[Art Vandelay II]

Because m4/3 (4/3 as well) is competing with the K-mount. Btw, their current users (me included) will not migrate to m4/3 just because you say so; by this they would abandon their current users, instead of making them happy.
Forgetting about their users for the hope than some Pana/Oly users would "give Pentax a try"; you really want to see them dead, aren't you?

I've never once said to abandon the K-Mount in favor of m4/3's. I've said do both. Pentax's lens line up is fairly mature at the moment. There are very few holes (assuming they're not going to make a FF camera). I think they have anyone interested in APS-C DSLR's pretty well covered with their current offerings. What exactly do you or anyone else need to do with a camera that the K-7 and their current lens line up can't handle? They should keep refining, upgrading, and tweaking over time, but that is an extremely mature product line. There is nothing I need to do that Pentax's current system can't handle.

However, an EVIL would be another avenue to attract new customers. It's certainly more appealing to me then their P&S offerings.

[johnmflores]

and their worst enemies. Never satisfied with that they make, every time wanting something else

You're pretty much the same, you just want a different "something else"

An older post:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/520089-post60.html
“Creating new lenses mount like NX system needs as huge power as a Full-frame DSLR system. If we can not comprehend that the new system is superior to K mount system in all aspects, we never enter the mirror-less category.” - Mr. Taku Kawauchi, Pentax (translated by kimpira, original on dc.watch.impress.co.jp)

Didn't a Pentax exec also claim in the early 2000s that they weren't going to digital - that film was here to stay? I thought that I saw that somewhere.

Pentax lags behind Canikon with respect to AF, SDM, and dSLR because they were late adopters to each. And each time they lagged behind, they lost marketshare and brand reputation.

I switched from Nikon to Pentax last year because they present a very good price-to-performance ratio for a semi-pro like myself. I want them to stick around for that reason. Make no mistake, they are an historic brand on the ropes. If EVIL is the next wave and they miss it (again), this could be the final nail in the coffin...

[Art Vandelay II]

If Amazon sales can be counted as an indicator for how well mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras sell, the Panasonic GF-1 is #12 on the list. That is the highest ranking camera on Amazon of that type.

For a camera that is currently $900-1000 through them, that is extremely impressive. The only other Non-Canikon camera over $800 in the top 25 also happens to be a Panasonic m4/3's as well. Imagine how well they will sell when they make a $500 model.

[juu]

..

Good post, as usual.

How would it be a competing format if they join the m4/3's consortium?

To be fair, I'm not sure what the rules are for joining m43. Maybe they'd get accepted as equal partners after paying some membership fee, but that's not a given.

I also think the R&D time for designing a new mount is not that big compared to actually designing lenses for it, which they'd have to do anyway. Though perhaps I just don't get what's involved besides deciding on a flange distance and diameter .

Also, a mount of their own would give a better chance of supporting k-mount adapters more fully.

There are pros and cons in joining m43 as just another vendor vs. developing their own mount with an APSC sensor. If they do APSC they might even use a smaller diagonal, but multi-aspect capability to keep lens size down?

There is also the Samsung NX mount they can join.

I wonder if he thought digital could be superior to film 15 years ago after seeing the first half megapixel digital cameras. To me that's a scary quote. That sounds like someone old and set in their ways. Plus, he doesn't understand that mirrorless cameras don't have to be superior in ALL aspects. They just have to be good enough. Sounds like Pentax will get steam rolled by EVIL's due to their lack of vision if he has the final say.

I thought the same.

---

Last edited by juu; 01-19-2010 at 11:20 AM.

[lurchlarson]

For a camera that is currently $900-1000 through them, that is extremely impressive. The only other Non-Canikon camera over $800 in the top 25 also happens to be a Panasonic m4/3's as well. Imagine how well they will sell when they make a $500 model.

If the EP-1 was selling for $500 with the lens it would likely be the TOP selling camera at that price point.

There are pros and cons in joining m43 as just another vendor vs. developing their own mount with an APSC sensor. If they do APSC they might even use a smaller diagonal, but multi-aspect capability to keep lens size down?

There is also the Samsung NX mount they can join.

If Pentax joins any other company it will be Samsung which is already compatible with the K mount. I don't think that Pentax will join m4/3. micro APS-C like Samsung is how it will likely go down.

[juu]

If Pentax joins any other company it will be Samsung which is already compatible with the K mount.

There are more k-mount adapters available for m43 than NX. Of course, the crop factor on the NX is same as k-mount APSC, which helps.

I don't think that Pentax will join m4/3. micro APS-C like Samsung is how it will likely go down.

I agree, micro APS-C makes the most sense to me, whether joining Samsung NX or not.

[Kunzite]

You're pretty much the same, you just want a different "something else"

Not at all, since I am happy with Hoya's current strategy and I will buy one of their next DSLR.
"Pentax lags behind Canikon with respect to AF, SDM, and dSLR because they were late adopters to each" - and you (and Art Vandelay II) think it's a good idea to let that lag widen, by spending precious time developing... something else.
No, the K-mount system is not "complete" (I know, I know, no one would ever use a lens longer than 300mm ). By saying that, one truly suggest it should be abandoned (uh, sorry, "keep refining, upgrading, and tweaking over time"). And the K-7 being good enough so it wouldn't need a replacement... utterly ridiculous.

The sad thing is, I bet many of the vocal EVIL fans would not buy a Pentax EVIL, if/when it would appear. By then, they would write on forums, asking "why are they making EVILs? they should make **** instead!"

[juu]

The sad thing is, I bet many of the vocal EVIL fans would not buy a Pentax EVIL, if/when it would appear. By then, they would write on forums, asking "why are they making EVILs? they should make **** instead!"

And here you were making a more rational 'traditionalist' argument than Wheatfield/lithos largely devoid of attacks on character... until this point.

Do you think the same about FF fans?

[Kunzite]

I think that if you want an EVIL, you should buy an EVIL and let us be. There is no guarantee that you'll be satisfied with Hoya's first attempt at an EVIL, nor that a new fad would not appear, and then you'll want that.
And yes, I think quite a few (pentaxian) FF fans would not buy a Pentax FF camera, if they'll launch one tomorrow. But a FF is a different beast, since it would use the same K-mount we (as in me, Weathfield and lithos ) like so much.
FF and APS-C would complete each other, while APS-C and micro-whatever would compete each other. That's a big difference.

[Art Vandelay II]

Of course, the crop factor on the NX is same as k-mount APSC, which helps.

That actually doesn't help much unless they can make a k-mount adapter that allows aperture control through the camera body. Adapted lenses need aperture rings and none of Pentax's APS-C lenses have them. The best lenses to adapt are old manual focus lenses which obviously weren't designed for either 4/3's or APS-C.

"Pentax lags behind Canikon with respect to AF, SDM, and dSLR because they were late adopters to each" - and you (and Art Vandelay II) think it's a good idea to let that lag widen, by spending precious time developing... something else.

No, the K-mount system is not "complete" (I know, I know, no one would ever use a lens longer than 300mm ).

Well, in 35mm terms that is a 450mm lens. Which should cover the VAST majority of people. Plus there are rumors all over this forum for an upcoming 400mm (or 600mm eqv). If .2% of users need more reach than that there's always Sigma. Is a specialty item lens such as a 600mm f/4 (something only a handful of people would buy) really that important to you or Pentax's bottom line?

By saying that, one truly suggest it should be abandoned (uh, sorry, "keep refining, upgrading, and tweaking over time"). And the K-7 being good enough so it wouldn't need a replacement... utterly ridiculous.

Hmm, odd, I thought I cleared that up nicely when literally said I don't want Pentax to abandoned the K-Mount. And you never did answer. Got any examples of what you're trying to do that the K-7 can't handle? I'd love to know why you need it to be upgraded. Again, not to say they shouldn't upgrade it eventually as technology improves...but I don't think it should be priority #1 either.

[juu]

That actually doesn't help much

I think it would help in that the equivalent lens focal lengths for existing k-mount lenses would stay the same as they were on APSC. If they do a 2x CF camera then they all get shifted to tele.

[juu]

I think that if you want an EVIL, you should buy an EVIL and let us be.

Well, Pentax doesn't read this thread nor would they make strategy decisions based on it. So what we write here is fairly irrelevant except as a debate to amuse ourselves. Therefore, if you don't find it an interesting discussion, you can always unsubscribe from this thread and that will essentially "let you be".

[Art Vandelay II]

I think it would help in that the equivalent lens focal lengths for existing k-mount lenses would stay the same as they were on APSC. If they do a 2x CF camera then they all get shifted to tele.

Well, they've already been shifted (which is one of the reasons why myself and others want a FF camera), it doesn't make a difference to me if I have to multiply by 1.5 or 2. If I had to chose I'd take 2x....easier math

[Kunzite]

Hmm, odd, I thought I cleared that up nicely when literally said I don't want Pentax to abandoned the K-Mount. And you never did answer. Got any examples of what you're trying to do that the K-7 can't handle? I'd love to know why you need it to be upgraded. Again, not to say they shouldn't upgrade it eventually as technology improves...but I don't think it should be priority #1 either.

Well, you didn't cleared that up - because your own words also are clear: "eventually" upgrade the K-7. "Eventually". You're talking about putting most efforts into the EVIL, while maintaining the K-mount with the minimum of the resources - that's abandoning it, FYI. Waiting it to die.
No, the K-7 must be upgraded (Photokina is a good time), and don't use the "K-7 can handle" strawman. The competition is not sitting idle, and the Samsung sensor is showing it's age; the technology had already improved.
The K-7 upgrade must not be delayed by an EVIL. The K-x is selling well, but they must not wait for the sales to drastically decrease, before having a replacement ready. And the reason is obvious even to a 2-year old: the K-mount system is the one that makes money, for them.
You are saying the project that works should become prio #2, at most. No chance in h*ll I'll agree with that.

juu, I agree, writing "1000 ways for Pentax to kill themselves by doing miscellaneous useless things" can be quite entertaining

[juu]

Well, they've already been shifted

Well, yes, for FA/M/K/etc. lenses, not for DA/DA* ones (well you still have to do the math in your head, but you know what I mean).