New K-series DSLR under development to be exhibited

**Larrymc** · 10-02-2019, 07:18 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by GordonZA

Detachable pop out remote control wifi touch screen... no need for a mobile phone, release button top left.

Just something else to come loose and fall into the lake or fall and get damaged.

photoptimist · 10-02-2019, 08:10 AM - **8 Likes**

Originally posted by Trickortreat

Bigger viewfinder is a plus, dynamic range isnt all that better to warrant the price increase (or size/weight), resolution of FF is currently a plus but how much resolution we need? what are exactly visible gains of higher resolution? Besides you dont get the full resolution after you slap a lens on a camera either way and the difference gets a lot smaller. High ISO noise isnt all that better. Half a stop and after some nice denoising difference becomes indistinguishable. Fast wide angles can be made for crop too. Camera companies just don't do them because tey want to push buyers into more expensive gear.

You may not think the added DR, high-ISO, and resolution performance is worth the weight and costs, but some of us clearly do.

The same "FF isn't needed because APS-C is good enough (and smaller/lighter/cheaper)" arguments can be rolled down to say "APS-C isn't needed because Micro4/3rds is good enough (and smaller/lighter/cheaper)." In fact, the argument can be rolled all the way down to say "ILCs aren't needed because smart phones are good enough (and smaller/lighter/cheaper)." However, basic physics proves that larger sensors and larger lenses can produce better images so there's always a trade-off between IQ and weight/bulk/cost.

This really is a subjective Goldilocks issue -- some cameras are too big, some cameras are too small, and some cameras are just right. But every photographer is different -- the vast majority will stick with smartphones, many will end up somewhere in the MFT-APSC-FF spectrum of mainstream ILCs, some will go medium format digital, and a few will insist on 4x5, 810, etc. large format view cameras.

There is no universal optimum format.

**Serkevan** · 10-02-2019, 08:29 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Larrymc

Just something else to come loose and fall into the lake or fall and get damaged.

Taking bets: what falls first, the hot shoe cover or the detachable screen?

Class A · 10-02-2019, 08:34 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by photoptimist

There is no universal optimum format.

Yes, but a mount that is too big for the image circle it needs to support (most APS-C systems are based on FF mounts) is hardly the basis for a "Goldilocks" system. Hence I have my reservations about the existing APS-C systems being "just right".

MJKoski · 10-02-2019, 08:42 AM - **5 Likes**

I would pre-order instantly if this had like 6-12mm sensor shift in each direction. Using FF sensor area with crop sensor and movements = epic win. So Pentax, make the sensor base slide on rails please.

Kunzite · 10-02-2019, 08:42 AM

I'm not sure the K-mount is too big for APS-C; its diameter could be larger, and as for the register distance - they had to use a floating mirror structure for the K-1.
Besides, that's just Pentax' mount, and can't really determine what APS-C is

**mlt** · 10-02-2019, 09:14 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by MJKoski

I would pre-order instantly if this had like 6-12mm sensor shift in each direction. Using FF sensor area with crop sensor and movements = epic win. So Pentax, make the sensor base slide on rails please.

That along with built in focus stacking, and tilting the sensor using the ibis system would be killer. The focus stacking should be possible in firmware (possibly using and expanding the existing lens correction algorithms), the expanded shift and tilt may be difficult given the current mirror box and shutter size.

photoptimist · 10-02-2019, 09:19 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Class A

Yes, but a mount that is too big for the image circle it needs to support (most APS-C systems are based on FF mounts) is hardly the basis for a "Goldilocks" system. Hence I have my reservations about the existing APS-C systems being "just right".

That is true, however.....

Even if the mount ring is sized for FF (which is true for APS-C cameras from Pentax, Canon, Nikon, & Sony), the APS-C cameras and lenses using this FF mount are smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the full FF versions. Sure, in an ideal world, an APS-C camera with an APS-C-sized mount might be optimal but only Fuji offers that and Fuji comes with other compromises (no OVF, no PASM dial, hard-coded settings dials, xtrans artifacts, etc.)

Goldilocks did not get to specify the optimal choice of bed, she had to pick among only 3 choices (which bears had been sleeping in!). One fundamental challenge for all photographers is that they almost never get their perfect personal choice of optimal camera. There are only a few makers of ILCs and each only makes a few models. Every available camera has some missing features. Every camera has some superfluous features that add cost & weight. It's all a compromise.

Kunzite · 10-02-2019, 09:26 AM

I wouldn't call Fujifilm, Canon's M, nor Pana/Oly's m4/3 choices optimal. They restricted themselves to too small sensors - Fujifilm can never add FF to their X-mount line, Canon had to launch another mirrorless mount, and as for m4/3, they had to fight a long time with not choosing a de facto standard sensor size (as well as not being able to add FF).
A mount allowing both APS-C and FF might be more "optimal" than that.

**TwoUptons** · 10-02-2019, 09:37 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

I wouldn't call Fujifilm, Canon's M, nor Pana/Oly's m4/3 choices optimal. They restricted themselves to too small sensors - Fujifilm can never add FF to their X-mount line, Canon had to launch another mirrorless mount, and as for m4/3, they had to fight a long time with not choosing a de facto standard sensor size (as well as not being able to add FF).
A mount allowing both APS-C and FF might be more "optimal" than that.

I would consider the Fuji and Canon choices optimal for their purposes - the fact they don’t work for other popular formats might suggest they are over-optimized...

But they are certainly not robust in terms of changes...

-Eric

**taks** · 10-02-2019, 09:44 AM

Will the touch screen have a button to turn on/off the "touch" feature manually besides the sensor below the view finder? I can just see my self changing some settings without such button

**TedH42** · 10-02-2019, 10:01 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by taks

Will the touch screen have a button to turn on/off the "touch" feature manually besides the sensor below the view finder? I can just see my self changing some settings without such button

That might be the "LOCK" button on the front left side.

**mlt** · 10-02-2019, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by TedH42

That might be the "LOCK" button on the front left side.

That would be a logical use, or maybe the “S-Fn” button means screen function.

Kunzite · 10-02-2019, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by TwoUptons

I would consider the Fuji and Canon choices optimal for their purposes - the fact they don’t work for other popular formats might suggest they are over-optimized...

Premature optimization is the root of all evil

Making a mount with a diameter barely large enough for a small sensor sounds like premature optimization to me. Particularly when few years later you have to introduce a new mount, or when you have to work hard to convince people that APS-C is all they'd ever need.

---------- Post added 02-10-19 at 08:17 PM ----------

Originally posted by mlt

That would be a logical use, or maybe the “S-Fn” button means screen function.

Smart Function.
It replaces the K-1's Smart Function selection dial (as it have to be replaced by something).

**sbh** · 10-02-2019, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by totsmuyco

I was wondering why it has a curved side. Maybe it will be explained later. I'd like a straight sided camera.

What do you mean by curved side? You mean that the side line from top to bottom plate is a curve?

10-02-2019, 08:10 AM - 8 Likes	#1622
photoptimist Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,122	Originally posted by Trickortreat Bigger viewfinder is a plus, dynamic range isnt all that better to warrant the price increase (or size/weight), resolution of FF is currently a plus but how much resolution we need? what are exactly visible gains of higher resolution? Besides you dont get the full resolution after you slap a lens on a camera either way and the difference gets a lot smaller. High ISO noise isnt all that better. Half a stop and after some nice denoising difference becomes indistinguishable. Fast wide angles can be made for crop too. Camera companies just don't do them because tey want to push buyers into more expensive gear. You may not think the added DR, high-ISO, and resolution performance is worth the weight and costs, but some of us clearly do. The same "FF isn't needed because APS-C is good enough (and smaller/lighter/cheaper)" arguments can be rolled down to say "APS-C isn't needed because Micro4/3rds is good enough (and smaller/lighter/cheaper)." In fact, the argument can be rolled all the way down to say "ILCs aren't needed because smart phones are good enough (and smaller/lighter/cheaper)." However, basic physics proves that larger sensors and larger lenses can produce better images so there's always a trade-off between IQ and weight/bulk/cost. This really is a subjective Goldilocks issue -- some cameras are too big, some cameras are too small, and some cameras are just right. But every photographer is different -- the vast majority will stick with smartphones, many will end up somewhere in the MFT-APSC-FF spectrum of mainstream ILCs, some will go medium format digital, and a few will insist on 4x5, 810, etc. large format view cameras. There is no universal optimum format. Last edited by photoptimist; 10-02-2019 at 08:19 AM. Reason: typos

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax K-1 (tentative) exhibited in Salon de la Photo from Paris	Zygonyx	Pentax News and Rumors	519	12-10-2015 11:45 AM
FF Under Development	leonsroar	Pentax Full Frame	1291	10-23-2015 03:04 PM
RICOH IMAGING to Exhibit a DSLR Camera Under Development at CP+ February 12-15	Adam	Homepage & Official Pentax News	0	02-04-2015 04:30 PM
Toronto Contact Festival: Any forum members who have exhibited?	frogoutofwater	General Photography	2	11-06-2014 01:20 PM
Pentax at P&E2013: FF under development, APS-C compact camera and more	Mistral75	Pentax News and Rumors	82	04-30-2013 06:30 AM

10-02-2019, 07:18 AM - 2 Likes	#1621
Larrymc Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Mississippi, USA Posts: 5,251	Originally posted by GordonZA Detachable pop out remote control wifi touch screen... no need for a mobile phone, release button top left. Just something else to come loose and fall into the lake or fall and get damaged.

10-02-2019, 08:29 AM - 1 Like	#1623
Serkevan Site Supporter Join Date: May 2019 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,976	Originally posted by Larrymc Just something else to come loose and fall into the lake or fall and get damaged. Taking bets: what falls first, the hot shoe cover or the detachable screen?

10-02-2019, 08:34 AM - 2 Likes	#1624
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251 Original Poster	Originally posted by photoptimist There is no universal optimum format. Yes, but a mount that is too big for the image circle it needs to support (most APS-C systems are based on FF mounts) is hardly the basis for a "Goldilocks" system. Hence I have my reservations about the existing APS-C systems being "just right".

10-02-2019, 08:42 AM - 5 Likes	#1625
MJKoski Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 1,784	I would pre-order instantly if this had like 6-12mm sensor shift in each direction. Using FF sensor area with crop sensor and movements = epic win. So Pentax, make the sensor base slide on rails please.

10-02-2019, 08:42 AM	#1626
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	I'm not sure the K-mount is too big for APS-C; its diameter could be larger, and as for the register distance - they had to use a floating mirror structure for the K-1. Besides, that's just Pentax' mount, and can't really determine what APS-C is

10-02-2019, 09:14 AM - 1 Like	#1627
mlt Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 1,159	Originally posted by MJKoski I would pre-order instantly if this had like 6-12mm sensor shift in each direction. Using FF sensor area with crop sensor and movements = epic win. So Pentax, make the sensor base slide on rails please. That along with built in focus stacking, and tilting the sensor using the ibis system would be killer. The focus stacking should be possible in firmware (possibly using and expanding the existing lens correction algorithms), the expanded shift and tilt may be difficult given the current mirror box and shutter size.

10-02-2019, 09:19 AM - 1 Like	#1628
photoptimist Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,122	Originally posted by Class A Yes, but a mount that is too big for the image circle it needs to support (most APS-C systems are based on FF mounts) is hardly the basis for a "Goldilocks" system. Hence I have my reservations about the existing APS-C systems being "just right". That is true, however..... Even if the mount ring is sized for FF (which is true for APS-C cameras from Pentax, Canon, Nikon, & Sony), the APS-C cameras and lenses using this FF mount are smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the full FF versions. Sure, in an ideal world, an APS-C camera with an APS-C-sized mount might be optimal but only Fuji offers that and Fuji comes with other compromises (no OVF, no PASM dial, hard-coded settings dials, xtrans artifacts, etc.) Goldilocks did not get to specify the optimal choice of bed, she had to pick among only 3 choices (which bears had been sleeping in!). One fundamental challenge for all photographers is that they almost never get their perfect personal choice of optimal camera. There are only a few makers of ILCs and each only makes a few models. Every available camera has some missing features. Every camera has some superfluous features that add cost & weight. It's all a compromise.

10-02-2019, 09:26 AM	#1629
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	I wouldn't call Fujifilm, Canon's M, nor Pana/Oly's m4/3 choices optimal. They restricted themselves to too small sensors - Fujifilm can never add FF to their X-mount line, Canon had to launch another mirrorless mount, and as for m4/3, they had to fight a long time with not choosing a de facto standard sensor size (as well as not being able to add FF). A mount allowing both APS-C and FF might be more "optimal" than that.

10-02-2019, 09:37 AM	#1630
TwoUptons Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,213	Originally posted by Kunzite I wouldn't call Fujifilm, Canon's M, nor Pana/Oly's m4/3 choices optimal. They restricted themselves to too small sensors - Fujifilm can never add FF to their X-mount line, Canon had to launch another mirrorless mount, and as for m4/3, they had to fight a long time with not choosing a de facto standard sensor size (as well as not being able to add FF). A mount allowing both APS-C and FF might be more "optimal" than that. I would consider the Fuji and Canon choices optimal for their purposes - the fact they don’t work for other popular formats might suggest they are over-optimized... But they are certainly not robust in terms of changes... -Eric

10-02-2019, 09:44 AM	#1631
taks Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: Seattle Posts: 2,778	Will the touch screen have a button to turn on/off the "touch" feature manually besides the sensor below the view finder? I can just see my self changing some settings without such button

10-02-2019, 10:01 AM - 1 Like	#1632
TedH42 F/8 & Somewhere Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Colorado Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,412	Originally posted by taks Will the touch screen have a button to turn on/off the "touch" feature manually besides the sensor below the view finder? I can just see my self changing some settings without such button That might be the "LOCK" button on the front left side.

10-02-2019, 10:10 AM	#1633
mlt Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 1,159	Originally posted by TedH42 That might be the "LOCK" button on the front left side. That would be a logical use, or maybe the “S-Fn” button means screen function.

10-02-2019, 10:16 AM	#1634
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by TwoUptons I would consider the Fuji and Canon choices optimal for their purposes - the fact they don’t work for other popular formats might suggest they are over-optimized... Premature optimization is the root of all evil Making a mount with a diameter barely large enough for a small sensor sounds like premature optimization to me. Particularly when few years later you have to introduce a new mount, or when you have to work hard to convince people that APS-C is all they'd ever need. ---------- Post added 02-10-19 at 08:17 PM ---------- Originally posted by mlt That would be a logical use, or maybe the “S-Fn” button means screen function. Smart Function. It replaces the K-1's Smart Function selection dial (as it have to be replaced by something).

10-02-2019, 11:13 AM	#1635
sbh Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Black Forest, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 849	Originally posted by totsmuyco I was wondering why it has a curved side. Maybe it will be explained later. I'd like a straight sided camera. What do you mean by curved side? You mean that the side line from top to bottom plate is a curve?