Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-09-2017, 08:14 AM   #406
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 10,814
Well, of course. Changing the mechanical specifications means none of your lenses would fit.
Adapters do allow for one-way compatibility, however they also work to obsolete your current mount with implications as described in your post. Pentax can't afford to lose their users, so they must be careful.

05-09-2017, 10:10 AM   #407
retired nerd
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,211
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
The three reasons that K-mount backward compatibility matters are lenses, lenses and lenses.
  1. You don't want to obsolete your substantial existing inventory of K-mount lenses
  2. Your current customers don't want you to obsolete their substantial existing inventory of K-mount lenses.
  3. Your capital allocation decision makers don't want you to commit the firm to development of a catalog of lenses that obsoletes your substantial existing inventory of K-mount lenses tools and your K-mount lenses knowledge base
That doesn't mean you shouldn't do it - but there are strong headwinds . . . .
Canon is not retiring the EF-mount, and there is no reason to think that Pentax would retire the K-mount. The Canon adapter allows EF-M mount cameras to use "standard" lenses - so they don't need to create very many EF-M mounts lenses in order for the EOS-M cameras to be feasible.

Exactly the same thing would be true if Pentax created a PM-mount. They would probably need to create 18-55mm PM-mount lenses, but not much more than that. A "simple" adapter would not need to provide a focusing screw, just electronic compatibility. With that kind of adapter, a user could use KAF4 and KAF3 lenses, which would make the camera much more feasible; the adapter could be engineered to ignore the mechanical links, so a user could use M42, K-mount, and KA-mount lenses exactly as they were intended to be used - except focusing would be done stopped down; based on my experience with my Q-7, I believe focus peaking / magnification during focusing would give results for most of us comparable to what we were getting with the split-image focusing aid on the original camera.

Under this scenario, Pentax would continue to produce DSLR cameras, especially the upper tier ones. Those who don't want MILC could still purchase DSLR. Pentax would still have a market for their lens inventory, and we would still have a use for our lens inventories - and Pentax would have an entry in the market for those of us who are intrigued with MILC.
05-09-2017, 10:45 AM - 1 Like   #408
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,723
^^ I'm not suggesting Pentax would abandon K-mount, but I assert there are significant reasons for Pentax to be cautious rather than bold. In fact I want Pentax to produce a FF mirrorless video-centric camera. I have little use for an adapted MILC stills camera.

The Canon experience and the Pentax experience are not comparable, however, for obvious depth of capital reasons. Further, I'm not interested in manually focusing a $500 AF DA Limited lens, and less so a $1,000 FA* lens. For stopped down manual focusing, especially on and APSc-sized EVF, the EVF would need to provide enough gain to allow me to see the image. As it is I can't easily manually focus f/3.5 lenses wide open on a K-3, but I can on a K-1. An A50/1.2 is principally attractive to me for focusing rather than for DoF creative images.

I am interested in a full catalog of lenses native to a new, fully electronic mount if it does something a mirrored system doesn't do (without giving anything back). i would likely acquire a Pentax MILC system, but certainly not a MILC body with manual or semi-electronic K-mount adapter. I already have dSLR's for K-mount lenses.

Last edited by monochrome; 05-09-2017 at 10:51 AM.
05-09-2017, 11:30 AM - 2 Likes   #409
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
filmamigo's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 730
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
K-mount MILC? They did that, we know how it went.
K-01 was hardly a "definitive" test. MILC seems to have a split identity. It can mean:
  • Small! Cute! But still serious enough that you can change the lenses! Let's market this to women! Artsy women! But who still want to put the camera in their purse!
  • Serious MILC for the gadget head. Our customer will love adapting old lenses, will love pretending to have a Leica, will appreciate the technical prowess involved in making our cameras. Our (manly) customer is an iconoclast who will try to prove this camera does everything the Canon 5D MK IX can do!

(Please note: the sexist tone above is SARCASM, though I fear it's real inside of many camera companies.)

I believe Pentax went all-in with the first approach. The Q was the "twee-est" MILC they could make. The K-01 was an attempt to do "fashion forward" within the constraints of an existing mount.

If Pentax gets around to trying to make a MILC for the second market, I think they will do quite well. This is the market where Fuji's top-of-the-line ) and most "traditional") cameras are playing. This is the market where the Sony A7/A9 series is playing. This is where the Olympus EM1 is playing. None of these are "twee" cameras. They are big, they are serious, and -realistically- they could get away with a bigger legacy mount. These customers aren't going to run away from a cool new camera because it adds a few millimetres to the lens throat. They are already putting f/2.8 zooms on, and battery grips. Pentax could easily make a high-end, traditional-feeling MILC with K-Mount that be accepted by these users.

And to answer those who will say "but why bother? It won't be smaller!" I refer you back to my market analysis above. There are good reasons to like mirrorless. I experienced these on the K-01. They include:
  • EXTREMELY accurate focus, because you are focusing on the sensor. All AF alignment issues go away.
  • Easy preview of DOF, filters, processing. I loved shooting on my K-01 with a square crop, black & white mode with red filter.
  • Video. Enough has already been said.

Could a K-2 with HYBRID EVF+OVF do the same? Yes. But I suggest this would be MORE expensive and much riskier R&D than doing a K-02 with an EVF stuffed into the empty reflex hump of a KP or K-1.


Last edited by filmamigo; 05-09-2017 at 11:55 AM.
05-09-2017, 12:14 PM - 1 Like   #410
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 10,814
Yeah, if only they fix what is wrong with the K-01 they would definitely succeed... but what if what's wrong with the K-01 is the concept itself? What if, in the unlikely case they'd be doing it, people would offer more or less the same excuses not to buy it?

And why are we talking about Pentax/Ricoh transforming a past failure into a success (the idea being very questionable IMHO) instead of celebrating that a real product did well on the market? Are we unable to be happy with anything Pentax is actually doing, seeking refuge in fantasy?
05-09-2017, 12:18 PM   #411
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,723
Maybe K-1 is the flagship, KP is the highest APSc dSLR and the K-3lll will be EVF/MILC
05-09-2017, 12:58 PM   #412
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,333
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
Canon is not retiring the EF-mount, and there is no reason to think that Pentax would retire the K-mount. The Canon adapter allows EF-M mount cameras to use "standard" lenses - so they don't need to create very many EF-M mounts lenses in order for the EOS-M cameras to be feasible.

Exactly the same thing would be true if Pentax created a PM-mount. They would probably need to create 18-55mm PM-mount lenses, but not much more than that. A "simple" adapter would not need to provide a focusing screw, just electronic compatibility. With that kind of adapter, a user could use KAF4 and KAF3 lenses, which would make the camera much more feasible; the adapter could be engineered to ignore the mechanical links, so a user could use M42, K-mount, and KA-mount lenses exactly as they were intended to be used - except focusing would be done stopped down; based on my experience with my Q-7, I believe focus peaking / magnification during focusing would give results for most of us comparable to what we were getting with the split-image focusing aid on the original camera.

Under this scenario, Pentax would continue to produce DSLR cameras, especially the upper tier ones. Those who don't want MILC could still purchase DSLR. Pentax would still have a market for their lens inventory, and we would still have a use for our lens inventories - and Pentax would have an entry in the market for those of us who are intrigued with MILC.
The problem with a new mount is primarily one of shifting focus. Pentax doesn't have adequate resources right now to fill out the 645 and full frame k mount line ups quickly (at least that's the way it seems from the outside). The idea that they add another mount would mean even more division of resources.

For mirrorless cameras to be truly small, they need lenses designed for the shorter registration distance that most of them have. On the other hand, the only negative to keeping the k mount but using a mirrorless design is that you can mount third party, odd lenses on the camera. Not a big deal to me and not sure how many current folks want to do that who haven't already purchased a Sony Nex camera.
05-09-2017, 03:03 PM   #413
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,303
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The problem with a new mount is primarily one of shifting focus. Pentax doesn't have adequate resources right now to fill out the 645 and full frame k mount line ups quickly (at least that's the way it seems from the outside). The idea that they add another mount would mean even more division of resources.

For mirrorless cameras to be truly small, they need lenses designed for the shorter registration distance that most of them have. On the other hand, the only negative to keeping the k mount but using a mirrorless design is that you can mount third party, odd lenses on the camera. Not a big deal to me and not sure how many current folks want to do that who haven't already purchased a Sony Nex camera.
This is Pentax. Would it sell?




Last edited by mecrox; 05-09-2017 at 03:17 PM.
05-09-2017, 03:57 PM   #414
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,011
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
...Are we unable to be happy with anything Pentax is actually doing, seeking refuge in fantasy?
Short attentions spans are the curse of the modern age.

Still, after ten years of fantasizing about the K-1, we did get it. The issue here may be separating cause and effect, though.
05-09-2017, 04:10 PM   #415
retired nerd
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,211
QuoteOriginally posted by RobA_Oz Quote
Short attentions spans are the curse of the modern age.
I am not the forty-something who switched from Pentax to Canon in 1995; I am not saying lack of MILC is the "deal breaker" that will cause me to leave Pentax again. I may not purchase another camera, or I may purchase just one, and something like a K-70 would be just fine for me. My comments are not really about any current users of Pentax; I believe that lower-tier products must be alluring to those just now entering the DSLR/MILC market - the person I was nearly forty years ago when Pentax was strong - and I believe a credible MILC may be the product needed to reach that person {there is a reason why the marketing mavens at Canon have persisted with the EOS-M series despite their lack of success}
05-09-2017, 04:13 PM - 1 Like   #416
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,333
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
This is Pentax. Would it sell?

Why not?

I think the biggest thing is to have the tech right -- decent EVF, fast enough frame rate, fast enough auto focus. I don't know if Pentax could get there with a mirrorless design, but that probably isn't related to the registration distance. Assuming they could, releasing the camera with a whole line up of excellent native lenses would be a definite plus compared with trying to roll out the necessary lenses over a ten year time period.

---------- Post added 05-09-17 at 07:15 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I wonder if people made the same sort of comments when everything tipped to Auto Focus, and people like me switched to Canon because Pentax didn't have a credible product. I believe Canon "came of age" because of EF/USM.
Not the same at all. If the functionality is there, the registration distance won't matter to most people.

Many of the people who purchased Sony Nex cameras in the beginning did so to use old lenses that were unusable till then. But some of that was just because the lens line up wasn't there and the alpha to FE mount adapter was fairly clunky.
05-09-2017, 04:20 PM - 1 Like   #417
retired nerd
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,211
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Not the same at all. If the functionality is there, the registration distance won't matter to most people.
I agree totally with you. I didn't consider registration distance to be germane to my statements. Pentax needs some kind of EVF/MILC product to attract users new to ILC.
05-09-2017, 05:34 PM   #418
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,601
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I agree totally with you. I didn't consider registration distance to be germane to my statements. Pentax needs some kind of EVF/MILC product to attract users new to ILC.
Yes,without a doubt....and the video HAS to catch up to attract.Otherwise new users will mostly choose another brand.
The big ??? Is which sensor?....

Now,the video doesn't need to be GH5 standard....just the accepted resolution(4K).

The still image tech is excellent and will continue to be,but times change and things do move and have to be captured.
05-09-2017, 09:43 PM - 1 Like   #419
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,559
In the specific case of a K mount MILC, it would be A LOT easier for the market with (e.a.) a good video support. If not mandatory.
05-10-2017, 12:45 AM   #420
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,011
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I am not the forty-something who switched from Pentax to Canon in 1995; I am not saying lack of MILC is the "deal breaker" that will cause me to leave Pentax again. I may not purchase another camera, or I may purchase just one, and something like a K-70 would be just fine for me. My comments are not really about any current users of Pentax; I believe that lower-tier products must be alluring to those just now entering the DSLR/MILC market - the person I was nearly forty years ago when Pentax was strong - and I believe a credible MILC may be the product needed to reach that person {there is a reason why the marketing mavens at Canon have persisted with the EOS-M series despite their lack of success}
Trust me. My comment wasn't aimed at you. I was merely musing on Kunzite's point.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, company, customers, data, guys, hd, k-1, k-1 another nikon/canon, level, lot, medium, movies, nikon/canon shooter, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, pentaxian buying k-1, pm, post, ricoh, sample, screen, shooter jumped ship, size, statement, thread, video, view
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Greetings - First Time Pentax User - Jumped Shipped from Canon bsjsfo Welcomes and Introductions 5 07-07-2014 12:40 PM
Jumped Ship - K5 urundai Pentax K-5 39 04-22-2013 04:09 PM
Finally jumped ship Hey Elwood Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 21 06-11-2012 09:31 PM
As Pentaxian, if you were to jump ship, Nikon, Canon, Sony, or? LFLee Pentax DSLR Discussion 215 06-11-2012 08:11 AM
K-r jumped ship to Sony A55 due to FF issues SteveUK Pentax K-r 15 06-25-2011 10:58 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:43 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top