[Rondec]

I am sure that Pentax is working on different ideas. I imagine that a first launch will be a traditional SLR with an optical viewfinder. Pentax has as much as said that and I think that is what will sell the most units initially. Releasing another shorter registration camera with lousy lens support (which at the pace of new lens development would take years to fix) is probably not a logical way to go . Beyond which, Sony has already done it.

On the other hand, over time, Pentax could certainly release a full frame camera with EVF, but keeping the k mount. I could see such a camera being significantly better than NEX cameras with regard to ergonomics and more useful from a professional standpoint and with larger lenses.

Certainly Pentax has different things that they are working on. I just don't think an initial full frame camera will be anything but traditional from them.

[redcat]

Yeah the K-3, its a great platform now - just jam that 35mm sucker in there ! People gonna buy it ! including me !

I'll buy it for sure too it's gonna rock, no need to add fancy stuff, just upgrade the core and that's fine ^^

[jatrax]

So first let me say this is still devil's advocate, I don't really want a mirrorless, I'm just trying to keep an open mind and think long term and beyond my own needs. No knee jerk reactions, just think where you want to be in 5 to 10 years. Pentax missed the FF boat, it already sailed. Maybe there is time to catch the mirrorless FF one.

I don't think a lot of people who currently use Pentax are willing to spend MORE money to pretty much rebuy lenses that they already have in a different mount. Might as well switch systems.

Why? I stated that the new mirrorless FF will SEAMLESSLY use k-mount lenses. The only thing you lose is the OVF. You gain all the mirrorless advantages and Pentax moves into the modern world.

agreed. i certainly would not. i would dump my k mount stuff like hot cakes and go back to canon

Again: Why? If the new mirrorless FF uses k-mount lenses seamlessly what do you lose except the OVF? If that's enough to jump ship, then I fully understand. But many, many people said many times a k-01 with EVF and better shape/styling/ergonomics would have been a success. It's failure was not the concept, just the implementation.

I'm sure they'd offer even less support if Pentax implemented a new mirrorless mount. A niche new mount within a small market share brand like Pentax isn't going to see the lens makers of the world queuing up to make lenses for you.

Probably correct.

After a lot of years of waiting for a FF, Pentax must first convince the current Pentax users that they can produce a good FF, in the actual K mount.

Only if we assume they give a flip about current users. Looked at from a purely bean counter viewpoint they might be better off to dump k-mount completely and start over with a new mount. Then they can sell new cameras and new lenses. Produce a $500 adapter to k-mount so they can claim compatibility and off they go.

As long as they have a FF sensor with K mount support i dont really care if is a DSLR or a mirrorless or whatever... ..

Yep.

I guess the dilemma for Pentax is how to do enough to keep the holders of legacy lenses on side while producing something that, going forward, is contemporary enough to establish a credible place for itself. A pure DSLR risks being steamrollered by Canon and Nikon and might soon be seen as too old fashioned (over a 5-7 year frame) to attract users new to the brand. A pure mirrorless risks costing too much to develop (for Ricoh, anyway). One suggestion has been that a high-resolution K-mount camera would not make legacy lenses all that attractive to use; they would still work perfectly, but the "cost" is that on a modern sensor the result would be a bit subpar and thus owners would be gently pushed towards investing in new lenses.

The legacy lenses are wonderful. I have way too many. But as we go forward they are going to be less and less capable of keeping up with newer sensors. At some point their limitations will be reached and will be obvious. If Ricoh is smart they are looking 10 years out and planning for that. Which means new coatings, new glass, and maybe a new mount.

[philbaum]

So first let me say this is still devil's advocate, I don't really want a mirrorless, I'm just trying to keep an open mind and think long term and beyond my own needs. No knee jerk reactions, just think where you want to be in 5 to 10 years. Pentax missed the FF boat, it already sailed. Maybe there is time to catch the mirrorless FF one.
Why? I stated that the new mirrorless FF will SEAMLESSLY use k-mount lenses. The only thing you lose is the OVF. You gain all the mirrorless advantages and Pentax moves into the modern world.
Again: Why? If the new mirrorless FF uses k-mount lenses seamlessly what do you lose except the OVF? If that's enough to jump ship, then I fully understand. But many, many people said many times a k-01 with EVF and better shape/styling/ergonomics would have been a success. It's failure was not the concept, just the implementation.
Probably correct.
Only if we assume they give a flip about current users. Looked at from a purely bean counter viewpoint they might be better off to dump k-mount completely and start over with a new mount. Then they can sell new cameras and new lenses. Produce a $500 adapter to k-mount so they can claim compatibility and off they go.
Yep.
The legacy lenses are wonderful. I have way too many. But as we go forward they are going to be less and less capable of keeping up with newer sensors. At some point their limitations will be reached and will be obvious. If Ricoh is smart they are looking 10 years out and planning for that. Which means new coatings, new glass, and maybe a new mount.

Good summary and points.

3 days ago, I and a friend invited an eccentric photo club member, call him Don, to a lunch paid for by us if he would let us handle and see his two Sonys, an A7R and an A7S. Which he did along with a bag ful of native lenses: A brand new 16-35 F4, A 24-70 F4, and a 70-200 F4, all native FE. I really wanted to compare the size to my K3 so i rushed out to my car and brought it in with a Pentax 17-70 F4 lens attached to it.

My observations (not all bad)
A. The A7 body is slightly smaller than my K3 which looks kinda clunky beside it

B. My K-3 optical viewfinder looked dark gray compared to the bright detailed EVF of the Sony A7R or S as we took pictures inside this cafe with cloudy weather outside. If i had thought about which lens to bring in, it should have been an f2.8 50-135 - better ovf and fairer comparison ;-( No A7 lag that i could see after taking pictures. If i was a newbie, and looked through the viewfinders of both these cameras - i would buy the Sony every time.

C. The A7R body, besides being smaller, is also lighter than my K3, With batteries, Dpreview says that the K3 weighs 800gm, the A7R weighs 465gm, and the new A7 II weighs 599 gm. So the APS K3 is both larger and significantly heavier than Sony's FF FE mirrorless cameras.

D. The Sony native FE lenses are both a good and bad story. The good story is that they lighter and smaller than one might expect. Most 70-200's are heavy large pigs. Not the 70-200 F4 Sony. For one thing its F4, there's probably more plastic elements in there, and i've read that smaller mount registration distance for mirrorless helps the lenses to be designed smaller. Anyway, the 70-200 F4 seemed almost toylike compared to my DA 50-135 f2.8 - its both smaller and lighter, again. See the theme developing here - both smaller and lighter. The bad news is that there are NO NATIVE F2.8 zoom lenses available for the A7 bodies and there are only a few primes which are either f2.8 or faster. Also, Sony tends to use fewer correcting elements in the lenses and more firmware PP correction - thats bad news to some as well.

E. Shutter noise: The A7 bodies are loud, not harsh, but loud. Don says he had the camera in his grand daughter's classroom, and all the kids turned around when he took a shot. I held down the K3 shutter with the setting on High rate, and the K3 probably had less than 1/5th the sound of the A7. However, the A7S has the electronic shutter setting, and it was no-sound at all -distrubingly quiet as in - did the camera take a picture???

I think the Sony A7, 7R, 7S, 7 II are giant killers, and i would be plenty nervous in the Canikon world. If i worked at Costco or Best Buy, i would insist the Canikon case be cleaned out and the Sony body and lenses be installed. Its cheaper. lighter and smaller than any other FF camera around, except for another Sony You can give me all the faults of the camera, mostly about lenses, but 75% of the customers in those stores aren't going to care.

---

Last edited by philbaum; 11-24-2014 at 03:05 PM.

[normhead]

Thanks for the comparison, good information.

It doesn't sound like it's for me on the following points.
1. The last step of my evolution in this process is going to be getting rid of ƒ4 glass, and getting ƒ2.8 or faster glass. A lighter body would be nice, with the same functionality. But going FF costs me magnification obtained with the APS-c crop factor, for both wildlife and macro.

The good story is that they lighter and smaller than one might expect. Most 70-200's are heavy large pigs. Not the 70-200 F4

2. Compared to ƒ4 glass, ƒ 2.8 should be twice as heavy, minimum. So when you compare an ƒ4 lens to an ƒ2.8 lens you need to double the weight of the ƒ4 lens. Are those Sony lenses still good weight? With a weight of 840 grams .

For example the DA*60-250 ƒ4 is 1.04 kg and has more 60mm for an extra 150 grams. This Sony lens is not light for what it is, nonsense about registration distance etc. aside.

Its cheaper. lighter and smaller than any other FF camera around, except for another Sony

Cleary you aren't looking at the same lens prices I'm seeing on the Sony website. The lighter thing is also under dispute.

Your enthusiasm however is enough to convince me I ought to check them out at a camera store.

[rawr]

Compared to ƒ4 glass, ƒ 2.8 should be twice as heavy, minimum.

Sounds about right.

As a point of reference, Nikon and Canon both have f4 and f2.8 70-200's.
Weight (and price in AUD at a popular local store) is hugely different between f2.8 and f4.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM 1490g AUD$2674
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM 760g AUD$1460

Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f2.8G ED VR II 1530g AUD$2690
Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/4G ED VR 850g AUD$1655

Same story (almost) with Sony:

Sony 70-200 f2.8 II G (A-mount) 1340g AUD$3244
Sony 70-200mm f/4 G FE OSS 840g AUD$1507

EDIT: this list also serves as a warning for folks interested in Pentax FF - any new Pentax 70-200 f2.8 ain't gonna be cheap

[disconnekt]

Really? What about all the people who, for years, have been doing just that, buying up (and bidding up the prices) on screwmount lenses and all the variety of official and after market adapters? What about the people who have been doing surgery on older lenses to adapt them to Pentax registration? What about the guy who's doing a decent business with the multi-mount replacement mount for Pentax bodies?

Sure, the entire market doesn't do that, but neither would the entire market already have old lenses to use, assuming Ricoh/Pentax has a competitive marketing/promotions plan for any new products.

Anyway... What would an electronic interface take? Add some contacts to the current contacts so that third-party makers can mfr fully electronic-controlled lenses? Leave the lever mechanism in place for compatibility with older lenses and add new contacts and circuitry for simultaneous stop-down, whether by the lever or new contacts.

I don't know. It just doesn't seem like an Apollo project to modernize and look toward the future .. to me.

And do you think those same people are going to spend MORE money to reconvert most of those lenses they have to the new mount?
Or rebuy lenses they already have to be converted to a different mount again? For most m42 lenses, prime lenses are easily available (24, 28, 35, 50/55, 85 & 135), but what about ones that are hard to find? And how long will pentax release an adapter for those lenses? Don't think 3rd party makers are going to be very helpful, since nowadays they're pulling support for pentax.

[johnmflores]

1. FF sensor in K-3 body
2. FF sensor in K-01 body

problem solved!

[Clavius]

Good summary and points.

3 days ago, I and a friend invited an eccentric photo club member, call him Don, to a lunch paid for by us if he would let us handle and see his two Sonys, an A7R and an A7S. Which he did along with a bag ful of native lenses: A brand new 16-35 F4, A 24-70 F4, and a 70-200 F4, all native FE. I really wanted to compare the size to my K3 so i rushed out to my car and brought it in with a Pentax 17-70 F4 lens attached to it.

My observations (not all bad)
A. The A7 body is slightly smaller than my K3 which looks kinda clunky beside it

B. My K-3 optical viewfinder looked dark gray compared to the bright detailed EVF of the Sony A7R or S as we took pictures inside this cafe with cloudy weather outside. If i had thought about which lens to bring in, it should have been an f2.8 50-135 - better ovf and fairer comparison ;-( No A7 lag that i could see after taking pictures. If i was a newbie, and looked through the viewfinders of both these cameras - i would buy the Sony every time.

C. The A7R body, besides being smaller, is also lighter than my K3, With batteries, Dpreview says that the K3 weighs 800gm, the A7R weighs 465gm, and the new A7 II weighs 599 gm. So the APS K3 is both larger and significantly heavier than Sony's FF FE mirrorless cameras.

D. The Sony native FE lenses are both a good and bad story. The good story is that they lighter and smaller than one might expect. Most 70-200's are heavy large pigs. Not the 70-200 F4 Sony. For one thing its F4, there's probably more plastic elements in there, and i've read that smaller mount registration distance for mirrorless helps the lenses to be designed smaller. Anyway, the 70-200 F4 seemed almost toylike compared to my DA 50-135 f2.8 - its both smaller and lighter, again. See the theme developing here - both smaller and lighter. The bad news is that there are NO NATIVE F2.8 zoom lenses available for the A7 bodies and there are only a few primes which are either f2.8 or faster. Also, Sony tends to use fewer correcting elements in the lenses and more firmware PP correction - thats bad news to some as well.

E. Shutter noise: The A7 bodies are loud, not harsh, but loud. Don says he had the camera in his grand daughter's classroom, and all the kids turned around when he took a shot. I held down the K3 shutter with the setting on High rate, and the K3 probably had less than 1/5th the sound of the A7. However, the A7S has the electronic shutter setting, and it was no-sound at all -distrubingly quiet as in - did the camera take a picture???

I think the Sony A7, 7R, 7S, 7 II are giant killers, and i would be plenty nervous in the Canikon world. If i worked at Costco or Best Buy, i would insist the Canikon case be cleaned out and the Sony body and lenses be installed. Its cheaper. lighter and smaller than any other FF camera around, except for another Sony You can give me all the faults of the camera, mostly about lenses, but 75% of the customers in those stores aren't going to care.

I understand Sony is missing a big heavy 70-200 2.8 cannon. But would the typical A7(r/s/II)-user be interested in such bulky gear? They chose world's smallest and lightest FF camera for a reason. It screams for small fast primes. I myself typically just go out with the 35 and the 55. All it's still missing is something really very wide.

[philbaum]

I understand Sony is missing a big heavy 70-200 2.8 cannon. But would the typical A7(r/s/II)-user be interested in such bulky gear? They chose world's smallest and lightest FF camera for a reason. It screams for small fast primes. I myself typically just go out with the 35 and the 55. All it's still missing is something really very wide.

I agree that the typical user would probably not buy that cannon. But i was thinking of using the A7 for sometimes dark scenes in theater plays. It would be useful to at least have a f2.8 FE 28-70 or some such. But i seem to be swiming against the tide with those ideas :-) I guess even without the faster zoom lens, i'd still get an advantage of higher iso capability over my K3. Truth be told, my K3 does a pretty capable job, and the AF is peerless in low light, imo. Fun to dream ;-). For my own landscape pictures that i flog the market with, i'd just use some Pentax manual lenses - that has been fun even with my Nex6.

[zoolander]

Because the future is mirrorless and all electronic lens connections?
Whether it is 2015 or 2025 the mirror is going, so maybe it is time to think ahead instead of behind.
Several third party manufacturers have dropped Pentax completely and Sigma is steadily reducing their offerings. It has been stated that it is harder to develop for K-mount because of the mechanical linkage.
Canon and Nikon have the FF DSLR market sewn up, not even Sony has been able to crack that much. But mirrorless FF, that is a new market with potential future.
Ricoh appears to be focusing more on developing markets, (Asia, India) perhaps mirrorless is a better fit there.
There is zero profit to Ricoh in building cameras for 'old guys that wish to use again their FF lenses with the FF body'.
It is easier to develop short registration lens? No idea about that, but Sony, Fuji both seem to have no problem bringing out very nice lenses for their mirrorless offerings.
K-mount is a FF mount, but it is also mechanical and outdated.

I think you're right, the future is definitely mirrorless, but with a new lens mount, a proper K-mount adapter - not like the Sony or EOS-M adapters which are stupid (one being mirrored and the other where EF lens can barely auto focus).

If Pentax want to be relevant, then they have to drop a product line before they step into mirrorless 35mm. Drop the Q, and make the: Q-macdaddy, a 35mm mirrorless camera. (Sorry to all the Q fans, but its just an idea). Sony is simply gonna run away with it, because they're so far ahead of everybody else with the A7 system now. If tomorrow I needed a 35mm camera, I'd be getting an A7, and not a canikon, mainly for the compactness and how the A7's images pop.

But this whole forum is like a giant "focus group", we analyse every little thing in the industry, all the different brands and models, and come up with ideas as we see things should be. Its a giant focus group, we've all got hopes and would like to see this new thing or that new thing. Who knows what will happen.

All I know is is that Pentax has got to become a little more relevant. I went to another local camera store, and they said that they (Head Office) won't be stocking any Pentax cameras anymore, they'll just be ordering them in for customers. So there won't be any hands on Pentax models through one of Australias biggest retailers of cameras "Teds". Thats the second or third retailer that won't put Pentax cameras on their shelves, they'll only stock canikon, and a little bit of Sony, and some mirrorless.

So thats:
Camera house - stopped carrying Pentax several years ago.
JB HIFI - stopped carrying Pentax several years ago.
Photo Continental - stopped carrying Pentax several months ago.
Teds Cameras stopped carrying Pentax just recently.

Digi direct is one of the last camera store that I've been to that had a K-3 and K-50 on its shelves. I've been hoping to try the K-S1, but I'll have to go back to the city (CBD) and hopefully Digi direct might have one to try out. Pentax is nearly DEAD in this city.

Digital Camera Warehouse is the only other retailer carrying Pentax, but they don't power up none of their display cameras to try.

Thats it, just 2 retailers left that carry Pentax.

Pentax has really gotta do something to put Pentax back on the shelves with something new and exciting, like a 35mm mirrorless or 35mm DSLR - something that really has an impact. Pentax has really gotta pull something out of its a**, to resurrect the brand. All the sales people in the stores are either Canon or Nikon shooters, and they don't know anything about Pentax, and sure as hell won't push a Pentax product. They complain to me that its because of Pentax marketing, so I say, do you know anything about Pentax Shake Reduction, that its 5 axis, and can level itself, and about astrotracer - they say that they didn't know that. How can you be a sales person and not know the camera systems benefits and strengths.

The problem is the sales people hate Pentax and don't have a clue about anything other than nikon or canon.

[kooks]

The problem is the sales people hate Pentax and don't have a clue about anything other than nikon or canon.

Perhaps is not that they "hate" it.. cuz many photographers talk good things about the brand quality.. but they just dont know about the camera features.. retailers need something like "quick workshops" about Pentax products.. RICOH have some good potential of growing the brand but they need to do it from the basics. A FF release to catch attention and reputation + if we good marketing along that release can push this.

A few weeks ago in my town we had the visit of a RICOH sales representative for Latin America, so looks like the company is putting some efford.. little steps that can make a difference.

[LensBeginner]

*snip*
EDIT: this list also serves as a warning for folks interested in Pentax FF - any new Pentax 70-200 f2.8 ain't gonna be cheap

I was under the impression that the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 ED id LD ADD etc. whathever macro was FF...
I know, it's cheap, but if it works...
Same for the Sigma.

[kooks]

I was under the impression that the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 ED id LD ADD etc. whathever macro was FF...
I know, it's cheap, but if it works...
Same for the Sigma.

if the FF is release im saving for that lenses.. Sigma or Tamron .. Pentax lens could be later.... actually what im going to buy first will be one of those Sigma 24-70 and a Sigma 50mm Art f1.4... I can deal with this for a while.

[RonHendriks1966]

Good news, is it coming on januari first?

---------- Post added 25-11-14 at 10:57 ----------

1. FF sensor in K-3 body
2. FF sensor in K-01 body

problem solved!

I would prefer the K-01 option.