Originally posted by Kiwi110Auto I am stunned by the closed minded thinking of fellow Pentaxians, The open system gives Pentax engineers an established communication protocol, lens mount, flange distance to start from, It gives Pentax a chance to not have to figure out all that critical stuff and burn R&D Dollars to launch a mirrorless system, does not mean that Pentax Engineers are 'Tied down designing an adapter' only, sure they can develop an adapter, but also develop bodies, lenses with known points of reference to start with. It gives Pentax owners a chance to use other lenses on launch instead of having to wait for ages after a new model is launched for the KAF mount version to be developed.
The negativity over such an idea is astounding
An established communication protocol, lens mount, flange distance does not help Pentax engineers much at all. Anyone can quickly specify these things on the back of a napkin. The hard part is designing new camera bodies, lenses, and accessories that actually adhere to the standard whilst delivering competitive performance. And that can actually be hard in an alliance due to interoperability requirements. If the members interpret the standard in slightly different ways, a Sigma lens might have trouble on a Pentax body with both sides pointing fingers at each other.
Joining an alliance is a very tricky double gamble for Pentax. First, it's a gamble that consumers will flock to the alliance's products. That implies that Pentax would want the other alliance members to be good enough to create attractive products on their part. But, second, it's also gamble that consumers that do pick alliance products will pick the Pentax variants of those products. That has the paradoxical implication that Pentax does not want the other alliance members to be so good as to outcompete Pentax on bodies and lenses. That is, Pentax must believe the alliance members are good but not too good!
Any new mount is basically a "back-to-square-one" experience for a camera company that takes huge investment to create new products fitting the new standard. Thus, joining an alliance is a high-cost, high-risk strategy.
Staying with the K-mount is a low-cost strategy and enables Pentax to build incrementally better products with incremental investment rather than starting from scratch. Whether K-mount is a risky strategy depends on the future of DSLRs. That future has less to do with mirrorless than many think. Even if MILCs gain marketshare, even if MILCs become very popular, that does not imply a company cannot be successful making DSLRs for people who want DSLRs. Many types of products can coexist in the market.