Originally posted by Parry Forget the A7 as an individual camera and how it performs for a moment, forget the mount and forget who makes it. Forget comparison with the K-3, it's a completely different camera altogether.
It's the concept of the thing. The ability to mount any lens at the correct registry distance from the full frame sensor using an adapter is what counts. The A7 is just the start (looks like a Beta version) and it'll soon be an outdated body, but the concept of this will have started the ball rolling and other manufacturers will likely catch on to this, most likely Olympus next.
Would you not prefer the flexibility of being able to just buy an adapter to use any lens on the same camera body? I've always liked the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 for example, but I don't want to have to buy into the whole Nikon full frame DSLR thing just to use it.
It doesn't matter what Ricoh wants, it's what the market wants that counts. Ricoh Pentax are at present small fish in a pond that's getting smaller by the year, due to camera phones and a global recession impacting the living standards of anyone outside the super rich. Something has to give and Sony is the first to see this.
Why should I forget about the A7? The thread's titled "A7 envy"...
Why should I forget about the mount? I'm a K-mount user.
Why should I forget about the K-3? A Pentax "full frame" should, IMO, offer a significant step-up in image quality.
Why should I forget about anything?
Sorry, but you're building a scenario which would lead to a specific conclusion.
That concept of adapting lenses; what it means for me?
- having to adapt my lenses, instead of using them natively; function loss is likely.
- losing the optical viewfinder, which is the reason I would go "full frame".
As for advantages? Zero. I'm not an "any lens" user, I'm a K-mount user; and I like to think I'm a typical enthusiast K-mount user.
I cannot accept that selected opinions are "what the market wants", and Ricoh is oblivious to it. That's just a way of avoiding the burden of proof. Doesn't Ricoh have market data unavailable to us? Doesn't Ricoh know better what is feasible and what not, a thing largely ignored on such threads? A strategy based on using foreign lenses, does it make sense to them - as opposed to "helping" K-mount users spend more into the system?
And when you claim that Ricoh Imaging is "getting smaller by the year", while they're saying they're growing, there's no doubt in my mind on whom I should believe.