[Jasvox]

nor would they be doing themselves any favors by spending time to develop a camera for a very small, niche market.

People wonder why a FF isn't in the works for Pentax anytime soon either...same scenario. FF versus APS-C is a very small percentage of camera buyers.

Jason

[johnmflores]

I can't see them getting healthy by spreading themselves thinly. Pentax are dependent on outside sources for sensors and they would be for EVF. There's no advantage there for a company with a small budget.

The entire entry-level dSLR market will be turned upside down once EVIL camera kits break the $500 price point. For a vast majority of snap shotters and vacation landscapers, the size benefits are worth the performance sacrifices.

No, EVFs aren't perfect, but you gotta remember that most people don't look through viewfinders anymore.

And while the size benefits of EVIL over entry-level dSLRs like the K-x diminish when zoom lenses are attached, the benefits are pretty clear with pancake primes:



I held up my wife's K-x with DA40 next to my brother's wife's E-P1 with Panny pancake and said, "The K-x is about the same size..." He just laughed at me.

Additionally, designs like Oly's collapsing zoom help retain the size advantage:



My belief is that this market change is inevitable. My fear is that Pentax misses this boat, and with their entry-level dSLR sales obliterated they no longer seem viable.

My belief is that this market change is inevitable. My fear is that Pentax misses this boat, and with their entry-level dSLR sales obliterated they no longer seem viable.

Yeah, that's a big problem. I guess a lot depends on how much Hoya are behind Pentax and which market they want to aim at.
The best we can hope for are EVF's that are as good as OVF's. Then it doesn't matter (except that it is one more electronic component that can malfunction).

[dosdan]

The fact that the cheapest APS-C is already cheap and affordable, the EVIL is quit expensive for what it offers against that APS-C.

That's at introduction. Once the manufacturers ramp up, EVIL will reduce in cost, improve in performance & features and maybe become cheaper than OVF DSLRs. Remember when mini-DVD-RW, HDD & DSHC videocams came out, they were more expensive and more limited than mini-DV tape videocams. Now I think tape videocams have been completely supplanted in the consumer sector and the size & weight of videocams has shrunk.

I think the same thing will happen with EVIL, but I don't think OVF DSLRs will disappear. They'll just have to share the market.

Dan.

---

Last edited by dosdan; 01-06-2010 at 11:45 PM.

[Photomy]

I also vote no.

The K-x is small enough. If I wanted a smaller camera I would've gotten a point and shoot instead.

Because the APS-C DSLR does have a larger sensor than the micro 4/3rds, these EVIL's on top of having a worse viewfinder, it will limit it's ability to pack as much pixels and power as the APS-C.

A DSLR is a camera designed to have a real viewfinder for a reason, designed to have generate the IQ that it does for a reason, and designed to have all these buttons for a reason. As I said if, I wanted smaller I would've gone with a point and shoot despite the fact that these EVILs don't have the IQ of a real DSLR.

I bought a DSLR for a reason and the K-x is as small as small can be for a interchangeable lens camera for me, I want to hold a DSLR in my hand and feel it as a camera, not a DSLR in my hand and feel it as a point and shoot. If I wanted IQ, I would go with the DSLR, if I wanted compact and small for my pocket, I would've gone with point and shoot; what's the point of EVILs? It's small and lacks many features of the DSLR, and yet you still have to invest in lenses the same way you would with a DSLR without the power.

There's absolutely no point of going EVIL, it's just another format that wasn't necessary in the first place. It only attracts attention to the newcomers due to the fact that it looks retro, fit, and cool. People who choose to buy a DSLR will most likely go for Canikon. With these smaller companies having no chance with these big boys to make top dollar, they came up with this new format to attract newer consumers who want it instead of the DSLR, without Canikon in the EVIL market, they know that they have a chance to start from scratch to compete against the APS-C DSLR with these EVIL formats.

I think the main point of EVIL is not too see how small you can make it but:

Make it significantly lighter
Have fewer moving parts and so more reliable
Make it quieter
Make it have less vibration
Make the AF more simple, more accurate, and more reliable (though still slow today)
Make it less expensive for the same image quality

Has this potential been achieved yet? Not completely, but this technology is just starting. SLRs have been around for over 50 years.

I have always thought if you do not worry about the thickness of the camera, you could do some great things with a moving sensor such as tilt and AF since the mirror box is not in the way. How about small prime lenses that do not even need a focus mechanism as in LF type design? I know, sounds crazy but you never know what the future holds.

[juu]

Yes, they should produce an EVIL camera. Samsung dropped the ball with the NX10 as it is neither small, nor exciting enough (and the grip seems too small). The m43 offerings are still very expensive.

Pentax should produce a camera the size of roughly GF1, with weather sealing and a proper ergonomic grip (as the lens mostly protrudes more than the grip anyway). Add in some nice pancake lenses, a K-mount adapter (not sure if they can do AF) and they'd be well positioned in what is currently the fastest growing, most profitable segment.

But probably they won't as they are already doing 645D and don't have enough R&D resources.

[*isteve]

I stumbled across this article at dpreview.com today. It's a wish list for fast primes for the micro four-thirds system and other non-DSLR, interchangeable-lens cameras that are likely to hit the market over the next year.

On Lenses For Small Cameras: dpreview.com Editorial blog: Digital Photography Review

It seems to me that Pentax, with its lineup of DA Limited pancake primes, is particularly well-positioned to enter this market with little trouble. Yes, Pentax still needs to make some faster DA pancakes. But even as the lineup stands right now, Pentax might be able to leapfrog over micro four-thirds and similar APS-C cameras - at least among serious photographic enthusiasts. That's if they act quickly enough.

One other thought... if Samsung provides a good Pentax adaptor for its NX1 - assuming the camera offers the image quality many of us want - the DA primes might be the perfect complement. But I'm not sure what the adaptor would do to the overal package size.

Any thoughts?

Not if it means another lens range. Pentax currently make 3 SLR cameras and 2 lens ranges. You want to make that 4 and 3? Or when a FF camera is released, 5 and 4? And should they follow the Micro 4/3 standard or produce yet another proprietary lens format? The latter would be absurd.

The whole dumb mistake with EVIL cameras is the utter pointlessness of making them interchangeable lens cameras. It adds cost, size, compexity and (for the target audience) adds little value. A built in zoom camera which folded up inside the body when turned off could be much more compact and would not require a new lens mount.

[Pål Jensen]

The entire entry-level dSLR market will be turned upside down once EVIL camera kits break the $500 price point. For a vast majority of snap shotters and vacation landscapers, the size benefits are worth the performance sacrifices..

I don't think so. EVIL cameras will mainly compete with P&S cameras.

[Wheatfield]

Not if it means another lens range. Pentax currently make 3 SLR cameras and 2 lens ranges. You want to make that 4 and 3? Or when a FF camera is released, 5 and 4? And should they follow the Micro 4/3 standard or produce yet another proprietary lens format? The latter would be absurd.

The whole dumb mistake with EVIL cameras is the utter pointlessness of making them interchangeable lens cameras. It adds cost, size, compexity and (for the target audience) adds little value. A built in zoom camera which folded up inside the body when turned off could be much more compact and would not require a new lens mount.

Good points.
The current K-mount lens line up would either not work on an electronic viewfinder camera, would have to have an adaptor to allow them to work or else the camera would have to be as thick as present cameras.
I think most present Pentax users would find the first to be unacceptable, and the marketplace would find the third to be unacceptable.
Since the major advantage that is being batted around is reduced size, Pentax would have to release an entirely new lens line designed to work with a shorter flange to focal plane distance.
This would ensure that none of the present lenses would work with the new system, or would have to be used with an optical adapter, along with all the optical degradations that this entails.

[Rondec]

Not if it means another lens range. Pentax currently make 3 SLR cameras and 2 lens ranges. You want to make that 4 and 3? Or when a FF camera is released, 5 and 4? And should they follow the Micro 4/3 standard or produce yet another proprietary lens format? The latter would be absurd.

The whole dumb mistake with EVIL cameras is the utter pointlessness of making them interchangeable lens cameras. It adds cost, size, compexity and (for the target audience) adds little value. A built in zoom camera which folded up inside the body when turned off could be much more compact and would not require a new lens mount.

You are exactly right Steve. Most people, particularly at the entry level, would be best served by having an 18-250 zoom welded to their camera.

On the other hand, I don't know the purpose of making a camera smaller and smaller. There is a certain size at which cameras become more difficult to use. I certainly find point and shoots difficult because of the difficulty accessing different functions, lack of buttons, etc. I would hope the goal of evil cameras is to make a better camera, not just a smaller, more difficult to use one.

[ghelary]

When I look at my film camera, I get something of the size of the Pen.

Get thinner screen, thinner sensor, smaller electronics (OLED shall make for the first in the not too far future) and you will get something of the size of the film era (pre-autofocus)

I think Pentax is right for not trying to compete there, Canon and Nikon are not trying either.

Pentax is already going on the compact way with the K-7, a few improvements and they can get an even smaller body. At the end of the day, lens have much more impact on compacity of a setup, and Pentax lineup is great in that perspective.

[audiobomber]

Also, what is this mystical power you speak of that a K-x possesses that a Panasonic GH1 doesn't?

The K-x is two ISO stops better.

IMO, EVIL is the future, it's by far the largest growth area in cameras. Unfortunately for Pentax i doubt that they have the resources to enter the market.

[Art Vandelay II]

No, EVFs aren't perfect, but you gotta remember that most people don't look through viewfinders anymore.

Size bonus aside, I believe the fact that these cameras don't have OVF's is actually a bonus to people moving up from P&S cameras. I'm sure everyone here has handed their DSLR over to a friend to try out. The first thing I always hear is: how do you turn the LCD on?

The simple fact is a mirror box and OVF is nothing but useless expense and extra bulk to a good number of people. I think even Nikon believes this too based on the fact that they now make a DSLR with a live view flip out screen. Sadly, like Pentax they seem to be struggling to let go of the old way of doing things. I want one or the other (EVIL or DSLR with a giant prism), these new cross over DSLR's built around live view just look like retrofitted pieces of junk.

I see two clear types of users eventually forming in the large sensor camera market. Those that prefer serious pro-grade DSLR's like the K-7, Sony A900, Nikon D300, D700, Canon 5D, etc., and people that prefer EVIL's (or ICL's as DPR now calls them). Cameras like the Rebel, D5000, and K-x are neither fish nor foul. Finally, the real thing to think about is that a good portion of those that prefer large pro-grade DSLR's will also buy an ICL for travel.

[juu]

I see two clear types of users eventually forming in the large sensor camera market. Those that prefer serious pro-grade DSLR's like the K-7, Sony A900, Nikon D300, D700, Canon 5D, etc., and people that prefer EVIL's (or ICL's as DPR now calls them). Cameras like the Rebel, D5000, and K-x are neither fish nor foul. Finally, the real thing to think about is that a good portion of those that prefer large pro-grade DSLR's will also buy an ICL for travel.

I agree. Although currently the low-end DSLRs have a clear advantage (as EVF/CDAF isn't that great yet and the m43 stuff is expensive) and thus a case for being, that will change as technology evolves.

This is actually a technology shift akin to the move to digital, only less significant. Pentax needs to get on board or risks becoming even more marginalized. Unfortunately, they don't have the resources to do it.

[*isteve]

Good points.
The current K-mount lens line up would either not work on an electronic viewfinder camera, would have to have an adaptor to allow them to work or else the camera would have to be as thick as present cameras.
I think most present Pentax users would find the first to be unacceptable, and the marketplace would find the third to be unacceptable.
Since the major advantage that is being batted around is reduced size, Pentax would have to release an entirely new lens line designed to work with a shorter flange to focal plane distance.
This would ensure that none of the present lenses would work with the new system, or would have to be used with an optical adapter, along with all the optical degradations that this entails.

Worse, if they decided to make the new lenses fully electronic (aperture and focus) then no adapter could achieve complete functionality with old Pentax lenses which I suspect will be true of the new Samsung.

Basically, Panasonic and Samsung want to compete with SLRs but can't (the big five own and share all the patents) so they got uppity an decided they should make micro cameras into "system" cameras. However, if Canon were to produce a compact fixed IS zoom APSC mirrorless camera for $400 with the current 500D sensor, they would wipe out most of the Micro camera market overnight. Moreover a fixed zoom lens could be optimised for video with AF.

There IS however a niche for high quality (high priced) digital rangefinders (silent shutter, high synch speed) for photojournalism as a complimentary camera to a D3x or 1Ds. 3-4 compact and pancake primes would cover it (11/22/44/88mm). Retro styling would work best here.

Somehow I cant see Panasonic or Samsung being happy with a niche, but Olympus and Leica, and even perhaps Ricoh.....?