[zosxavius]

As much as I love my K-5 I have to admit seeing images from old pentax lenses on the A7 is giving me a bit of envy. I really hope that if Ricoh comes out with a full frame that they follow suit and go mirrorless. Time will tell. Of course a K-3 sized DSLR with a full frame that takes all my old k-mount glass would be really lovely too, so either way I wouldn't be a complainer, though I think the future is most likely ultimately mirrorless and I bet the engineers at Ricoh feel the same way. Anyways, here's a bit of day dreaming as to what a mirrorless FF camera might look like. We can always dream can't we?

Attached Images

 

[johnmflores]

Lol! I'd prefer a FF K-02

[zosxavius]

Someone wrote a reply asking why don't I buy the A7 and deleted it. First of all I couldn't hardly afford nor could I justify an A7 at this moment. Secondly its a sony. Not that it in itself is reason enough to pass on the camera, but its something that I don't like about it. I also don't think that the A7 would be great with K-mount lenses due to the lack of automation and racking the aperture rings open and close constantly isn't good for them. I guess you could stop down and leave it, but with an EVF that would be problematic in low light.

A proper k-mount mirrorless, even like a k-02 would be great!

[normhead]

An FF K-02 would be excellent...

[lesmore49]

A Pentax FF DSLR would be my choice.

[aremmes]

I'm likely overlooking something, but I imagine that a mirrorless camera fully compatible with existing KAF lenses could still prove viable with just a few changes. Keep the same bayonet mount ring, but move it closer to the focal plane (duh!), maybe to 19.25mm so it could be used with Micro Four Thirds lenses with a ring adapter. Add a few electrical contacts for controlling an in-lens shutter or OIS, or both. Issue a new series of Mirrorless K-mount (MK) lenses that work with the shorter focal distance, and an "extension tube" adapter that extends the AF screw drive and electrical contacts for the additional 26.21mm to reach the KAF focal distance.

[civiletti]

Full frame modeled on the K-01 makes sense - especially if the LCD articulates. Although it would be nice to use other mount lenses by adaptor on a Pentax FF, that would make it less likely for independent lens manufacturers to produce FF K-mount lenses.

[Kunzite]

Someone wrote a reply asking why don't I buy the A7 and deleted it. First of all I couldn't hardly afford nor could I justify an A7 at this moment. Secondly its a sony. Not that it in itself is reason enough to pass on the camera, but its something that I don't like about it. I also don't think that the A7 would be great with K-mount lenses due to the lack of automation and racking the aperture rings open and close constantly isn't good for them. I guess you could stop down and leave it, but with an EVF that would be problematic in low light.

A proper k-mount mirrorless, even like a k-02 would be great!

Yes, I deleted my comment because I think such discussions are repetitive and pointless. But since you mentioned it:

First, if one wants an A7, he should buy an A7; there's no need to ask a company to make something similar. There's no guarantee people asking for that would actually buy it, and if you can't afford nor justify the cheap A7...

Second, if we're talking about a new mount mirrorless - right now their best chance is to continue to develop the K-mount, instead of trying things with new systems. The MILC market is several times smaller than the DSLR one, and fiercely competitive; they need a strong K-mount to support such venture.
Starting it with a low volume "full frame" is out of the question, unless losing money is somehow acceptable.

OTOH, a K-mount mirrorless is an interesting exercise which doesn't have a lens problem, but it appears as a quirky, niche solution to me, not something they would be able to fight Sony with. It won't be as small, it won't be as cheap and it just cannot be the K-mount flagship.

[Parry]

Yes, I deleted my comment because I think such discussions are repetitive and pointless. But since you mentioned it:

First, if one wants an A7, he should buy an A7; there's no need to ask a company to make something similar. There's no guarantee people asking for that would actually buy it, and if you can't afford nor justify the cheap A7...

Second, if we're talking about a new mount mirrorless - right now their best chance is to continue to develop the K-mount, instead of trying things with new systems. The MILC market is several times smaller than the DSLR one, and fiercely competitive; they need a strong K-mount to support such venture.
Starting it with a low volume "full frame" is out of the question, unless losing money is somehow acceptable.

OTOH, a K-mount mirrorless is an interesting exercise which doesn't have a lens problem, but it appears as a quirky, niche solution to me, not something they would be able to fight Sony with. It won't be as small, it won't be as cheap and it just cannot be the K-mount flagship.

It doesn't matter what mount it is now. The realisation that mirrorless can provide a very short flange for which adapters can make up the correct registry distance could mean that any lens from any manufacturer could be used on the same body. With a DSLR and its mirror box this isn't possible, although others who know much more than I do may correct me on this.

So, in my opinion, Sony has shown the way and anyone who's into ILC's should be rejoicing over this. It means we don't have to change lenses if we change systems as the A7 is 'universal'. Just need the correct adapter for the lens mount.

Sure, it could be that optical stabilisation will be available in the next FF mirrorless body. AF adapters like the Contax G to Sony E mount from DEO-Tech are just the start, expect many more from third party manufacturers, hopefully covering PK fit too. I have pro-photographer friends who have never ever used OS in any case, say it's not an issue.

Really, what is there to not be very, very happy about all this? You can now have a FF body and Pentax lenses . . . and Minolta and Nikkor and Contax G and Canon and Leica and Voigtlander and Konica Hexanon and . . . .

[normhead]

Really, what is there to not be very, very happy about all this? You can now have a FF body and Pentax lenses . . . and Minolta and Nikkor and Contax G and Canon and Leica and Voigtlander and Konica Hexanon and . . . .

But is that going to stop anyone from whining because Pentax doesn't have a full frame. All the people who have been saying "I want to use my Pentax FF glass the way it was designed to be used, now you have an option, you can quit your whining and just buy a Sony A&. Your dreams are answered.

[normhead]

Really, what is there to not be very, very happy about all this? You can now have a FF body and Pentax lenses . . . and Minolta and Nikkor and Contax G and Canon and Leica and Voigtlander and Konica Hexanon and . . . .

But is that going to stop anyone from whining because Pentax doesn't have a full frame? All the people who have been saying "I want to use my Pentax FF glass the way it was designed to be used", now you have an option, you can quit your whining and just buy a Sony A7. Your dreams are answered.

[Parry]

But is that going to stop anyone from whining because Pentax doesn't have a full frame? All the people who have been saying "I want to use my Pentax FF glass the way it was designed to be used", now you have an option, you can quit your whining and just buy a Sony A7. Your dreams are answered.

This is the thing. They now have one. And they have a Minolta full frame digital. And a Konica full frame digital. And a Krasnogorskiy Zavod full frame digital.

This is the way forward in ILC. Universal body design. Unless they do this ILC's will be seriously on the wane for the mass market. Because hands up who's had enough of spending staggering sums on lenses, only to be faced with another £3000, £5000, £10,000 spend just because you want to change camera body manufacturer?

[LFLee]

As much as I love my K-5 I have to admit seeing images from old pentax lenses on the A7 is giving me a bit of envy. I really hope that if Ricoh comes out with a full frame that they follow suit and go mirrorless. Time will tell. Of course a K-3 sized DSLR with a full frame that takes all my old k-mount glass would be really lovely too, so either way I wouldn't be a complainer, though I think the future is most likely ultimately mirrorless and I bet the engineers at Ricoh feel the same way. Anyways, here's a bit of day dreaming as to what a mirrorless FF camera might look like. We can always dream can't we?

I will be happy even if Ricoh have SONY manufacture the Pentax version of A7r for them...

[Kunzite]

Then, the same question - if Sony is what you want, why won't you buy Sony?

It doesn't matter what mount it is now. The realisation that mirrorless can provide a very short flange for which adapters can make up the correct registry distance could mean that any lens from any manufacturer could be used on the same body. With a DSLR and its mirror box this isn't possible, although others who know much more than I do may correct me on this.

So, in my opinion, Sony has shown the way and anyone who's into ILC's should be rejoicing over this. It means we don't have to change lenses if we change systems as the A7 is 'universal'. Just need the correct adapter for the lens mount.

Sure, it could be that optical stabilisation will be available in the next FF mirrorless body. AF adapters like the Contax G to Sony E mount from DEO-Tech are just the start, expect many more from third party manufacturers, hopefully covering PK fit too. I have pro-photographer friends who have never ever used OS in any case, say it's not an issue.

Really, what is there to not be very, very happy about all this? You can now have a FF body and Pentax lenses . . . and Minolta and Nikkor and Contax G and Canon and Leica and Voigtlander and Konica Hexanon and . . . .

I'm a Pentax K user, for me the mount matters a lot (unless there will be something so good I'll want to jump to another system).
Being a Pentax K user, what I want is a K-mount body suitable to my needs/wants (which happens to include an optical viewfinder). Having to adapt my lenses to a foreign system, or being able to adapt lenses I don't own are irrelevant complications for me; thanks but no, thanks.

From Ricoh's point of view, a market segment where people would buy the cheapest MILC they could adapt their old lenses on, using 3rd-party adapters might not be so desirable

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. Pentax would have to do better.

[Parry]

Then, the same question - if Sony is what you want, why won't you buy Sony?


I'm a Pentax K user, for me the mount matters a lot (unless there will be something so good I'll want to jump to another system).
Being a Pentax K user, what I want is a K-mount body suitable to my needs/wants (which happens to include an optical viewfinder). Having to adapt my lenses to a foreign system, or being able to adapt lenses I don't own are irrelevant complications for me; thanks but no, thanks.

From Ricoh's point of view, a market segment where people would buy the cheapest MILC they could adapt their old lenses on, using 3rd-party adapters might not be so desirable

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. Pentax would have to do better.

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.