[osv]

By the way, if I were to believe DPReview's studio images, the A7 doesn't have much to offer, image quality-wise, over the K-3.

then you shouldn't have any problem showing us a k-3 shot that's as sharp as this:

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-alpha-7-7r/samples/goodshots/DSC00084.JPG

[Fogel70]

I don't see any major difference compared to K-3 sample images.
Sample Images?K-3 | RICOH IMAGING

[Parry]

I cannot understand why the A7 and A7r are being compared to the K-3 here.

Okay, compare the A7 to the Leica M, sure. But the K-3 is an APS-C DSLR and has completely different strengths and weaknesses.

If we must compare this orange with that apple, I do think that the K-3 would be a more user friendly general purpose camera for beginners and amatuer photogs and I include myself in that.

[normhead]

I just don't see it the way you do, unless the adapters offer full functionality. You talk about losing all this functionality as if it means nothing. The point to buying your brand's lenses, is your brand is the only company that fully takes your camera into account when they design lenses etc. You like the Nikkor 14-24, I like the Sigma 8-16. It's a smaller lens and for landscape you rarely need f 2.8. You can promote your pipe dream about a system that is fully functional with every lens made by any manufacturer, but you look at Canon and they can't ben do that for their own lenses. Its a great concept, but this is not something I see happening… ever.

[Kunzite]

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 The A7 is just the start (looks like a Beta version) and it'll soon be an outdated body, but the concept of this will have started the ball rolling and other manufacturers will likely catch on to this, most likely Olympus next.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.

[Parry]

I just don't see it the way you do, unless the adapters offer full functionality. You talk about losing all this functionality as if it means nothing. The point to buying your brand's lenses, is your brand is the only company that fully takes your camera into account when they design lenses etc. You like the Nikkor 14-24, I like the Sigma 8-16. It's a smaller lens and for landscape you rarely need f 2.8. You can promote your pipe dream about a system that is fully functional with every lens made by any manufacturer, but you look at Canon and they can't ben do that for their own lenses. Its a great concept, but this is not something I see happening… ever.

I have the Siggy 8-16 and the 15mm Limited. Their all right are those lenses. But I'd never use them for wide landscape. I've tried and I didn't like it, so I went with a Benro panoramic head to deal with parallax and use the 77mm Limited and stitch together. But not really into landscape in any case.

Many here enjoy their K, M and A manual primes and there's very little 'functionality', is there? Yet some of the best photos come from lenses from the 1970's which do not communicate any information to the camera except light. It was one of the big attractions to the Pentax system today . . . K-mount, old manual lenses.

Look at the Sony A mount to E adapter. No functionality lost reading the user accounts. Why not other mounts? They will come.

As you rightly point out Norm, it's a great concept.

Sony A7. It's just the beginning. It's no longer a pipe dream. It's happening now. Manufacturers better take notice of this.

.

[Parry]

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.

Up to you. I'd just like the flexibility to mix and match without loss in quality and I think this is the way it's going and has a lot of appeal.

DSLR market is getting smaller by the year. Pentax is a small player in a shrinking market. You can still be a K-mount user, just via an adapter. More and more pics are coming out to demonstrate this is possible.

By the way, M42 are foreign lenses, old Soviet and East German vintage glass . . . but they work lovely!


Just trying to have a normal discussion, just stick me on ignore.

[normhead]

then you shouldn't have any problem showing us a k-3 shot that's as sharp as this:

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-alpha-7-7r/samples/goodshots/DSC00084.JPG

No I wouldn't, have any trouble showing you a K-3 image as sharp as that. IN fact, if I were say anything about that image is that it almost works as a portrait because it's not at all sharp, and most portraits shouldn't be. However, the lighting etc. is so poor I suffered looking at it. Please don't do that again.

[RobA_Oz]

then you shouldn't have any problem showing us a k-3 shot that's as sharp as this:

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-alpha-7-7r/samples/goodshots/DSC00084.JPG

It's not exactly helpful to post one shot from a camera/lens combination and effectively say: "beat this with your system". It proves nothing except that camera and lens can make a decent fist of displaying sharp facial hair and out of focus shirt buttons.

I'm not saying the A7/s isn't a good camera, but you'll need more than one photo to demonstrate its superiority over another.

[Parry]

I just don't see it the way you do, unless the adapters offer full functionality. You talk about losing all this functionality as if it means nothing. The point to buying your brand's lenses, is your brand is the only company that fully takes your camera into account when they design lenses etc. You like the Nikkor 14-24, I like the Sigma 8-16. It's a smaller lens and for landscape you rarely need f 2.8. You can promote your pipe dream about a system that is fully functional with every lens made by any manufacturer, but you look at Canon and they can't ben do that for their own lenses. Its a great concept, but this is not something I see happening… ever.

How does a third party manufacturer take into account lens design for individual cameras when manufacturing for three or four different mounts? Sigma 8-16mm a case in point.

Don't read this as being facetious. It's a genuine question.

[Kunzite]

Up to you. I'd just like the flexibility to mix and match without loss in quality and I think this is the way it's going and has a lot of appeal.

DSLR market is getting smaller by the year. Pentax is a small player in a shrinking market. You can still be a K-mount user, just via an adapter. More and more pics are coming out to demonstrate this is possible.

By the way, M42 are foreign lenses, old Soviet and East German vintage glass . . . but they work lovely!


Just trying to have a normal discussion, just stick me on ignore.

Then, by all means - buy the A7; it appears to be exactly what you want. It's well supported by 3rd-party adapter makers, too.
That camera simply does not appeal to me, and I don't understand all the hype.

Using the CIPA data, we can see that this year production for both DSLRs and MILCs decreased similarly, at about 78-77% from the exaggerated 2012 figures. The DSLRs are still 4.73 times the volume, and 5.64 times the value.
So you're saying Pentax should give up on the shrinking DSLR market for another, much smaller shrinking market?

I already explained why being able to adapt my lenses on a foreign mount - instead of using them natively - is a disadvantage for a K-mount user like myself. Please tell if it needs further clarification.

Ricoh Imaging won't bet their future on M42 users; nor on Nikkors.

How would ignoring you help having a normal discussion?

[Parry]

Then, by all means - buy the A7; it appears to be exactly what you want. It's well supported by 3rd-party adapter makers, too.

Using the CIPA data, we can see that this year production for both DSLRs and MILCs decreased similarly, at about 78-77% from the exaggerated 2012 figures. The DSLRs are still 4.73 times the volume, and 5.64 times the value.
So you're saying Pentax should give up on the shrinking DSLR market for another, much smaller shrinking market?

Ricoh Imaging won't bet their future on M42 users; nor on Nikkors.

How would ignoring you help having a normal discussion?

Sorry, I've got raging toothache from a gum abscess and it's making me cranky. I'm in the jungle at the moment and there's no dentist or antibiotics.

No, I think the market is changing rapidly. These cameras which come with a free telephone attached are a nuisance to sustaining the consumer market and recession and squeezed incomes are bothering the prosumer market. At some point the tree gets shaken and a few players are going to fall out. Not saying that it'll be Pentax, I'd rather not because I have a lot of their stuff and I do like using it.

Then a camera comes along like the A7 and changes, or shows the potential to change the old problem of being stuck with a particular mount. This could offer us, the ever financially burdened photogs with a more economic and more flexible way of choosing and using gear. I like this. It appears others like this too. I'm not saying the A7 is it, but it's definitely a start.

It's just a different approach which I would have thought would make ILC users absolutely rejoice.

[jcdoss]

then you shouldn't have any problem showing us a k-3 shot that's as sharp as this:

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-alpha-7-7r/samples/goodshots/DSC00084.JPG

That guy better be thankful he didn't have any eye boogers!

[Kunzite]

Parry:
Ouch, those can be nasty... find a doctor, and get well soon!

I don't think smartphones can threaten high end cameras in any way; market slowdown is likely due to saturation (and overstocking/overestimating the demand, in 2012). And if the MILCs would take over (which we don't see happening right now), it would take some years. IMO, Ricoh Imaging has time to first rebuild the K-mount, and then prepare for an eventual MILC dominance.
The alternative would be a desperate move to go MILC, losing their K-mount user base on the way, and being in the red for quite a long time.
I'm reasonably certain the 2014 will be a "DSLR year" for them. That's good for me.

[Parry]

Parry:
Ouch, those can be nasty... find a doctor, and get well soon!

I don't think smartphones can threaten high end cameras in any way; market slowdown is likely due to saturation (and overstocking/overestimating the demand, in 2012). And if the MILCs would take over (which we don't see happening right now), it would take some years. IMO, Ricoh Imaging has time to first rebuild the K-mount, and then prepare for an eventual MILC dominance.
The alternative would be a desperate move to go MILC, losing their K-mount user base on the way, and being in the red for quite a long time.
I'm reasonably certain the 2014 will be a "DSLR year" for them. That's good for me.

Kunzite, believe me when I say, I really want a FF Pentax K-mount camera. I really do. As much as I want morphine right now.

MILC's are relatively new. But the pro-photogs I know love 'em (I just have cameras for fun by the way). An old Vietnam War veteran photog I know just flew into HK simply to get the new Oly EM-1 or EM-5 is it? Can't keep up. Other's too, all going for this Olympus thing. Supposed to be great. They all love it and stick their Voigtlanders and wotnot on the thing.

So, MILC's appeal is growing, from what I'm seeing because they are getting better and in the Oly's case the M4/3's sensor is a goodun'. Great! I also notice Ming Thein is nuts about the things. Says a lot.

Now comes along the first ever FF MILC. Never been demand for a FF MILC before, because there's never been one.

As the EVF technology improves and gets closer to OVF quality or at least acceptable, the old prism thing with a flappy mirrorbox and all its vibration is no longer required.

So I'm not so sure Pentax would do the right thing here with another DSLR. They're not going to sell more lenses just because they sell less cameras. If they can crack the "you can attach any lens you like to this full frame thing" and do it with that old Pentax carved from granite quality like they do . . . massive appeal. Would sell loads. Would likely sell even more of their excellent PK glass because of it.