Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-11-2010, 05:46 AM   #76
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,512
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
Placed besides a MX, both K-mount down, the K-x is significantly thicker. Must be the circuitry and LCD taking up all the added space. Maybe with some clever engineering, Pentax could make a dSLR as slim as the MX
As technology evolves, it should definitely be possible to make the back of the K-x significantly thinner. Not sure if it's possible to make it just as thin as the MX, though. While the film back plate of the MX has a certain thickness, it might still be a bit thinner than what it's sensible to squeeze a moving sensor (SR) and an LCD into.

01-11-2010, 08:06 AM   #77
Veteran Member
ghelary's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 617
Well the next technology that will help thing get slimer is OLED.

It's already widely available for cell-phones. Not sure when it'll be widespread for SLR yet.

Shake reduction also account for some thickness. When Iso range willbe less an issue (if it'll ever be) removing SR will help reduce thickness.

But this would mean, that camera size is a major concern of the camera makers. It is not. The K7 is quite alone when you look at its competition. Nikon D300 or Canon 7D are much, much bigger (not counting the 700D or 5DmkII that are about the size of a Pentax 6x7)

Who will bring out the new Leica ?
01-11-2010, 08:53 AM   #78
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 886
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
Placed besides a MX, both K-mount down, the K-x is significantly thicker. Must be the circuitry and LCD taking up all the added space. Maybe with some clever engineering, Pentax could make a dSLR as slim as the MX, which looks to be as slim as the Olympus E-P1, if not slimmer:
Leica proved with the M9 that full frame digital can indeed be the exact same size as its film counterpart of yesteryear. So I don't see how Pentax or any of the other Japanese companies have an excuse not to be able to do the same. I'd love to see a manual focus Pentax Digital LX to compete with the Leica M9 for 1/4 the cost, but I know it won't happen. So I'd be happy if they just made a digital version of the MZ-3 (or MZ-S). Both should be realistically possible...and if they use a sensor similar to what's in the new Nikon D3s the IQ will absolutely blow away any EVIL camera while not being much larger.

Last edited by Art Vandelay II; 01-11-2010 at 02:16 PM. Reason: typo
01-11-2010, 09:29 AM   #79
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 886
I guess this belongs here since half of the Online Photographers panel chose EVIL's as their camera of the year (one guy did chose the K-x):

The Online Photographer: TOP Camera of the Year 2009

This is the part I found interesting:
QuoteQuote:
Full-frame DSLRs are now literally as big and heavy as some of the Speed Graphic cameras that were displaced by Leicas in the forties and fifties, and I think the DSLRs will be displaced by Micro 4/3-like systems for the same reasons, having to do with "good enough" quality and ease of use.

Thom Hogan, on his website, has recently listed sale volumes for cameras last year. In the interchangeable-lens category, Panasonic had suddenly jumped to third place, behind Canon and Nikon, taking 8.5% of the interchangeable lens market in the year and a half since its first model appeared.

I think they are the cameras of the future for many working photographers.
Pentax has obviously lost out big time for not making an EVIL (as many predicted on here last year) seeing as how Panasonic has now surpassed Pentax's market share after releasing just three cameras and a handful of lenses. That said, if they don't make one I still think they could have big success with a small full frame DSLR. That is obviously a niche that has yet to be exploited.

01-11-2010, 09:43 AM   #80
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 145
Art, I don't think not making an EVIL camera is the reason Pentax lost marketshare to Panasonic in the past year, I think its marketing and camera placement. Panasonic has a foot in the door of many electronics stores since they make TVs, DVD players and the like. Therefore they are able to get their cameras in there. Plus, they created a whole smoke of buzz by claiming they are the new, next generation of cameras (which is why too many stupid writers refer to EVILs as SLRs without the mirror - which is the whole point of the name).

We all know, Pentax really is not on the counters of many electronic stores, which are the number one place people go to get cameras nowadays. People see those blue shirts at Best Buy and think "gee, this must be the best camera out there" and walk away with a D5000 or XSI or GH1, not seeing a Pentax in sight. THAT why they lost marketshare.

I am surprised at the number of people I talk to who do not realize Pentax is still out there, or that it's lensmount will handle every lens they have ever made. "Oh really, I have an XXX and a bunch of lenses lying around."
01-11-2010, 09:47 AM   #81
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,323
Making an EVIL means more or less starting all over again; Panasonic had nothing to lose - but would our conservative Pentax do such a thing?
I'd like them to keep with the optical viewfinder (good optical viewfinders) for as long as it's possible. A thinner body - thinner LCD and sensor/SR plate - looks also like an idea worthy of pursuing (if we're talking about a 'digital ME Super'). I think DSLRs like the K-7 are just a little bit too thick (but I must congratulate Pentax for making yet another excellent to hold (and use, though I barely touched a K-7) camera; but I wouldn't give up the grip, and the built-in flash could be useful sometimes.
And while not a fan of complicated solutions like variable registration distance, I'm thinking... how far could a lens extend into a mirrorless K-mount camera?

P.S. Pentax haven't lost market share to anyone. Isn't the K-x selling quite well?
01-11-2010, 10:40 AM   #82
juu
Veteran Member
juu's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 680
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Making an EVIL means more or less starting all over again; Panasonic had nothing to lose - but would our conservative Pentax do such a thing?
I'd like them to keep with the optical viewfinder (good optical viewfinders) for as long as it's possible.
I agree that Panasonic was in a much better position to introduce EVIL than Pentax. However, what about Olympus?

I think an interesting question is not only would they do it, but what happens if they don't?

Would they be able to survive just with DSLRs? As EVF/CDAF technology advances EVIL cameras will likely have significant cost, size and "no mirror slap" advantages while their disadvantages will be diminished. Will DSLRs be relegated only to the pro segment/FF, if even that? Would Pentax be perceived as (even more) behind the times if they are nearly the only ones not producing EVIL cameras?

Last edited by juu; 01-11-2010 at 10:56 AM.
01-11-2010, 10:46 AM   #83
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,156
QuoteOriginally posted by Art Vandelay II Quote

Pentax has obviously lost out big time for not making an EVIL (as many predicted on here last year) seeing as how Panasonic has now surpassed Pentax's market share after releasing just three cameras and a handful of lenses.
That's a big leap to make.
And probably not a particularly accurate one.

01-11-2010, 11:13 AM   #84
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,323
For me, it's a long, long time before EVIL could replace an DSLR. Give me the best that "behind the times" technology can make, and I couldn't be happier.
01-11-2010, 01:30 PM   #85
Veteran Member
lurchlarson's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Oregon, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 683
I predict that in 10 years, at least half of all sub $1200 cameras with interchangeable lenses will be EVIL. I think that most people who buy cameras in that market won't notices the difference between EVIL and true DSLR cameras.
01-11-2010, 06:47 PM   #86
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
QuoteOriginally posted by lurchlarson Quote
I predict that in 10 years, at least half of all sub $1200 cameras with interchangeable lenses will be EVIL. I think that most people who buy cameras in that market won't notices the difference between EVIL and true DSLR cameras.
Make that $500. They are currrently a very poor value proposition.
01-11-2010, 06:53 PM   #87
Senior Member
Itai's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 211
That is because that is a poor EVF.

I still have a Konica-Minolta Dimage A2 in the closet and its EVF is an exemplary piece of technology. At 1 MP the resolution is awesome and most importantly it accurately previews
exposure, color and white-balance which optical viewfinders do not.

The main issue is lag because light travels through an OVF at, well, the speed of light As for EVF, there is a delay in reading the image from the sensor and sending it so that moving subjects are tracked slightly behind which is not ideal for fast action. They would have to bring the read-delay below 10ms for the difference to be imperceptible.

- Itai
Neoluminance | Fine Art Photography
01-11-2010, 08:30 PM   #88
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,185
QuoteOriginally posted by ghelary Quote
Well the next technology that will help thing get slimer is OLED.

It's already widely available for cell-phones. Not sure when it'll be widespread for SLR yet.

Shake reduction also account for some thickness. When Iso range willbe less an issue (if it'll ever be) removing SR will help reduce thickness.

But this would mean, that camera size is a major concern of the camera makers. It is not. The K7 is quite alone when you look at its competition. Nikon D300 or Canon 7D are much, much bigger (not counting the 700D or 5DmkII that are about the size of a Pentax 6x7)

Who will bring out the new Leica ?
Is there a law requiring displays - OLED or otherwise - to be on the back of the camera? If Live View becomes popular, does that mean people will be holding EVILs and dSLRs with 5x and 10x zooms at arms-length? Sounds like a recipe for blurry photos.

Why not mount the display on the top of the camera? Sony did just that with their DSC-R1 a couple of years back.

Others here have commented on the need for more innovation in camera design. While the M43s and the Ricoh GRX have been interesting, I want more!!!
01-12-2010, 12:27 AM   #89
juu
Veteran Member
juu's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 680
QuoteOriginally posted by *isteve Quote
Make that $500. They are currrently a very poor value proposition.
I was going to say "make it 5 years" (and keep the $1200 figure).

They are currently overpriced as there isn't any competition (and some of the more attractive cameras are out of stock in many places), therefore Panasonic/Olympus can keep their prices and profit margins high. But the actual manufacturing costs are allegedly lower than for a comparable DSLR, which would mean prices have a lot of room to go down as competition appears - and it will.

Last edited by juu; 01-12-2010 at 12:33 AM.
01-12-2010, 12:45 AM   #90
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Finland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 185
The short answer: Yes

The first EVIL Pentax would not have to be small or fast. Flexible could be the word.
The viewfinder could tilt & swivel.
Adaptors could be made not only for Pentax glass but for a lot of legacy lenses of different sizes. I'd love to be able to hook it up to some of my Konica lenses again, not to speak of the bellows.
The thin body would also allow for an adaptor with a tilt & shift mecanism. That would make the body suited for architecture, advertising and macro photography where speed is not the first concern anyway.
It would be a very good back to attach to a microscope (Pentax is big in medical imaging, btw) or a telescope. The shutter could be movement-activated.
AF and automatic aperture would most often not work, but in this kind of work and with focusing aid in the VF this would be bearable.
I'd get one right away.
Reply

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!
adaptor, camera, cameras, da, dpreview.com, four-thirds, lineup, market, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, primes
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
EVIL Camera at Photokina for Pentax ? wll Pentax News and Rumors 19 09-11-2010 06:22 PM
People "The deadly evil Pentax Camera" charliezap Post Your Photos! 6 06-05-2010 05:39 AM
Early review of Sony NEX-3 EVIL camera Urkeldaedalus Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 27 05-24-2010 11:47 AM
Crazy,possibly stupid idea for a Pentax EVIL camera BLD367 Photographic Technique 2 05-07-2010 07:49 AM
Help me build a good kit. (A Virtual Camera Bag) doggydude Photographic Technique 2 12-21-2006 06:37 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:07 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