Originally posted by Kunzite Leica's
Mini M(e)?
It looks like someone at Leica thinks that diluting the M brand is a great idea. They will have the M, then the Mini M, Micro M and Nano M....
Well, you could say they did that a long time ago, when they brought out the re-badged Panasonics, but it seems to have done their reputation no real harm. There are those who disparage Leicas as being rich people's toys or being for camera snobs, but I don't think anyone would pass up their optics if they were offered at the right price. They have their following, but they're clearly not for everyone. We'll have to see what the Mini M is all about, to make a fair judgment about it.
However, the difference between a non-viewfinder Leica with an M-mount and a K-01 or other K-mount mirrorless, I think, largely comes down to the registration distance, namely 27.8 versus 45.46 mm. That 17.66 mm means the body can be that much thinner, and no matter what the virtues of the K-01 slimness isn't one of them and that's the aesthetic of today, whether we like it or not. Marc Newsome, for all his detractors, at least tried to make a virtue out of the body thickness - whether or not he succeeded is a matter of personal taste, but it's clear that not a lot of people thought so.
If Pentax want to make a "full frame" mirrorless that sells well, they will have to address the impression of size in some way, IMHO, and retaining the mirror box in the styling isn't going to remove that impression. A new mount is the only answer, although I believe it would have to be compatible with the K-mount through a bespoke adapter in order to be a success and draw on the existing range of lenses. The M-mount versions of the FA Limited lenses are proof that Pentax can successfully adapt existing optics to shorter registration distances, and a similar range of lenses dedicated to the new mount would have to be developed over time, if this course were to be followed.
Personally, I don't see this happening in the short-term, because of the additional work that would have to be done on the lens range, but I would think (or hope) that Pentax managers might have already done this sort of thinking, in determining their direction for a possible new sensor format line of cameras. Given that, they will have balanced the costs and timelines for lens development against market considerations, in coming to a decision.
However, Pentax does seem to be thinking "outside the square" when it comes to new products, so who knows? In spite of its (ongoing) detractors here, the Q has been judged a success (I don't think we'd have the Q10 if it wasn't) and the K-01 has probably been judged to have failed at its original price point, at least. In its niche, I would think from initial reactions that the GR will be a success, and perhaps that's a clue to the future Pentax form - a larger sensor in an existing range, rather than a radical departure from accepted forms. We'll see, and hopefully in the not-too-distant future. One thing is certain from the past couple of years' outcomes - they're not going to rush out a half-baked product just to satisfy the impatient desires of a few people here.