Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-09-2012, 12:57 PM   #3016
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Well you have a few problems in your search.

- Pentax auto 110 is smaller filmsize, only 4/3th sensor of Olympus would fit with a hight of 13mm.
- Pentax auto 110 lenses don't go that far into the mount then Leica-M lenses do. Giving more room for a mirror.

So My position is that M-mount and any sensor aps-c or bigger won't work with an oldschool mirror.
- I know that's why i need to see how much room there is for improvement, we are talking about mm's here
- So you can't use most lenses then... but i never claimed it work with all...

07-09-2012, 01:56 PM   #3017
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,498
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
Well, Olympus have stated they are not dropping the 4/3 line. Don't be offended, but I pay more attention to them than to a poster on a Pentax forum.
I think Eddie means Olympus has to survive as a company in order to keep making anything, much less cameras. IOW, they have to avoid bankruptcy liquidation.
07-09-2012, 02:14 PM   #3018
Veteran Member
lammie200's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,028
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Before everyone is thinking that Ricoh is rich:

Ricoh - RICOY - Fortune Global 500 Top Companies

I think the global economy is taking hard on everyone (except oilcompany's) and Pentax has to be profatable.
Righto!

And you (not you personally) think that they are (or should be) contemplating a new mount system, or even a FF body for that matter? They don't even have an EVF to go with their mirrorless strategy, whatever that is.

It is going to be a slow uphill struggle. We have seen two bodies so far. The K-01 doesn't appear to be a big seller. The K-30 might help start the climb, but it is too early to say. And if it does, it will only be taking baby steps.
07-09-2012, 02:26 PM   #3019
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,557
QuoteOriginally posted by lammie200 Quote
Righto!

And you (not you personally) think that they are (or should be) contemplating a new mount system, or even a FF body for that matter? They don't even have an EVF to go with their mirrorless strategy, whatever that is.

It is going to be a slow uphill struggle. We have seen two bodies so far. The K-01 doesn't appear to be a big seller. The K-30 might help start the climb, but it is too early to say. And if it does, it will only be taking baby steps.
I don't see any money for a new mount experiment.

I do see a place for a Full Frame camera to boost the brand into the serieous camerabrand section.

07-09-2012, 02:39 PM   #3020
Veteran Member
lammie200's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,028
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
I do see a place for a Full Frame camera to boost the brand into the serieous camerabrand section.
I agree. But I think first we will see a 24mp K-5 replacement for the semi-serious. I am thinking that the next interesting thing to see is if they will go FF or develop their MILC strategy further. Maybe both FF and MILC, but they are already in the MILC game. I wonder if their MILC strategy is to morph into dSLR-type products. (Similar to Sony, I guess.) If so, they need that EVF.
07-09-2012, 03:11 PM - 1 Like   #3021
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,431
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Like i said i believe 10 times already i said Pentax should get a new mount for APS-C IF they don't make a FF camera but want to compete with nikon and canon FF with the APS-C.
And no matter how many times you will say it, it's still a bad idea. And Pentax has better things to do than pursue bad ideas.
I tried to explain to you why it can't possibly work, why it could hurt them badly yet bring no advantage - but you're so fixating on your bad idea any attempt of reasoning with you is futile. Good bye.

Last edited by Ash; 07-10-2012 at 04:43 AM.
07-09-2012, 09:28 PM   #3022
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
Kunzite take a look at yourself will you.

You're claiming it's the end of the world and that it will happen and must be stop at any cost while i only give it as an option "if" they decide to do something.
Really, you're barking at the wrong tree here getting mad about a speculation, option an idea, how silly is that?

What i'm discussing is an option what pentax could do if they want to use APS-C to compete with FF, nothing more nothing less.
I'm pretty sure myself Pentax won't do it but it doesn't mean we can't speculate about it.

So really what are you so mad about?

Anyway there is an advantage in using a mount with smaller register and larger diameter, i already explained why but you haven't explained why not.
I asked you to explain it but you only got mad at me so don't come to me that i can't be reasoned with...
So do your best why are there no advantage in a mount with a smaller register and larger diameter forget about marketing, market share, legacy lenses just a technical reason why it isn't better.
07-09-2012, 09:39 PM   #3023
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Anyway there is an advantage in using a mount with smaller register and larger diameter, i already explained why but you haven't explained why not.
Huh? 50 1.2 and 85 1.4 are already straightforward. The mount has a larger diameter than Nikon, and I don't see Nikon hurting for fast glass.

The downside to making registers smaller and larger is larger weight (larger diameter tube), larger weight (lenses are longer, if you're carrying more than one of them, at least). Not enough mirror clearance. And of course...

...less than perfect backwards compatibility. Right now Pentax's biggest asset is the rabid Pentax fans, and they're already a little ticked with the Hoya years and now Pentax pricing. Let's not kill the brand by pushing all the existing users to Nikon.

07-09-2012, 09:44 PM - 1 Like   #3024
Veteran Member
Chex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,700
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Anyway there is an advantage in using a mount with smaller register and larger diameter, i already explained why but you haven't explained why not.
I asked you to explain it but you only got mad at me so don't come to me that i can't be reasoned with...
As MANY have stated.. changing their mount at this point in time would be disastrous.. forcing people to a new mount would only push them to Canikon systems (Canon for those who want to easily use their Pentax glass on them, Nikon for those who are fine with a mount change to upgrade). Not many people would want to want to have to buy a Pentax Camera, then buy a Pentax PK adapter to use PENTAX glass..

IN THEORY your shorter registration distance via new mount sounds great and probably would look good on paper... Maybe this is something they should look at marketing via Ricoh.. but Pentax users have stuck steadfast with Pentax because of their backwards compatibility... how many percent of Canon shooters do you think have an FD to EOS mount, I bet it's under 10%... I think Pentax has learned to not rock that boat... especially when your trying to GAIN market-share, not alienate your loyal following.

I personally think most will end up in the same boat as myself.. sick of waiting for an upgrade path and simply jump ship.. But I was also semi-forced into replacing my K-5, so I opted for the upgrade.. Let the VISA bleed!
07-09-2012, 09:54 PM   #3025
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
Personally I want to wait until the mount is actually prohibiting some glass before I say the mount is stopping us. Right now there isn't any Pentax glass where the glass path is up against the limits of the mount IMO. Where's our 85 1.4? Where's our 50 1.2? 35 1.4?

We're at least 1/3 stop and a lot of the time more than a stop away from the mount limits.
07-09-2012, 11:14 PM   #3026
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by Chex Quote

IN THEORY your shorter registration distance via new mount sounds great and probably would look good on paper... Maybe this is something they should look at marketing via Ricoh.. but Pentax users have stuck steadfast with Pentax because of their backwards compatibility... how many percent of Canon shooters do you think have an FD to EOS mount, I bet it's under 10%... I think Pentax has learned to not rock that boat... especially when your trying to GAIN market-share, not alienate your loyal following.
You are making some curious assumptions and a poor comparison here. Canon's EF mount has a longer registration distance than the FD one, making an adapter require corrective optics and introducing a crop factor.

Tell me this, if Pentax sold a camera, adapter included and, hell, even MOUNTED for you, offering the same K mount functionality as a K5, but giving you the option to remove the adapter and mount smaller lenses in a new mount, how is that possibly a bad thing?
07-09-2012, 11:43 PM   #3027
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,431
But how is that possibly a good thing?

Below I was assumed it's about a MILC, but still these are valid points for a DSLR.
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
- the mere presence of an adapter. It means added bulk and complexity, more than if integrating the same technologies into the body; and the shape of the camera is changed not in the best way.
- adapters aren't for free. Having to pay to get your lens working is a limitation.
- perfect compatibility via an adapter is not a given (yet you suppose it is). The Sony LA-EA2, for example, doesn't support teleconverters and of course, image stabilization is lost (missing on the NEX). Yes, the bodies can also introduce limitations an adapter can't "fix".
- losing two way compatibility: you can use your old lenses with the new body with this adapter, but you cannot use new lenses with your old cameras.
I'm with ElJamoquio, we don't even have lenses as fast as the mount allows.
07-09-2012, 11:51 PM - 1 Like   #3028
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
What problem are we trying to even solve? Is it worth solving? At what cost? Is there another way to solve it?

Solving a lack of equiv fast lenses for APS-C by introducing a new mount so a whole new set of very fast APS-C only lenses can be built is, IMHO, completely and utterly insane. There is a far easier way to solve it, and it <hint> <hint> involves changing the size of the sensor.
07-10-2012, 12:02 AM   #3029
Veteran Member
Chex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,700
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
What problem are we trying to even solve? Is it worth solving? At what cost? Is there another way to solve it?

Solving a lack of equiv fast lenses for APS-C by introducing a new mount so a whole new set of very fast APS-C only lenses can be built is, IMHO, completely and utterly insane. There is a far easier way to solve it, and it <hint> <hint> involves changing the size of the sensor.
Well that would simply be the smarter, cost effective, crowd pleasing way of doing things.. BUT as it seems the Pentax FF has been a perpetual stillborn effort.. I wonder if they have people like Anvh working in their midst...
07-10-2012, 02:24 AM   #3030
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 83
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
Right now there isn't any Pentax glass where the glass path is up against the limits of the mount IMO. Where's our 85 1.4? Where's our 50 1.2? 35 1.4? We're at least 1/3 stop and a lot of the time more than a stop away from the mount limits.

If I remember rightly, one of the excuses for switching from M42 to K-mount was to enlarge the throat for an f1.2 standard lens. But Yashica was already selling a 55/f1.2 in M42 for their TL Electro-X. Chinon also had one, possibly from the same source (Tomioka), so that argument didn't really wash. The K-mount's width would probably allow Pentax to go beyond f1.2, and it would be interesting to speculate how far. As far as the Canon 7's f0.95 'Dream'? Or the f1 Noctilux?

Question is, who really wants this speed of glass, and can they pay for it? Would the numbers justify it? For most people 85/f2 is plenty fast enough, and so is 35/f2. A 'refreshed' 50/1.2 would be nice though. And so would an 85/1.4... Hmmm, dammit ElJam, you're right!
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 09:53 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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