Pentax Should Build an EVIL Camera

Art Vandelay II · 01-08-2010, 08:35 AM

Wow, B&H has the NX listed for $700 with the 30mm prime included.

Samsung | NX-10 Digital Camera | | B&H Photo Video

At that price I imagine it will turn a few heads. It's not much larger than a GF1, more resolution, larger sensor, and $200 cheaper ($300 cheaper if you buy the GF1 optional VF). It will also compete directly against entry level DSLR's at that price. I wonder if Samsung can get the big box stores to stock it.

juu · 01-08-2010, 08:59 AM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

I'm guessing my M, K, and A series manual glass will work just fine via adapter.

I've heard some reports that MF on the NX10 isn't that great. However, NX10 is just the first camera in a series. Surely if the NX10 and NX11 don't get it right, NX12 or whatever might.

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

Wow, B&H has the NX listed for $700 with the 30mm prime included.

Where does it say the 30mm is included? The picture shows it but none of the description does, so I don't think this is a given.

Art Vandelay II · 01-08-2010, 09:09 AM

Originally posted by juu

Where does it say the 30mm is included? The picture shows it but none of the description does, so I don't think this is a given.

True, I just assumed it was included. They usually add the ubiquitous "Lens Not Included" label under the pics and I didn't see that on there either.

juu · 01-08-2010, 09:31 AM

I think it's very early and they may have just put it there to generate clicks

In other news, Woolworth is listing it with 18-55 and 50-200 for 600 gbp:
Samsung digital camera NX-10 - Woolworths

Wheatfield · 01-08-2010, 06:51 PM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

Speak for yourself, I'm guessing my M, K, and A series manual glass will work just fine via adapter.

They'll work just as well with a Panasonic.
Maybe buy one of those instead.

Art Vandelay II · 01-09-2010, 08:28 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

They'll work just as well with a Panasonic.
Maybe buy one of those instead.

Already have, well, an E-P1. However I sold it after I bought a rangefinder to go along with the M-Mount glass I was using with my E-P1 and realized how much I missed having a viewfinder. Used the cash from it to buy a Pentax LX, Nikon F100, a Nikon FE2 and a Canon G10 (my only digital at the moment). Figured since I either can't afford everything I won't in digital such as an M9 (and in the case of a digital Pentax LX not even available) I'll just shoot film until someone makes what I want.

I will consider another m4/3's camera if they make one similar to the E-P1 or Panasonic G-F1 with a view finder built in (no clip on junk).

I also got tired of the way I had to switch to manual focus zoom mode with the E-P1. I set it up up via a custom function on the rear, but it still wasn't quick enough. One of these companies needs to program the shutter release to switch to the magnified manual focus mode when half pressed, then zoom back out to the full view after focus is set. That would solve my biggest gripe about manual focus on an EVIL. Aside from that I found manual focus to be easier on an EVIL then any SLR I've tried.

Fl_Gulfer · 01-10-2010, 11:44 AM

What's the EVIL stand for?

audiobomber · 01-10-2010, 11:53 AM

Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer

What's the EVIL stand for?

Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens.

erickallemeyn · 01-10-2010, 12:27 PM

Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer

What's the EVIL stand for?

Not "official" though. Comapnies like panasonic and olympus just call them Digital Cameras with SLR quality and interchangeable lenses.

EVIL is probably not the best acronym for marketing, i say, given their target market...

Ratmagiclady · 01-10-2010, 12:56 PM

Personally, I just don't think it makes any sense at all for Pentax to try and rush an EVIL camera to market: it doesn't play to their strengths and there's no reason for them to take on the burden of the tech's awkward adolescence on, when they can sit back, wait, and, when they do it, do it absolutely right.

If they were just to keep on with the DSLRs, they can just wait till the technology and computer power catches up to the concept.

If they don't throw a lot of resources at trying to play catch-up with basically the only thing Panasonic and Olympus have been doing for a few years, they probably *can* hold out for a 'digital ME Super.' That'll use K-mount, maybe have an affordable FF sensor in it (a few years down the road, this could be very doable: but the sensor size of their own choice) ...and either have a thinner LCD than can presently be made, or dispense with the rear LCD entirely, in favor of turning where a prism housing would go into the biggest EVF ever with some arrangement of viewing hood/magnifier.

Basically, I think Pentax ought to play to their own strengths, and not jump into another race they'd be a few years behind at, when they could sit back and enter such market or not at a time of their own choosing.

One way or another, they could wait a little bit and *not* have to come up with a special mount and a whole other lens lineup at all.

ChainbreakR · 01-10-2010, 02:33 PM

I don't see the NX standing out much aside from price and higher resolution. I was ready to buy one if it had 1080p and a mic jack...alas, this one boards the failboat too in the way of HD cams...

johnmflores · 01-10-2010, 05:38 PM

Maybe Pentax doesn't need to make an EVIL camera to compete with Olympus, Panasonic, and now Samsung...maybe they just need to put the K-x on a diet! (Ghelary spoke of this earlier)

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:

shiner · 01-11-2010, 12:44 AM

Originally posted by Damn Brit

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).

To me that's the entire key for success: an EVF that is as "good" as optical, in practical terms. Surely they are on the verge of such development. IMO the OVF is ultimately doomed, and the early adopters will be on top of the industry in the future.

Prognathous · 01-11-2010, 12:51 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

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.

True.

Quote:

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.

Not necessarily. Pentax can put the K-mount on a moving platform that collapses half an inch to adopt to new-generation lenses optimized for compact size, and expands for regular K-mount lenses. This way, the "collapsed mode" mount register would be as short as needed when using specially designed "for-EVIL" lenses (as in m43 or NX cameras), and the regular K-mount register will be in maintained when the mount is in "expanded mode". You get the best of both worlds - extreme compactness with suitable lenses and full backwards compatibility with existing lenses, and without the need to use a cumbersome adapter.

Originally posted by Wheatfield

If the flange to focal plane distance is shortened to make a more compact body, the present lens line will not work.
It's not a question of changing the mount, its the mount registration distance.

Correct, but see above why mount registration distance shouldn't prevent backwards compatibility or compact size. You can have both with the same mount and without an adapter. All you need is the right design.

Prog.

Wheatfield · 01-11-2010, 04:58 AM

Originally posted by Prognathous

True.

Not necessarily. Pentax can put the K-mount on a moving platform that collapses half an inch to adopt to new-generation lenses optimized for compact size, and expands for regular K-mount lenses. This way, the "collapsed mode" mount register would be as short as needed when using specially designed "for-EVIL" lenses (as in m43 or NX cameras), and the regular K-mount register will be in maintained when the mount is in "expanded mode". You get the best of both worlds - extreme compactness with suitable lenses and full backwards compatibility with existing lenses, and without the need to use a cumbersome adapter.

Correct, but see above why mount registration distance shouldn't prevent backwards compatibility or compact size. You can have both with the same mount and without an adapter. All you need is the right design.

Prog.

My bad about the optical adapter.
Brain fart.
However, since the whole idea of making camera bodies is to sell lenses, I anticipate that a new mount with a lessened flange to focal plane distance would entail forced obsolescence from Pentax.
IE: They would pull a Canon.
Consider how price sensitive the camera industry is, and how much a built in K-Mount adapter would add to the price of the body.
Someone would probably make a K -> mini-K adapter, but I have doubts that it would offer full backwards compatibility, and I strongly doubt it would support Kaf3 lenses.

When you ask for a shortened registration camera, be careful of what you ask for, you may not be pleased with the result.

01-11-2010, 12:51 AM	#74
Prognathous Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 102	Expanding/Collapsing K-mount Originally posted by Wheatfield 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. True. Quote: 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. Not necessarily. Pentax can put the K-mount on a moving platform that collapses half an inch to adopt to new-generation lenses optimized for compact size, and expands for regular K-mount lenses. This way, the "collapsed mode" mount register would be as short as needed when using specially designed "for-EVIL" lenses (as in m43 or NX cameras), and the regular K-mount register will be in maintained when the mount is in "expanded mode". You get the best of both worlds - extreme compactness with suitable lenses and full backwards compatibility with existing lenses, and without the need to use a cumbersome adapter. Originally posted by Wheatfield If the flange to focal plane distance is shortened to make a more compact body, the present lens line will not work. It's not a question of changing the mount, its the mount registration distance. Correct, but see above why mount registration distance shouldn't prevent backwards compatibility or compact size. You can have both with the same mount and without an adapter. All you need is the right design. Prog.

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	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	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

01-08-2010, 08:35 AM	#61
Art Vandelay II Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 886	Wow, B&H has the NX listed for $700 with the 30mm prime included. Samsung \| NX-10 Digital Camera \| \| B&H Photo Video At that price I imagine it will turn a few heads. It's not much larger than a GF1, more resolution, larger sensor, and $200 cheaper ($300 cheaper if you buy the GF1 optional VF). It will also compete directly against entry level DSLR's at that price. I wonder if Samsung can get the big box stores to stock it.

01-08-2010, 08:59 AM	#62
juu Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 680	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II I'm guessing my M, K, and A series manual glass will work just fine via adapter. I've heard some reports that MF on the NX10 isn't that great. However, NX10 is just the first camera in a series. Surely if the NX10 and NX11 don't get it right, NX12 or whatever might. Originally posted by Art Vandelay II Wow, B&H has the NX listed for $700 with the 30mm prime included. Where does it say the 30mm is included? The picture shows it but none of the description does, so I don't think this is a given.

01-08-2010, 09:09 AM	#63
Art Vandelay II Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 886	Originally posted by juu Where does it say the 30mm is included? The picture shows it but none of the description does, so I don't think this is a given. True, I just assumed it was included. They usually add the ubiquitous "Lens Not Included" label under the pics and I didn't see that on there either.

01-08-2010, 09:31 AM	#64
juu Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 680	I think it's very early and they may have just put it there to generate clicks In other news, Woolworth is listing it with 18-55 and 50-200 for 600 gbp: Samsung digital camera NX-10 - Woolworths

01-08-2010, 06:51 PM	#65
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,975	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II Speak for yourself, I'm guessing my M, K, and A series manual glass will work just fine via adapter. They'll work just as well with a Panasonic. Maybe buy one of those instead.

01-09-2010, 08:28 AM	#66
Art Vandelay II Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 886	Originally posted by Wheatfield They'll work just as well with a Panasonic. Maybe buy one of those instead. Already have, well, an E-P1. However I sold it after I bought a rangefinder to go along with the M-Mount glass I was using with my E-P1 and realized how much I missed having a viewfinder. Used the cash from it to buy a Pentax LX, Nikon F100, a Nikon FE2 and a Canon G10 (my only digital at the moment). Figured since I either can't afford everything I won't in digital such as an M9 (and in the case of a digital Pentax LX not even available) I'll just shoot film until someone makes what I want. I will consider another m4/3's camera if they make one similar to the E-P1 or Panasonic G-F1 with a view finder built in (no clip on junk). I also got tired of the way I had to switch to manual focus zoom mode with the E-P1. I set it up up via a custom function on the rear, but it still wasn't quick enough. One of these companies needs to program the shutter release to switch to the magnified manual focus mode when half pressed, then zoom back out to the full view after focus is set. That would solve my biggest gripe about manual focus on an EVIL. Aside from that I found manual focus to be easier on an EVIL then any SLR I've tried.

01-10-2010, 11:44 AM	#67
Fl_Gulfer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Photos: Albums Posts: 3,054	What's the EVIL stand for?

01-10-2010, 11:53 AM	#68
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer What's the EVIL stand for? Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens.

01-10-2010, 12:27 PM	#69
erickallemeyn Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: United States Posts: 112	Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer What's the EVIL stand for? Not "official" though. Comapnies like panasonic and olympus just call them Digital Cameras with SLR quality and interchangeable lenses. EVIL is probably not the best acronym for marketing, i say, given their target market...

01-10-2010, 12:56 PM	#70
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Personally, I just don't think it makes any sense at all for Pentax to try and rush an EVIL camera to market: it doesn't play to their strengths and there's no reason for them to take on the burden of the tech's awkward adolescence on, when they can sit back, wait, and, when they do it, do it absolutely right. If they were just to keep on with the DSLRs, they can just wait till the technology and computer power catches up to the concept. If they don't throw a lot of resources at trying to play catch-up with basically the only thing Panasonic and Olympus have been doing for a few years, they probably can hold out for a 'digital ME Super.' That'll use K-mount, maybe have an affordable FF sensor in it (a few years down the road, this could be very doable: but the sensor size of their own choice) ...and either have a thinner LCD than can presently be made, or dispense with the rear LCD entirely, in favor of turning where a prism housing would go into the biggest EVF ever with some arrangement of viewing hood/magnifier. Basically, I think Pentax ought to play to their own strengths, and not jump into another race they'd be a few years behind at, when they could sit back and enter such market or not at a time of their own choosing. One way or another, they could wait a little bit and not have to come up with a special mount and a whole other lens lineup at all.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-10-2010, 02:33 PM	#71
ChainbreakR Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico Photos: Gallery Posts: 93	I don't see the NX standing out much aside from price and higher resolution. I was ready to buy one if it had 1080p and a mic jack...alas, this one boards the failboat too in the way of HD cams...

01-10-2010, 05:38 PM	#72
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Maybe Pentax doesn't need to make an EVIL camera to compete with Olympus, Panasonic, and now Samsung...maybe they just need to put the K-x on a diet! (Ghelary spoke of this earlier) 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:

01-11-2010, 12:44 AM	#73
shiner Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: N GA USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,127	Originally posted by Damn Brit 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). To me that's the entire key for success: an EVF that is as "good" as optical, in practical terms. Surely they are on the verge of such development. IMO the OVF is ultimately doomed, and the early adopters will be on top of the industry in the future.

01-11-2010, 04:58 AM	#75
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,975	Originally posted by Prognathous True. Not necessarily. Pentax can put the K-mount on a moving platform that collapses half an inch to adopt to new-generation lenses optimized for compact size, and expands for regular K-mount lenses. This way, the "collapsed mode" mount register would be as short as needed when using specially designed "for-EVIL" lenses (as in m43 or NX cameras), and the regular K-mount register will be in maintained when the mount is in "expanded mode". You get the best of both worlds - extreme compactness with suitable lenses and full backwards compatibility with existing lenses, and without the need to use a cumbersome adapter. Correct, but see above why mount registration distance shouldn't prevent backwards compatibility or compact size. You can have both with the same mount and without an adapter. All you need is the right design. Prog. My bad about the optical adapter. Brain fart. However, since the whole idea of making camera bodies is to sell lenses, I anticipate that a new mount with a lessened flange to focal plane distance would entail forced obsolescence from Pentax. IE: They would pull a Canon. Consider how price sensitive the camera industry is, and how much a built in K-Mount adapter would add to the price of the body. Someone would probably make a K -> mini-K adapter, but I have doubts that it would offer full backwards compatibility, and I strongly doubt it would support Kaf3 lenses. When you ask for a shortened registration camera, be careful of what you ask for, you may not be pleased with the result.