Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-07-2012, 02:57 PM   #2956
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Ron:
1. It doesn't make any sense to join a competitor's format, when you have your own. What for, to hurt your main system? To put yourself at a competitive disadvantages? To make me-too cameras? Should they join Panasonic/Olympus also on making heavy losses?
Pentax would not have access to special sensors, btw; but to whatever is available to Panasonic/Olympus.
2. Already done - Pentax Q.
3. It doesn't make any sense; what kind of entry level would it be? Buy it, buy lenses and when you're ready to go for a higher end camera, surprise - your lenses won't work on a DSLR.
4. It doesn't make sense; why not a full fledged DSLR?
5. They're already there.

Compatibility with M lenses (and the few users who might buy a Pentax because of that) is irrelevant, for Pentax. Show me a plan where they can sell tens of thousands cameras per month, please.
My quote was from this thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/130493-pentax-evil-nc-...r-opinion.html and already from januari 24th 2011, so almost one and a half year ago. It turned out to be Q.

I still think that joining micro4/3th would be a better idea then starting Q, but the little camera (Q) did find a little market for its own and maybe investments aren't that hi after all.

The only advantage for creating a new mount and choosing M-mount (but with advanced electronic couplings for new modern lenses) would be the group of owners of those lenses. So starting with a potential group of new buyers into Pentax for delivering the M-mount. Is it big? I'm not sure, but I guess it could be smaller then some people might think.

Is it for replacing the K-mount with M-mount? Absolutely NOT! On that part we are on the same level.

Why mirrorless? I guess that is a cameramodel that will be around for the next decade, so Pentax should be in it. With the K-01 and K-mount they can still improve. The advantage for K-01 is the use of all excisting lenses for K-mount. The problem for K-01 is the size, being bigger then the Nex'es of this world and for that Pentax could make a M-mount camera.

Is it expensive in investing? Well the technics aren't that difficult I guess. Only problem is that if the market is small you start again a product with a fairly low productionnumber on monthly base (as is with more Pentax products, compared to some of the competitors).

07-07-2012, 03:35 PM   #2957
Senior Member
Spare Tire's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montréal
Posts: 120
I've said this many times before. M-mount is stupid, and i can't emphasize that enough. M-mount is - litterally - a dumb mount. It is no better than NEX E-mount + adaptor, for example. If it's a dumb mount, why adopt it as native? You might as well start from scratch, make the flange focal distance the shortest in the industry and make adaptors for everything available, including M-mount, then add electronic contacts for lenses native to the next mount. You lose NOTHING. And then think of everything the M-mount cannot adapt. Contax G, contax / kiev / nikon RF mount, other esoteric rangefinder mounts.

And lets reserve this as a GXR mountor. That would have potential.
07-07-2012, 03:48 PM   #2958
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,343
Since there is already a GXR mountor for Leica M lenses, I'd like to see some data about how extraordinarily well it sells. If so, I might be persuaded that it would be a good idea for Pentax to make a new mount, based on the M.
Pentax is not that small, they can't settle for microscopic niches. A niche that is shared with many other cameras, by the way.
07-07-2012, 03:56 PM   #2959
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Since there is already a GXR mountor for Leica M lenses, I'd like to see some data about how extraordinarily well it sells. If so, I might be persuaded that it would be a good idea for Pentax to make a new mount, based on the M.
Pentax is not that small, they can't settle for microscopic niches. A niche that is shared with many other cameras, by the way.
Well the only thing we know was the tiny marketshare of Ricoh, so it can't be very big, but this was all from before the M-mounter for GXR. But when that has a market one could easily fit that mounter on a real camera instead of a mounter.

07-07-2012, 04:25 PM   #2960
Pentaxian
Wired's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Edmonton, AB
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,525
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Adapter can be made, if you don't want the new mount then leave the adapter on permanently and your current lenses can still be used.

Why is a new mount confusing?
Q has a new mount, was that confusing...

Also what about my legacy of DA lenses, they won't work on FF *sniff*
a) its confusing if its similar in size/form/function to regular APS-C. As people will have a DSLR, think they are buying a DSLR lens as its made by Pentax. and then fail.
b) The Q is not the same as reinvesting the wheel for SLR sized cameras. It's OBVIOUSLY a different mount.
c) Many DA lenses are compatible with Full Frame image circle. It would also, if it works the way Nikon/Canon counterparts do...and it should... "crop" it to make them work
07-07-2012, 04:36 PM   #2961
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by markku55 Quote
We could make questions about the anvantage of a new mount constructed for max APS-C size:
1. Is it like an automat, smaller sensor, smaller and cheaper lenses?
- It might make the lenses smaller, but not for sure cheaper. I believe that the volymes from Pentax are not big enough to make the new lenses cheaper, price reduction will not be as big as the reduction of size, actually the price might be higher - now they already have increased DA lens prices.
- If we look at good and bright m4/3 lens prices, you have to pay more than from similar FF lenses, why?
Not all will be cheaper but the lens formula design shift to the wide angle, so the design we use for 50mm lenses now can be used for 35mm so a fast 35mm f/0.8 can be just as expensive as a 50mm f/1.2. So basically we get back the prices we had for FF for a certain type of lens. Wide angle might actually suffer a bit in the corners because of this that's the down side.

QuoteQuote:
2. If the new system would be better than FF competitors, it must be weather proof, are WR cheaper/smaller?
- To be able to use existing K-mount lenses (which is a must, because you can not make a complete system by overnight), the adapter must be also weather proof, functions like AF should work as good as with out adapter, and the adapters should be sold with understandable price.
- To be convinient to use, you need to have an adapter on every K-mount lens, or you have to remove the adapter too when changing from K-mount to new mount lens and that's not convinient.
Not cheaper per se but it will be smaller body the lenses can be smaller but not with true equivalent lenses for example like 35mm f/0.8 APS-C vs 50mm f/1.2 FF will be just as large but you do get the same AOV and the same DOF, the differnce in sensorsize is so good as gone because you can shoot with wide aperture for the same DOF with APS-C lens.

QuoteQuote:
3. As you know, Pentax already have a lot of really good F and FA lenses, but yet they have not been able to remake them to be as good in digital bodies as in film bodies, why?
- It might be so, that they do not have the capacity to do that.
- It might be so that even the slight modifications are too expensive or too difficult to do.
- It might be so that those lenses even with out modifications are far too expencive for present market situation - too small volymes to be profitable?

Or what ever questions we could imagine to make, there are far too many open points to be answered, at least answered by us
Problem is that the K-mount is designed for FF, for that it works perfectly and they can surely go up against Canon and Nikon FF if they want to but they need an FF camera then. They can't design a 35mm f/0.8 for the K-mount because of the register distance and the mount is not large enough to go further inside the mirror box.
07-07-2012, 04:48 PM   #2962
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Ben_Edict Quote
I have been using Pentax for roughly 30 years now, with 6 film bodies and currently 3 DSLRs and at least 30 Pentax lenses and ten or so others. I would never buy another Pentax body, If I had to use adapters for these lenses. If (and that is a really big IF), the adapter would provide full functionality for K-lenses (KA, KAF, DA etc.), it would be very expensive to make and to buy. On the few M42 lenses I use, I have K-adaptors mounted permanently. That wouldn't be an option with really expensive ones. I really don't think, that Pentax could be stupid enough to switch its mount, as they made a really big issue about their backwards compatibility (without adaptor).
$109 most likely.
Panasonic DMW-MA1 Mount Adapter to Mount Four Thirds Lens

In your case just leave the adapter on the camera, you don't need to disconnect it from the body and first connect it to the lens... it should work preciesly the same as you've now but with the option to take the adapter away and fit a faster lens specially design for the smaller mount. If you don't want that then invest in lenses with the K-mount.
I don't see the problem... and they could make a special introduction action that you get the adapter for free if you already have a Pentax DSLR with the k-mount.


QuoteQuote:
Pentax won't win the professional market anyway with any kind of small format camera, be it 35mm sensor (aka "FF") or aps-c. Pros used Pentax back in the Spotmatic days, because at that time Pentax was really ahead of the competition. These days are long gone and they cannot invest the money to bring themselves back into the professional game. Except for the 645 - if they provide the lenses and accessories, pro photogs really need. The 645D is the only professional segment I can recognize some effort from Pentax's side.
That's why i say IF all the time

QuoteQuote:
Sure, Pentax can jump onto the bandwaggon of mirrorless cameras, which make only sense, if you use the absence of a mirror for sliming the camera body. In thzat case a new lens line-up with a new, shorter back focal length is sensible. Perhaps they go in that direction. But going FF and introducing a new mount simply doesn't make much sense at all.

Ben
Actually that isn't that smart idea, for fun look at the corner sharpness of the NEX system... don't know if it's the lenses or the camera but i've the feeling the light hits the corners of the sensor under a too steep angle.
And I don't mean FF and a new mount, i meant that if they don't bring out a FF camera but they want to compete against the higher segment with the APS-C camera's then they need to get a new mount.
So a lot of if's....

Last edited by Anvh; 07-07-2012 at 04:57 PM.
07-07-2012, 04:52 PM   #2963
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
I can see one new mount that could work. But only if it can be combined with new electronicconnections. Since Ricoh already uses a like M-mount, they maybe can update it with electronics for new modern lenses. Most importantly is that it keeps it's backward compatability with old M-lenses! New lenses with an electronic focussing motor should be controlled by the camera. So you create in this way a M-mount (translucent) mirrorless camera for wich you only make a small number of new lenses. Not to dismiss K-mount, but to attrackt new users to the Pentax group by giving them a new camera. Ideal also with a FF sensor..
Shall i tell you something better, they can most likely make a M-mount DSLR with APS-C sensor, so with optical viewfinder and a flipping mirror.
it will be a tight fit though...

07-07-2012, 04:58 PM   #2964
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Spare Tire Quote
I've said this many times before. M-mount is stupid, and i can't emphasize that enough. M-mount is - litterally - a dumb mount. It is no better than NEX E-mount + adaptor, for example. If it's a dumb mount, why adopt it as native? You might as well start from scratch, make the flange focal distance the shortest in the industry and make adaptors for everything available, including M-mount, then add electronic contacts for lenses native to the next mount. You lose NOTHING. And then think of everything the M-mount cannot adapt. Contax G, contax / kiev / nikon RF mount, other esoteric rangefinder mounts.

And lets reserve this as a GXR mountor. That would have potential.
Then make it smart, i don't see the problem.... the k-mount also started out as a dumb mount you know.
07-08-2012, 02:07 AM   #2965
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,343
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Shall i tell you something better, they can most likely make a M-mount DSLR with APS-C sensor, so with optical viewfinder and a flipping mirror.
it will be a tight fit though...
Impossible; the M mount does not allow room for the mirror, because it's a rangefinder mount, with rangefinder registration distance.
It seems to me you lack basic knowledge on this matter, yet you're very opinionated and refuse to acknowledge all the arguments you're shown.

The 4/3 and m4/3 are intentionally very similar, except for the registration distance. They're full-electric mounts, so an adapter is just an extension tube with electrical contacts.
OTOH, the K-mount is partially mechanical, with its aperture lever and screw drive AF; it also combines the legacy A contacts with digital information transfer. But we're in a.d. 2012, so the just-because mount would be, naturally, full-electric, full-digital.
In other words, it's more similar with what Sony had to do. Yet you chose the simplest, cheapest adapter. Even better, you decide that Pentax should give it for free, just to "silence" the price argument against your stupid mount.

By the way, many people are complaining about AF speed when adapting 4/3 lenses to m4/3 cameras. I assume Sony had the same problem, solving it by including a PD-AF system in their adapter.
07-08-2012, 03:05 AM   #2966
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
By the way, many people are complaining about AF speed when adapting 4/3 lenses to m4/3 cameras. I assume Sony had the same problem, solving it by including a PD-AF system in their adapter.
This is a serious problem with AF speed. Having the adapter with PD-AF system makes it way to expensive and making the small camera big again.
07-08-2012, 06:51 AM   #2967
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,450
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I want no stinkin' adapters.
It isn't worth the effort.
07-08-2012, 08:39 AM   #2968
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Impossible; the M mount does not allow room for the mirror, because it's a rangefinder mount, with rangefinder registration distance.
It seems to me you lack basic knowledge on this matter, yet you're very opinionated and refuse to acknowledge all the arguments you're shown.
The register of the M-mount is 27.80 mm the height of the mirror is 27mm so like i said a very tight fit.

So.... where am i lacking?

QuoteQuote:
The 4/3 and m4/3 are intentionally very similar, except for the registration distance. They're full-electric mounts, so an adapter is just an extension tube with electrical contacts.
OTOH, the K-mount is partially mechanical, with its aperture lever and screw drive AF; it also combines the legacy A contacts with digital information transfer. But we're in a.d. 2012, so the just-because mount would be, naturally, full-electric, full-digital.
In other words, it's more similar with what Sony had to do. Yet you chose the simplest, cheapest adapter. Even better, you decide that Pentax should give it for free, just to "silence" the price argument against your stupid mount.
Who said that they can not simply change the register of the K-mount? oh wait you because you know it all....
While there are no extension tubes for the k-mount with AF there are TC with AF, aperture lever and electronic contacts so no problem with the mechanical parts.

I chose m4/3 adapter because the adapters for the Nex and Nikon 1 have build in focus system and we don't need that do we, so before you start with telling me about basic knowledge maybe you need to look at yourself first?
Reading isn't your strongest point either, i didn't said they must give it for free, i said they COULD give it for free to the owners of Pentax to make the transition softer, that's the least they could do for their customers right if they decide to change the mount.
07-08-2012, 09:03 AM   #2969
Site Supporter
markku55's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Hanko, Finland
Posts: 195
Oh boy, this is quite funny discussion with out any result
What is good for Pentax, that's the most important question.
I believe that no one from us can tell that, it might be that not even the market resource of Ricoh/Pentax.
We want to be adviser for Pentax, but we might be only confusing their mind
I suggest that we wait for next show and make our mind after that - if that is needed at all
07-08-2012, 11:03 AM   #2970
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,343
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
So.... where am i lacking?
Where did you get the "height of the mirror is 27mm"?
Are you aware that the mirror clearance is not the "height of the mirror"? And that a lens would protrude into the body, past the registration distance? That's basic knowledge, by the way

They cannot simply change the register distance of the K-mount because we're in a.d. 2012 and the K-mount incorporates many legacy things. To go through all the hassle of changing the mount, yet doing a half-assed job, that's something you'd suggest. Haven't noticed how real world examples supports my point of view and not yours; in this case, e.g. Sony going from Alpha to Nex?
Let's not forget (a thing you're an expert to) that Sony had to include PD-AF into the adapter because otherwise the AF would be very slow (4/3 to m4/3 slow). You were talking about no limitations, few posts ago... don't ignore them!

There is no such thing as "free"; you made that up because you cannot accept an argument. The least they could do for their customers is not to change the f*cking mount; and they don't plan to. Capisci?

Indeed, monochrome, it isn't worth the effort - the "just-because, screw all customers mount" camp is very stubborn. I must be a masochist.
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!
aps-c, bodies, body, dslr, full-frame, lenses, lineup, pentax, system, users
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Full frame pentax cem.kumuk Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 11-12-2010 03:13 PM
Pentax and Full Frame... Shutter-bug Photographic Technique 60 11-03-2010 10:03 AM
Pentax A 50/1.2 on Full Frame aegisphan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 10-28-2010 04:16 PM
News Regarding Advertising on PentaxForums.com: An Official Statement Adam Site Suggestions and Help 5 03-24-2010 07:37 PM
Official: New DSLR Body is Coming; Full Frame Model is Under Planning! RiceHigh Pentax News and Rumors 78 08-04-2008 06:18 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:11 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