise they are fine.

Cannot improve Pentax if we don't admit there are things wrong with Pentax. I think we can all agree we want a healthy Pentax in the future. How 'we' get there is another matter entirely.

That said, I think we all realize Ricoh is going to move as they see fit. And thus the only choice WE have in the matter is with our wallets in either buying what they offer or from another competitor.

But it is still an interesting discussion I think.