[BigMackCam]

A mirrorless APS-C camera with K-Mount and a viewfinder will not be significantly smaller than a K3. Much of the size of the camera is dictated by the registration distance the large battery and in body image stabilization.

I both agree and disagree with this. The depth from the adapted K-mount to the rear of the camera wouldn't be much different (if at all), but the rest of the camera's dimensions can be considerably smaller if required. The lack of viewfinder prism and separate phase detect AF module alone allow for considerable space saving.

Compare Sony's A7 series, fitted with LA-EA4 AF adapter, versus the Sony A99 or A99 MkII. These are full frame cameras, of course, but the comparison is still a valid one. And all but the earliest A7 "Mk I" have in-body five axis image stabilisation. In fact, these full frame cameras with articulating screens are significantly smaller than the APS-C K-3 / K-3II. The APS-C A6x00 series cameras are smaller still.

Smaller size, however, doesn't always equate to great handling. Personally, I'm happy using my bigger A-mount lenses (Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 USD, Tamron 150-600 G1) on the A7II + adapter, but it feels very different to using a larger camera, with almost all of the work being done with the lens arm, rather than a combination of both left and right. That works well for me, as my right arm is problematic with rheumatoid arthritis, and I'm right-handed - so I may be a little biased But the combo is less well balanced in my view, compared to a bigger, heavier DSLR plus lens.

Of course, when you start using (some, but not all) native mount lenses, or adapted lenses for systems with smaller flange focal distances, the combo size advantage can be more compelling still.

The biggest disadvantage, assuming you can live with an EVF (personally, I can - and actually like them), is - as you've rightly pointed out - battery life, which is dire by comparison. Small batteries and constant "live view" isn't a great combination... think "Pentax KP" running in Live View all the time The accessory battery grip is more-or-less permanently attached to my A7II... making it not such a small camera after all (though rather nice to handle).

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 02-02-2018 at 01:08 PM.

[lytrytyr]

With my X-T1, for example, using the viewscreen rather than the viewfinder costs me about 2 stops of low speed shutter duration because the camera is now less stable.

For longer hand-held exposures with my mirrorless cameras (Q's, K-01),
I rest my elbow against the side of my rib cage.

This gives a stable hold while viewing the rear screen
(and the balanced leaf shutters in the Q's also play their part).

BTW, who'da thunk the K3ii would be discontinued on the Ricoh site before the Q-S1?

[BigMackCam]

BTW, who'da thunk the K3ii would be discontinued on the Ricoh site before the Q-S1?

Sadly, because there's a considerably greater prospect of a K-3II replacement

[LeeRunge]

I KNOW that my K3 is an excellent camera. I have two of them, actually, to avoid changing optics in the field and they are the best cameras I have owned.

I skipped the K3II upgrade, because I was happy with what I had, and because since K10d, I think the pattern in upgrades has been minor-major-minor-major, and I expected a bigger difference betweeen K3II and the K3II-successor than between K3 and K3II.

But I am definitely impatient now. I tell myself not to: I tell myself there is plenty of space for improvement in my current gear. However, one of my bodies has passed 100.000 actuations and the other one is getting there. They are beginning to show signs of wear.

And I dream of an AF-upgrade. Just this morning I sold a series with a white-tailed eagle hunting ducks: I ended up selling them to the website end of the magazine because this was what I judged the quality fit for: The captures with my DA* 300mm could be cropped to show the hunting scenes reasonably well, but with my Sigma 500mm the focus plane was too narrow, I kept losing focus, and even when AF-C stayed on the target, it couldn't quite keep up, and the front of the eagle got out of focus. I would REALLY like more of my BIFs to be print-worthy. I know what kind of worksman blames his tools, but I really think the AF overhaul will make a big difference to me.

When it gets here. I hope soon.

I also have a K3 and got frustrated with the AF-C (had k7/5 also). The “improved” safox in each was very minor other than low light focus got a big bump on the K3. I looked into the K1 but the low frame rate and AF-C experience across three Pentax body’s didn’t sit well. I got sick of having a large bag of photo gear for travel shots so I started a second system with an OMD and the IQ is so close to my K3 that it started to collect dust. The OMD is much lighter and compact and the autofocus is faster. The IBIS is better as well. However m43 lacks shallow DoF which led me back to wanting a K1 upgrade. Going to K1 means buying a new set of FF lenses unless you want a slower 15mp APS-c body. The final straw for me was lack of long telephoto. I ended up with a D750 and Sigma 150-600 which works great, big improvement over the K3 in autofocus. Everyone bashes Nikon here but they sort of just get the job done.

Mirrorless has some great features, the EM1 ii is very impressive, but most of them have really short battery life and the EVF is better and worse depending on what your doing, it’s just a tiny live view (albeit faster). DSLR isn’t quite dead yet. The size advantage isn’t there for mirrorless FF because the lenses are still huge. For M43 it’s really nice. I came extremely close to just going with an em1 ii and 12-100 for everyday use, the sync IS is amazing with that combo, far far ahead of any other brand and allows lower iso use. Livecomp and Livebulb as well.

[Wheatfield]

I both agree and disagree with this. The depth from the adapted K-mount to the rear of the camera wouldn't be much different (if at all), but the rest of the camera's dimensions can be considerably smaller if required. The lack of viewfinder prism and separate phase detect AF module alone allow for considerable space saving.

I did specify a viewfinder.....
The registration depth controls the thickness of the camera. In order to make the camera thinner, one has to shorten that depth and then put a turret (extension tube) on the lens mount to put a lens onto.

Compare Sony's A7 series, fitted with LA-EA4 AF adapter, versus the Sony A99 or A99 MkII. These are full frame cameras, of course, but the comparison is still a valid one. And all but the earliest A7 "Mk I" have in-body five axis image stabilisation. In fact, these full frame cameras with articulating screens are significantly smaller than the APS-C K-3 / K-3II. The APS-C A6x00 series cameras are smaller still.

Smaller size, however, doesn't always equate to great handling. Personally, I'm happy using my bigger A-mount lenses (Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 USD, Tamron 150-600 G1) on the A7II + adapter, but it feels very different to using a larger camera, with almost all of the work being done with the lens arm, rather than a combination of both left and right. That works well for me, as my right arm is problematic with rheumatoid arthritis, and I'm right-handed - so I may be a little biased But the combo is less well balanced in my view, compared to a bigger, heavier DSLR plus lens.

Of course, when you start using (some, but not all) native mount lenses, or adapted lenses for systems with smaller flange focal distances, the combo size advantage can be more compelling still.

The biggest disadvantage, assuming you can live with an EVF (personally, I can - and actually like them), is - as you've rightly pointed out - battery life, which is dire by comparison. Small batteries and constant "live view" isn't a great combination... think "Pentax KP" running in Live View all the time The accessory battery grip is more-or-less permanently attached to my A7II... making it not such a small camera after all (though rather nice to handle).

You are, of course, not talking about a K-Mount camera, but something else with an adapter.

---------- Post added 02-03-18 at 10:29 AM ----------

I also have a K3 and got frustrated with the AF-C (had k7/5 also). The “improved” safox in each was very minor other than low light focus got a big bump on the K3. I looked into the K1 but the low frame rate and AF-C experience across three Pentax body’s didn’t sit well. I got sick of having a large bag of photo gear for travel shots so I started a second system with an OMD and the IQ is so close to my K3 that it started to collect dust. The OMD is much lighter and compact and the autofocus is faster. The IBIS is better as well. However m43 lacks shallow DoF which led me back to wanting a K1 upgrade. Going to K1 means buying a new set of FF lenses unless you want a slower 15mp APS-c body. The final straw for me was lack of long telephoto. I ended up with a D750 and Sigma 150-600 which works great, big improvement over the K3 in autofocus. Everyone bashes Nikon here but they sort of just get the job done.

Nikon does have better AF for sure.

Mirrorless has some great features, the EM1 ii is very impressive, but most of them have really short battery life and the EVF is better and worse depending on what your doing, it’s just a tiny live view (albeit faster). DSLR isn’t quite dead yet. The size advantage isn’t there for mirrorless FF because the lenses are still huge. For M43 it’s really nice. I came extremely close to just going with an em1 ii and 12-100 for everyday use, the sync IS is amazing with that combo, far far ahead of any other brand and allows lower iso use. Livecomp and Livebulb as well.

I expect EVFs will need a few generations to catch up to OVFs. The problem with them in this regard right now is that the mirrorless fanbois are insistent that the present level of EVF technology is superior to OVF (it isn't by a long shot), which puts very little pressure on mirrorless manufacturers to actually overcome the problems with their viewfinders.

One thing I just noticed the other day with my X-T1 is that the viewfinder rolls under LED lighting. LED lighting is becoming the standard method of indoor illumination.
Woops.
That gives the manufacturers one more thing to fix, and one more thing for the fanbois to conveniently ignore with their proselytizing.

[BigMackCam]

You are, of course, not talking about a K-Mount camera, but something else with an adapter.[COLOR="Silver"]

True... I was actually thinking of a camera using the same concept as Sony's A7 / A9 models, and the rumoured forthcoming Nikon mirrorless, where there's a new mount with a much smaller registration distance, and a full-function AF adapter to provide K-mount compatibility. To me, that would make most sense if Ricoh was to develop a Pentax mirrorless model.

[Kunzite]

I expect EVFs will need a few generations to catch up to OVFs. The problem with them in this regard right now is that the mirrorless fanbois are insistent that the present level of EVF technology is superior to OVF (it isn't by a long shot), which puts very little pressure on mirrorless manufacturers to actually overcome the problems with their viewfinders.

One thing I just noticed the other day with my X-T1 is that the viewfinder rolls under LED lighting. LED lighting is becoming the standard method of indoor illumination.
Woops.
That gives the manufacturers one more thing to fix, and one more thing for the fanbois to conveniently ignore with their proselytizing.

Harsh, strong wording but accurate - and the EVF propaganda happens everywhere, including in forums and topics dedicated to DSLRs.
Yet for all the claims of EVF superiority, I still get discomfort and headaches when using EVFs. It doesn't even reach the level where I would speak of preferences. And yes, I've seen the latest and greatest

[surfar]

And yes, I've seen the latest and greatest

So which ones?...You have looked thru the camera store window and seen them or just seen them online?

Or you have looked thru them when you picked up the camera in the store and taken 2 or 3 shots?

[LeeRunge]

I did specify a viewfinder.....
The registration depth controls the thickness of the camera. In order to make the camera thinner, one has to shorten that depth and then put a turret (extension tube) on the lens mount to put a lens onto.


You are, of course, not talking about a K-Mount camera, but something else with an adapter.

---------- Post added 02-03-18 at 10:29 AM ----------


Nikon does have better AF for sure.


I expect EVFs will need a few generations to catch up to OVFs. The problem with them in this regard right now is that the mirrorless fanbois are insistent that the present level of EVF technology is superior to OVF (it isn't by a long shot), which puts very little pressure on mirrorless manufacturers to actually overcome the problems with their viewfinders.

One thing I just noticed the other day with my X-T1 is that the viewfinder rolls under LED lighting. LED lighting is becoming the standard method of indoor illumination.
Woops.
That gives the manufacturers one more thing to fix, and one more thing for the fanbois to conveniently ignore with their proselytizing.

I agree with EVF isn't quite there yet. I've got an X100s and a OMD EM10ii with EVF. The big downsides are night photos, where it kills your vision (nice to just use the dim green top LCD and OVF that won't blind you. Lag at low shutter speeds on some of them. Lag in certain lighting. Exposure is easy to see just like live view but on both of those camera's the colors are way off what your end result looks like. Mainly very oversaturated. I still prefer OVF in general. The X100S actually nails it by having both, that's the ideal route.

[photoptimist]

I expect EVFs will need a few generations to catch up to OVFs. The problem with them in this regard right now is that the mirrorless fanbois are insistent that the present level of EVF technology is superior to OVF (it isn't by a long shot), which puts very little pressure on mirrorless manufacturers to actually overcome the problems with their viewfinders.

One thing I just noticed the other day with my X-T1 is that the viewfinder rolls under LED lighting. LED lighting is becoming the standard method of indoor illumination.
Woops.
That gives the manufacturers one more thing to fix, and one more thing for the fanbois to conveniently ignore with their proselytizing.

Great points!

Actually EVFs can never catch up to OVFs because the problem is physics (and biology), not technology. No matter how fast the fps of the sensor, an EVF image will lag by the shutter speed required by the scene. In sunlight, it's no problem. But move indoors, go into a dark forest, shoot weddings in a dim church, or take pictures at dusk, dawn, or night and the lag becomes unavoidable (or the grain becomes intolerable) because there simply aren't enough photons in the scene to form a decent image.

EVFs will ALWAYS give headaches to about 20-30% of the population and I doubt those people will give up photography just so they can emulate the fanbois.

[Kunzite]

So which ones?...You have looked thru the camera store window and seen them or just seen them online?

Don't be one of them, surfar.

[LeeRunge]

Great points!

Actually EVFs can never catch up to OVFs because the problem is physics (and biology), not technology. No matter how fast the fps of the sensor, an EVF image will lag by the shutter speed required by the scene. In sunlight, it's no problem. But move indoors, go into a dark forest, shoot weddings in a dim church, or take pictures at dusk, dawn, or night and the lag becomes unavoidable (or the grain becomes intolerable) because there simply aren't enough photons in the scene to form a decent image.

EVFs will ALWAYS give headaches to about 20-30% of the population and I doubt those people will give up photography just so they can emulate the fanbois.

Yes. OVF still has it's place. Adding in some overlays is nice (as long as it's user configurable) and the Fuji X100 series has a great hybrid OVF/EVF that you can switch between. In that scenario i'm almost always in OVF but it's nice to have the option to switch and look at cloud highlights/shadows etc.

The size advantage is mainly only in the Body for APS-C and FF with the Sony's. The lenses still have to obey physics and require a certain size. M43 is really where you get a nice compact package from Mirrorless but it has it's downsides getting shallow depth of field in shots especially with telephoto's.

[beholder3]

As has been said elsewhere already: There are signs, there won't be a K-3II sucessor this year (neither before nor after photokina). If, it will likely be 2019 thing.

[Larrymc]

As has been said elsewhere already: There are signs, there won't be a K-3II sucessor this year (neither before nor after photokina). If, it will likely be 2019 thing.

What makes you so sure?? Care to enumerate those signs? Or have you discarded the tea leaves already?

[Rondec]

Mirrorless is a tough thing for Pentax, particularly if it involves a new mount (which it should if done correctly). The biggest issues become lenses (using an adapter is at best a clumsy interim solution and at current rates of lens development you are looking at years to fill out a decent lens line up), specifications (Olympus and Sony have turned these cameras into specs monsters which is the opposite of Pentax's style of camera), auto focus (which would deteriorate even more if using an adapted lens), and probably a few other things I've not thought of. Maybe the biggest thing is that there is no particular point to k mount users going with said camera over a Sony camera if they need to get an adapter for either camera to work with k mount lenses.

Sony is so far ahead in the APS-C and full frame mirrorless game that it is hard to imagine Pentax catching up. For sure it would involve licensing a bunch of tech from the current players (if they would let them do so) and trying to find a niche that hasn't been targeted yet. It could happen, but the idea that you just jump into the mirrorless market and watch your profits explode is not realistic. It is probably harder to jump into that market and see good sales as it is to just continue doing what they are doing.