Pentax to join the micro4/3 standard?

jct us101 · 04-20-2010, 03:29 PM

Originally posted by thibs

You're mixing everything....

NX project announcement and used sensor dates prior to KX, this isn't related
Samsung developped NX without Pentax which probably why Hoya is pissed off (I would be)
I can't see Pentax joining Samsung when Samsung basicaly screwed Pentax
Whenb Samsung and Pentax had their alliance for DSLRs, Samsung sold cameras with Sony sensopr inside, so really, there's nothing weird in this.
Samsung never did much if anything in this DSLR alliance but sensors, which Pentax still had to pay but Samsung went alone with NX.

I'm afraid that my post was entirely sarcastic, it would seem I really have misplaced my sarcasm font though as you did not take it that way. Sorry!

thibs · 04-20-2010, 11:34 PM

Originally posted by jct us101

I'm afraid that my post was entirely sarcastic, it would seem I really have misplaced my sarcasm font though as you did not take it that way. Sorry!

Ah huh hum... OK, it happens

cesarechavarria · 04-21-2010, 07:09 AM

The Oly/Pana are not very small once you mount a zoom. I find that the ergonomics, shooting with a small camera body and relatively big lenses, is not good. The compactness of the Oly/Pana evils is only valid when using a pancake lens.

cateto · 04-22-2010, 01:00 AM

^That's entirely true, but on the other hand, if you put a pancake on it, you have the best of both worlds, dSLR and compacts.

Michael Barker · 04-27-2010, 07:45 AM

I would like to see Pentax create an electronic viewfinder that blows away all viewfinders, period - both electronic and optical, in size and features.

Then attach whatever camera you like to it, Pentax, and I'll be interested.

But really, the only company I can imagine would actually do this would be Ricoh.

**rparmar** · 04-27-2010, 08:36 AM - **1 Like**

Let me join this party rather late. Like many others I thought four-thirds does not have any real competitive niche but micro four-thirds could have potential: a decent sized sensor in a small package with interchangeable high quality lenses.

But the reality is a little different since the two companies are still struggling to produce a decent body, one that can provide excellent auto-focus and manual focus without having to jump through hoops. They seem trying to please too many people: those who want a viewfinder, those who want a flash. The result is a camera system sold as a fashion accessory. It's nifty, it's cool, it's tiny and cute. And there is no other way to sell it, really, since it is so overpriced as to be ridiculous.

Basically there are only three sizes of camera for the masses: pocket, handbag, too big. Kit out an m43 with EVF and decent lens and it's too big for the pocket. One may as well buy a K-x with a DA40. Instantly one has a much more capable camera with bigger sensor and other advantages.

Pentax should stick with the APS-C format it committed to and fill in the rest of the system (teleconverter, fast normal, etc.) This will provide a nice upgrade path for people limited by m43.

pxpaulx · 04-27-2010, 08:42 AM

Originally posted by cesarechavarria

The Oly/Pana are not very small once you mount a zoom. I find that the ergonomics, shooting with a small camera body and relatively big lenses, is not good. The compactness of the Oly/Pana evils is only valid when using a pancake lens.

Not really. I have the GF1, 20mm and also the oly 14-42mm. when folded down, the olympus 14-42mm adds about a centimetre to the total length, and is definitely still pocketable. Both of the forthcoming oly lenses (9-18mm and 14-150mm) also have the fold down design implemented - the 9-18 is negligibly larger than the 14-42 kit lens; the 14-150mm wouldn't be pocketable, but for the focal length it is also tiny compared to anything similar (and you could still throw the lens itself in your unused pocket).

On the other hand if you did want to stick with the panasonic lens lineup, their lenses definitely are not pocketable, pancake aside (but are solid performers in their own right).

pxpaulx · 04-27-2010, 08:54 AM

Originally posted by rparmar

The result is a camera system sold as a fashion accessory. It's nifty, it's cool, it's tiny and cute. And there is no other way to sell it, really, since it is so overpriced as to be ridiculous.

Basically there are only three sizes of camera for the masses: pocket, handbag, too big. Kit out an m43 with EVF and decent lens and it's too big for the pocket. One may as well buy a K-x with a DA40. Instantly one has a much more capable camera with bigger sensor and other advantages.

Pentax should stick with the APS-C format it committed to and fill in the rest of the system (teleconverter, fast normal, etc.) This will provide a nice upgrade path for people limited by m43.

I don't really find it to be a fashion accessory at all, much more a complement to my Pentax gear. I think the key think you left out is it is a system most (not all) people would be much more likely to have with them. I have a bag which does not fit the K-x and 40mm lens. It does however fit the GF1, 20mm and 14-42mm olympus kit lens. Attached to the side of the bag I have a lens pouch for the panasonic 45-200mm, and on the bag strap I have the small leather case carrying the GF1 evf. So, in the area the size of about 4x8x10 inches I have a pretty fleshed out, take with me everywhere kit - when I don't want the bulk of my (admittedly better, but not overwhelmingly so) Pentax gear.

Granted, prices are expensive! I received discounts through the panasonic EPP program, with which my employer is a participant (I assume my employer has some sort of business relationship and we get that benefit as a perk). At the same time, the Olympus e-pl1 (already going for $550 or so on ebay, close to $500 after cashback) is getting into the price range that is no longer completely out of the park, so to speak.

One other thought - if you buy a K-x and DA 40mm, doesn't that put you right at the price of a GF1/20mm?

Russell-Evans · 04-27-2010, 09:04 AM

Originally posted by jct us101

Can you blame them? Have you seen that NX camera, I would hope that Pentax wouldn't want to design anything that ugly with them!

I'm not sure what people want a camera to look like, but I suppose Samsung could color the plastic for you.

Thank you
Russell

pxpaulx · 04-27-2010, 09:09 AM

Originally posted by Russell-Evans

I'm not sure what people want a camera to look like, but I suppose Samsung could color the plastic for you.

Thank you
Russell

Haha, yeah its not really ugly, but its definitely not unique either; looks just like any other...dSLR. I think that is where their problem lies. Well, not to mention from all appearances severing ties with Pentax, the only thing that floated their dSLR lineup in the first place.

siva.ss.kumar · 04-27-2010, 09:50 AM

How does the micro 4/3 lenses compare to DSLR lenses? I like bird photography. Are there or will there be good teles for micro 4/3? A 300/4 to start with or 500/5.6?

**rparmar** · 04-27-2010, 09:53 AM

Originally posted by pxpaulx

One other thought - if you buy a K-x and DA 40mm, doesn't that put you right at the price of a GF1/20mm?

Exactly. But which one takes better pictures, has more useful features, a better system in place, and is more responsive to the photographer?

Maybe my opinion will change once they fix the issues in the bodies and think about how to design a better interface. Until then the size difference is not a big deal to me. I carry my K20D + FA77 everywhere I go in a small man bag no-one even notices. I'd still need the same bag for a m43 camera since it's not going to fit in a pocket. That was my main point: m43 falls between two stools.

cateto · 04-27-2010, 09:57 AM

^But that is entirely missing the point of mirrorless cameras.

Obviously many of us do prefer a traditional dSLR system; but it means bigger size, and also means (in the long run) a clearly higher price than a mirrorless system, which is simpler, more based on electronics than on fine mechanics, and thus by definition less expensive than a dSLR.

pxpaulx · 04-27-2010, 10:26 AM

Originally posted by rparmar

Exactly. But which one takes better pictures, has more useful features, a better system in place, and is more responsive to the photographer?

Maybe my opinion will change once they fix the issues in the bodies and think about how to design a better interface. Until then the size difference is not a big deal to me. I carry my K20D + FA77 everywhere I go in a small man bag no-one even notices. I'd still need the same bag for a m43 camera since it's not going to fit in a pocket. That was my main point: m43 falls between two stools.

I don't know what body related issues you're talking about honestly. As far as ergonomics go, I wouldn't give any nods to the K-x over the GF1 - they are obviously a different size, but feature accessibility is on par for both cameras.

And all I said was that it is a complimentary system, not a replacement. Finally, the Kx/40mm does not fit in an average jacket pocket. The GF1/20mm does.

johnmflores · 04-27-2010, 10:29 AM

I used to think that the K-m and K-x were as small as the M43 cameras. I told my brother that as he held my K-m and I held his E-P1. He laughed. He was right.

There are people for whom this size difference - however small - makes a big difference. I'm with Pentax because they are more compact and suitable to my motorcycle travel, bicycle touring, hiking, etc... Size plus weather resistance makes Pentax a great choice for a whole class of people participating in active sports and hobbies.

If you look closely, you can fit two E-P1 bodies in the space of a single K-x. That's a big deal when you have to carry everything on your back.

04-20-2010, 03:29 PM	#106
jct us101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Rohnert Park, CA Posts: 3,793	Originally posted by thibs You're mixing everything.... NX project announcement and used sensor dates prior to KX, this isn't related Samsung developped NX without Pentax which probably why Hoya is pissed off (I would be) I can't see Pentax joining Samsung when Samsung basicaly screwed Pentax Whenb Samsung and Pentax had their alliance for DSLRs, Samsung sold cameras with Sony sensopr inside, so really, there's nothing weird in this. Samsung never did much if anything in this DSLR alliance but sensors, which Pentax still had to pay but Samsung went alone with NX. I'm afraid that my post was entirely sarcastic, it would seem I really have misplaced my sarcasm font though as you did not take it that way. Sorry!

04-27-2010, 09:57 AM	#118
cateto Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Spain Posts: 189 Original Poster	^But that is entirely missing the point of mirrorless cameras. Obviously many of us do prefer a traditional dSLR system; but it means bigger size, and also means (in the long run) a clearly higher price than a mirrorless system, which is simpler, more based on electronics than on fine mechanics, and thus by definition less expensive than a dSLR. Last edited by cateto; 04-27-2010 at 10:43 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax 49mm rubber hood for standard lens	fulcrumx29	Sold Items	1	11-20-2009 05:02 PM
DNG - The non standard standard	Lowell Goudge	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	13	07-21-2009 05:02 AM
how does one join the pentax photo gallery	nirvanaguy19	Photographic Technique	4	01-08-2008 08:45 PM
Pentax Days! Come join us and meet Pentax!	codiac2600	Pentax News and Rumors	23	11-19-2007 08:46 PM
SMC PENTAX-M 28mm F/1.7 STANDARD LENS	HmmmGoFigure	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	07-07-2007 08:46 AM

04-20-2010, 11:34 PM	#107
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by jct us101 I'm afraid that my post was entirely sarcastic, it would seem I really have misplaced my sarcasm font though as you did not take it that way. Sorry! Ah huh hum... OK, it happens

04-21-2010, 07:09 AM	#108
cesarechavarria Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery Posts: 40	The Oly/Pana are not very small once you mount a zoom. I find that the ergonomics, shooting with a small camera body and relatively big lenses, is not good. The compactness of the Oly/Pana evils is only valid when using a pancake lens.

04-22-2010, 01:00 AM	#109
cateto Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Spain Posts: 189 Original Poster	^That's entirely true, but on the other hand, if you put a pancake on it, you have the best of both worlds, dSLR and compacts.

04-27-2010, 07:45 AM	#110
Michael Barker Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Markham, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 185	I would like to see Pentax create an electronic viewfinder that blows away all viewfinders, period - both electronic and optical, in size and features. Then attach whatever camera you like to it, Pentax, and I'll be interested. But really, the only company I can imagine would actually do this would be Ricoh.

04-27-2010, 08:36 AM - 1 Like	#111
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,817	Let me join this party rather late. Like many others I thought four-thirds does not have any real competitive niche but micro four-thirds could have potential: a decent sized sensor in a small package with interchangeable high quality lenses. But the reality is a little different since the two companies are still struggling to produce a decent body, one that can provide excellent auto-focus and manual focus without having to jump through hoops. They seem trying to please too many people: those who want a viewfinder, those who want a flash. The result is a camera system sold as a fashion accessory. It's nifty, it's cool, it's tiny and cute. And there is no other way to sell it, really, since it is so overpriced as to be ridiculous. Basically there are only three sizes of camera for the masses: pocket, handbag, too big. Kit out an m43 with EVF and decent lens and it's too big for the pocket. One may as well buy a K-x with a DA40. Instantly one has a much more capable camera with bigger sensor and other advantages. Pentax should stick with the APS-C format it committed to and fill in the rest of the system (teleconverter, fast normal, etc.) This will provide a nice upgrade path for people limited by m43.

04-27-2010, 08:42 AM	#112
pxpaulx Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 2,867	Originally posted by cesarechavarria The Oly/Pana are not very small once you mount a zoom. I find that the ergonomics, shooting with a small camera body and relatively big lenses, is not good. The compactness of the Oly/Pana evils is only valid when using a pancake lens. Not really. I have the GF1, 20mm and also the oly 14-42mm. when folded down, the olympus 14-42mm adds about a centimetre to the total length, and is definitely still pocketable. Both of the forthcoming oly lenses (9-18mm and 14-150mm) also have the fold down design implemented - the 9-18 is negligibly larger than the 14-42 kit lens; the 14-150mm wouldn't be pocketable, but for the focal length it is also tiny compared to anything similar (and you could still throw the lens itself in your unused pocket). On the other hand if you did want to stick with the panasonic lens lineup, their lenses definitely are not pocketable, pancake aside (but are solid performers in their own right).

04-27-2010, 08:54 AM	#113
pxpaulx Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 2,867	Originally posted by rparmar The result is a camera system sold as a fashion accessory. It's nifty, it's cool, it's tiny and cute. And there is no other way to sell it, really, since it is so overpriced as to be ridiculous. Basically there are only three sizes of camera for the masses: pocket, handbag, too big. Kit out an m43 with EVF and decent lens and it's too big for the pocket. One may as well buy a K-x with a DA40. Instantly one has a much more capable camera with bigger sensor and other advantages. Pentax should stick with the APS-C format it committed to and fill in the rest of the system (teleconverter, fast normal, etc.) This will provide a nice upgrade path for people limited by m43. I don't really find it to be a fashion accessory at all, much more a complement to my Pentax gear. I think the key think you left out is it is a system most (not all) people would be much more likely to have with them. I have a bag which does not fit the K-x and 40mm lens. It does however fit the GF1, 20mm and 14-42mm olympus kit lens. Attached to the side of the bag I have a lens pouch for the panasonic 45-200mm, and on the bag strap I have the small leather case carrying the GF1 evf. So, in the area the size of about 4x8x10 inches I have a pretty fleshed out, take with me everywhere kit - when I don't want the bulk of my (admittedly better, but not overwhelmingly so) Pentax gear. Granted, prices are expensive! I received discounts through the panasonic EPP program, with which my employer is a participant (I assume my employer has some sort of business relationship and we get that benefit as a perk). At the same time, the Olympus e-pl1 (already going for $550 or so on ebay, close to $500 after cashback) is getting into the price range that is no longer completely out of the park, so to speak. One other thought - if you buy a K-x and DA 40mm, doesn't that put you right at the price of a GF1/20mm?

04-27-2010, 09:04 AM	#114
Russell-Evans Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 1,553	Originally posted by jct us101 Can you blame them? Have you seen that NX camera, I would hope that Pentax wouldn't want to design anything that ugly with them! I'm not sure what people want a camera to look like, but I suppose Samsung could color the plastic for you. Thank you Russell

04-27-2010, 09:09 AM	#115
pxpaulx Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 2,867	Originally posted by Russell-Evans I'm not sure what people want a camera to look like, but I suppose Samsung could color the plastic for you. Thank you Russell Haha, yeah its not really ugly, but its definitely not unique either; looks just like any other...dSLR. I think that is where their problem lies. Well, not to mention from all appearances severing ties with Pentax, the only thing that floated their dSLR lineup in the first place.

04-27-2010, 09:50 AM	#116
siva.ss.kumar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Chennai, India Photos: Albums Posts: 534	How does the micro 4/3 lenses compare to DSLR lenses? I like bird photography. Are there or will there be good teles for micro 4/3? A 300/4 to start with or 500/5.6?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-27-2010, 09:53 AM	#117
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,817	Originally posted by pxpaulx One other thought - if you buy a K-x and DA 40mm, doesn't that put you right at the price of a GF1/20mm? Exactly. But which one takes better pictures, has more useful features, a better system in place, and is more responsive to the photographer? Maybe my opinion will change once they fix the issues in the bodies and think about how to design a better interface. Until then the size difference is not a big deal to me. I carry my K20D + FA77 everywhere I go in a small man bag no-one even notices. I'd still need the same bag for a m43 camera since it's not going to fit in a pocket. That was my main point: m43 falls between two stools.

04-27-2010, 10:26 AM	#119
pxpaulx Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 2,867	Originally posted by rparmar Exactly. But which one takes better pictures, has more useful features, a better system in place, and is more responsive to the photographer? Maybe my opinion will change once they fix the issues in the bodies and think about how to design a better interface. Until then the size difference is not a big deal to me. I carry my K20D + FA77 everywhere I go in a small man bag no-one even notices. I'd still need the same bag for a m43 camera since it's not going to fit in a pocket. That was my main point: m43 falls between two stools. I don't know what body related issues you're talking about honestly. As far as ergonomics go, I wouldn't give any nods to the K-x over the GF1 - they are obviously a different size, but feature accessibility is on par for both cameras. And all I said was that it is a complimentary system, not a replacement. Finally, the Kx/40mm does not fit in an average jacket pocket. The GF1/20mm does.

04-27-2010, 10:29 AM	#120
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	I used to think that the K-m and K-x were as small as the M43 cameras. I told my brother that as he held my K-m and I held his E-P1. He laughed. He was right. There are people for whom this size difference - however small - makes a big difference. I'm with Pentax because they are more compact and suitable to my motorcycle travel, bicycle touring, hiking, etc... Size plus weather resistance makes Pentax a great choice for a whole class of people participating in active sports and hobbies. If you look closely, you can fit two E-P1 bodies in the space of a single K-x. That's a big deal when you have to carry everything on your back.