Pentax to join the micro4/3 standard?

Supernaut · 05-10-2010, 12:21 AM

That would be great, but I guess that SR mechanisk takes a bit of space. And the display of course.

Does anyone have picture of a body cut in half that often are shown when releasing cameras? It would be interesting to see what adds depth in a body

mattdm · 05-10-2010, 06:19 AM

Originally posted by eigelb

i think its possible to made a DSRL thin like an MX LX even with a FF sensor.
Leica has done it with there rangfinders

No mirror assembly.

ogl · 05-10-2010, 06:24 AM

Originally posted by eigelb

i think its possible to made a DSRL thin like an MX LX even with a FF sensor.

Unreal IMO

ghelary · 05-10-2010, 09:14 AM

Originally posted by mattdm

No mirror assembly.

The M9 is significantly larger than the M7, Amoled screens are a plus for thinness, but my guess is that we simply can't make as small camera as a MX with a DSLR...

Autofocus + Advanced electronics + Pop up flash + sensor + shake reduction + back screen = more cumbersome than a K-x.

Eventually the camera will become smaller, but the form will never be the same.

falconeye · 05-10-2010, 05:59 PM

-> https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1038342-post31.html

(it's APSC. Does Sony produce K-mount adapters?)

pxpaulx · 05-10-2010, 07:42 PM

Falk, with that registration distance you can bet your you-know-what the adapters are already rolling off the Chinese assembly lines!

thibs · 05-11-2010, 01:27 AM

The camera is nice but with such big lenses, what's the point ?

eurostar · 05-11-2010, 02:11 AM

It's not the lens that's big, it's the camera that's very small.

falconeye · 05-11-2010, 02:25 AM

Originally posted by thibs

The camera is nice but with such big lenses, what's the point ?

We're approaching the camera=rear lens cap logic.

Don't ask how large the camera is. Just ask if it adds bulk to the lens.

And a lens can be made arbitrarily small, depending on your needs for sharpness (diffraction) and freedom of noise (lens diameter).

With 14MP and APSC, you don't even have to illuminate the entire image circle. Just mount a retractable walk'n shoot zoom with a µFT-sized image circle and you still have an outstanding 6MP camera.

thibs · 05-11-2010, 03:28 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

We're approaching the camera=rear lens cap logic.

Don't ask how large the camera is. Just ask if it adds bulk to the lens.

And a lens can be made arbitrarily small, depending on your needs for sharpness (diffraction) and freedom of noise (lens diameter).

With 14MP and APSC, you don't even have to illuminate the entire image circle. Just mount a retractable walk'n shoot zoom with a µFT-sized image circle and you still have an outstanding 6MP camera.

There's no point in such big lenses. Yes you can mount pancakes but you know very well that, considering the market those cameras are aimed at, it will be an exception. In conclusion, you get an ultra small camera fitted with big lens (compared to the camera) which is still not pocketable.

It is better than before but can't ahead DSLR's (no potent viewfinder and probably questionable performance, not sensor related) or P&S (net result is an unpocketable camera).
Nice and all, but very "niche" IMO.

gazonk · 05-11-2010, 03:48 AM

Originally posted by thibs

There's no point in such big lenses. Yes you can mount pancakes but you know very well that, considering the market those cameras are aimed at, it will be an exception. In conclusion, you get an ultra small camera fitted with big lens (compared to the camera) which is still not pocketable.

Yes, I still think the Auto 110 is a better model. As I've said before in this thread, if you scale down a FF K-mount camera to APS-C sensor size, i.e. by the factor 1.53, you end up with ~28mm flange distance and minimum mount throat diameter. One could even make a real SLR with that (somewhat larger than the EVIL competition) flange distance. Maybe make the throat 30 mm so lens barrels can be a little thicker than 1/1.53 of their FF versions. The larger throat mounts obviously have some advantages for digital (that's the 4/3 mantra), but if Nikon (with similar throat diameter and flange distance to K-mount) can make digital FF cameras, the scaled-down versions should work fine too.

Imagine "the baby amigos": 1:1.53-scaled versions of the FA Limiteds: 20mm 1.8, 28mm 1.9 and 50mm 1.8

falconeye · 05-11-2010, 04:01 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by thibs

In conclusion, you get an ultra small camera fitted with big lens (compared to the camera) which is still not pocketable.

This is why I made the comment I made.

The E-mount has a surprisingly large diameter. If it isn't for future FF cameras (which may be part of the reason, in particular as they use the E-mount for camcorders and therefore, potentially a forthcoing professional video camera series) -- then it is to support retractable zoom lenses. They can even reduce the image circle a bit to match FT performance.

So, I won't be surprised to see a pocketable E-mount travel zoom soon.

ozlizard · 05-11-2010, 04:10 AM

Don't see the point in such small cameras. Also didn't see any mention of this format in any of the recent rumour threads from Hoya/Pentax, did I miss something?

thibs · 05-11-2010, 04:48 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

This is why I made the comment I made.

The E-mount has a surprisingly large diameter. If it isn't for future FF cameras (which may be part of the reason, in particular as they use the E-mount for camcorders and therefore, potentially a forthcoing professional video camera series) -- then it is to support retractable zoom lenses. They can even reduce the image circle a bit to match FT performance.

So, I won't be surprised to see a pocketable E-mount travel zoom soon.

OK, I got your point. Thanks Falk.

dnas · 05-11-2010, 05:04 AM - **1 Like**

Both this Sony E-mount and the micro 4/3 have the room to retract a portion of the len into body.

I suspect that they will all do this at some stage. The Panasonic camera should be able to retract about 10mm of the rear element.

05-10-2010, 05:59 PM	#245
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Now, THIS is MILC :) -> https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1038342-post31.html (it's APSC. Does Sony produce K-mount adapters?)

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

05-10-2010, 12:21 AM	#241
Supernaut Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: West Coast , Sweden Posts: 467	That would be great, but I guess that SR mechanisk takes a bit of space. And the display of course. Does anyone have picture of a body cut in half that often are shown when releasing cameras? It would be interesting to see what adds depth in a body

05-10-2010, 06:19 AM	#242
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Originally posted by eigelb i think its possible to made a DSRL thin like an MX LX even with a FF sensor. Leica has done it with there rangfinders No mirror assembly.

05-10-2010, 06:24 AM	#243
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by eigelb i think its possible to made a DSRL thin like an MX LX even with a FF sensor. Unreal IMO

05-10-2010, 09:14 AM	#244
ghelary Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Paris, France Photos: Gallery Posts: 613	Originally posted by mattdm No mirror assembly. The M9 is significantly larger than the M7, Amoled screens are a plus for thinness, but my guess is that we simply can't make as small camera as a MX with a DSLR... Autofocus + Advanced electronics + Pop up flash + sensor + shake reduction + back screen = more cumbersome than a K-x. Eventually the camera will become smaller, but the form will never be the same.

05-10-2010, 07:42 PM	#246
pxpaulx Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 2,867	Falk, with that registration distance you can bet your you-know-what the adapters are already rolling off the Chinese assembly lines!

05-11-2010, 01:27 AM	#247
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	The camera is nice but with such big lenses, what's the point ?

05-11-2010, 02:11 AM	#248
eurostar Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Albareto, Italy Photos: Gallery Posts: 819	It's not the lens that's big, it's the camera that's very small.

05-11-2010, 02:25 AM	#249
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by thibs The camera is nice but with such big lenses, what's the point ? We're approaching the camera=rear lens cap logic. Don't ask how large the camera is. Just ask if it adds bulk to the lens. And a lens can be made arbitrarily small, depending on your needs for sharpness (diffraction) and freedom of noise (lens diameter). With 14MP and APSC, you don't even have to illuminate the entire image circle. Just mount a retractable walk'n shoot zoom with a µFT-sized image circle and you still have an outstanding 6MP camera.

05-11-2010, 03:28 AM	#250
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by falconeye We're approaching the camera=rear lens cap logic. Don't ask how large the camera is. Just ask if it adds bulk to the lens. And a lens can be made arbitrarily small, depending on your needs for sharpness (diffraction) and freedom of noise (lens diameter). With 14MP and APSC, you don't even have to illuminate the entire image circle. Just mount a retractable walk'n shoot zoom with a µFT-sized image circle and you still have an outstanding 6MP camera. There's no point in such big lenses. Yes you can mount pancakes but you know very well that, considering the market those cameras are aimed at, it will be an exception. In conclusion, you get an ultra small camera fitted with big lens (compared to the camera) which is still not pocketable. It is better than before but can't ahead DSLR's (no potent viewfinder and probably questionable performance, not sensor related) or P&S (net result is an unpocketable camera). Nice and all, but very "niche" IMO.

05-11-2010, 03:48 AM	#251
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by thibs There's no point in such big lenses. Yes you can mount pancakes but you know very well that, considering the market those cameras are aimed at, it will be an exception. In conclusion, you get an ultra small camera fitted with big lens (compared to the camera) which is still not pocketable. Yes, I still think the Auto 110 is a better model. As I've said before in this thread, if you scale down a FF K-mount camera to APS-C sensor size, i.e. by the factor 1.53, you end up with ~28mm flange distance and minimum mount throat diameter. One could even make a real SLR with that (somewhat larger than the EVIL competition) flange distance. Maybe make the throat 30 mm so lens barrels can be a little thicker than 1/1.53 of their FF versions. The larger throat mounts obviously have some advantages for digital (that's the 4/3 mantra), but if Nikon (with similar throat diameter and flange distance to K-mount) can make digital FF cameras, the scaled-down versions should work fine too. Imagine "the baby amigos": 1:1.53-scaled versions of the FA Limiteds: 20mm 1.8, 28mm 1.9 and 50mm 1.8

05-11-2010, 04:01 AM - 1 Like	#252
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by thibs In conclusion, you get an ultra small camera fitted with big lens (compared to the camera) which is still not pocketable. This is why I made the comment I made. The E-mount has a surprisingly large diameter. If it isn't for future FF cameras (which may be part of the reason, in particular as they use the E-mount for camcorders and therefore, potentially a forthcoing professional video camera series) -- then it is to support retractable zoom lenses. They can even reduce the image circle a bit to match FT performance. So, I won't be surprised to see a pocketable E-mount travel zoom soon.

05-11-2010, 04:10 AM	#253
ozlizard Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Bridgetown West Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 903	Don't see the point in such small cameras. Also didn't see any mention of this format in any of the recent rumour threads from Hoya/Pentax, did I miss something?

05-11-2010, 04:48 AM	#254
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by falconeye This is why I made the comment I made. The E-mount has a surprisingly large diameter. If it isn't for future FF cameras (which may be part of the reason, in particular as they use the E-mount for camcorders and therefore, potentially a forthcoing professional video camera series) -- then it is to support retractable zoom lenses. They can even reduce the image circle a bit to match FT performance. So, I won't be surprised to see a pocketable E-mount travel zoom soon. OK, I got your point. Thanks Falk.

05-11-2010, 05:04 AM - 1 Like	#255
dnas Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Japan (Australian expat) Posts: 179	Both this Sony E-mount and the micro 4/3 have the room to retract a portion of the len into body. I suspect that they will all do this at some stage. The Panasonic camera should be able to retract about 10mm of the rear element.