[Supernaut]

What is the smallest AF film body Pentax have made in the past?

[Zygonyx]

ME i would say : 131 x 82.5 x 49.5 mm

[gazonk]

ME i would say : 131 x 82.5 x 49.5 mm

I almost answered that, too, but then I saw that the OP said AF body...

[Zygonyx]

I dont think AF would make it taller nor thiker .

[gazonk]

I dont think AF would make it taller nor thiker .

There's absolutely no question that PDAF makes cameras taller - the AF sensors sit underneath the mirror box.

[deejjjaaaa]

So it's not actually clear that MILC's constitute as big a threat to APS-C DSLRs are they are sometimes made out to be.

of course they are... there are P&S upgraders who are buying into mirrorless instead of APS-C dSLR cameras, there are people w/ bigger gear bying smaller mirrorless instead of smaller APS-C dSLR body for casual outing, there are people who are dropping APS-C dSLR altogether too... certainly APS-C is nowhere near death and will not disappear tomorrow or day after tomorrow, but suffer for sure.

[RKKS08]

What is the smallest AF film body Pentax have made in the past?

MZ-M (ZX-M in US):135 x 90.5 x 55 mm (wider and higher, but less thick than *ist)

*ist: 122 x 84 x 63.5 mm (not as wide and high, but thicker than MZ-M)

Mind that the *ist has a built-in flash, the MZ-M hasn't.

[Kunzite]

The MZ-M was manual focus; so it's the *ist.

[vonBaloney]

I have a ZX-7 sitting here -- it is pretty compact.

[Class A]

Can't wait for the Pentax FF to hit the market, but was surprised to what extent Bill Gekas manages to make the K-5 look like an FF camera.

Have a look at his Potatoes image. I love the smooth tonality transitions.

If you want to fully appreciate it, download Issue 17 of F11-magazine, scoot to page 86, and watch it full screen on a calibrated monitor (not too close though, as the resolution isn't quite up there). Amazing.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

The problem is that when you are behind, you cannot simply aim for doing the same thing as those ahead of you - you need to do much more.

Pentax has made much progress in terms of APS-C bodies. But their lens lineup is growing too slowly and third party support is going down - Cosina has abandoned the mount and Sigma and Tamron only support it partially. Now Ricoh has to come up with some plan. So what can they do?

Continuing to put out APS-C DSLRs with incremental improvements won't lead them anywhere. They already have a strong APS-C camera but it doesn't help them gain market. 645D and Q are niche products. Everyone else but Samsung already offers FF cameras, so another FF DSLR won't get them anywhere.

Meanwhile, MILC market is expanding very nicely. Some people here don't want to believe that, but look at what lenses came out this year just for MFT mount (these are just those I kept track of):

Panasonic 35-100/2.8
Olympus 15/8 cap lens, 17/1.8, 60/2.8 macro, 75/1.8
Tokina 300/6.3 mirror
Sigma 19/2.8 and 30/2.8
Voigtlander 17.5/0.95

Also, some lenses were announced for the future: Panasonic 45/1.2 and 150/2.8; Schneider Kreuznach 14/2, 30/1.4, and 60/2.4 macro; SLR Magic 23/1.7 and 35/1.4.

That is a very active product development compared to Pentax. It really helps to have third party support from pretty much all manufacturers. And it is great to have a common platform shared by two camera manufacturers.

I don't see any future in which DSLRs continue to be relevant. Sure, some people will stick to them like others stuck to film and film cameras, but now we know how such stories end. Pentax has no compelling offering in this market yet. Ricoh tried something different with the GXR, but it is too different. I don't see Ricoh well if they don't announce an interesting MILC system in 2013. Whether it will be APS-C or FF is less important - they could just start with APS-C but with ability to use a FF sensor in the future. And they might announce some DSLRs too while they are at it, but I don't see how they could funnel development resources in parallel, so the DSLRs may just be of K-5III variety. They will need to make some tough choices and some people here will be disappointed. Or, they will not make the tough choices, and then the disappointment will come up in the long run.

[civiletti]

Can't wait for the Pentax FF to hit the market, but was surprised to what extent Bill Gekas manages to make the K-5 look like an FF camera.

Have a look at his Potatoes image. I love the smooth tonality transitions.

If you want to fully appreciate it, download Issue 17 of F11-magazine, scoot to page 86, and watch it full screen on a calibrated monitor (not too close though, as the resolution isn't quite up there). Amazing.

nice stuff - great tonality.

[Ash]

dSLRs irrelevant? I think not. Pentax playing catch up? Perhaps. But then each of the brands are playing this game with each other too. Look at the K-5. If that's any indication in the APS-C department then Pentax can make themselves a successful and sought after FF even if it's not as popular as the D600 or 6D.

[bigrex]

I don't see any future in which DSLRs continue to be relevant. Sure, some people will stick to them like others stuck to film and film cameras, but now we know how such stories end.

It is my understanding that mirrorless cameras do not offer the same quality as mirrored cameras. Most pros and a significant number of amateurs also care less about camera size and more about quality imagery.

[vonBaloney]

It is my understanding that mirrorless cameras do not offer the same quality as mirrored cameras.

By choice -- there is no technical reason that is so. At least image quality wise -- AF systems are certainly not as good (and there are technical reasons for that), and the lack of optical viewfinder is either a drawback or not depending on your preference. But Pentax's own K-01 is DSLR quality with no mirror.

Most pros and a significant number of amateurs also care less about camera size and more about quality imagery.

Everybody wants a camera they can comfortably use...