Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-27-2014, 08:00 PM   #61
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,316
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
Sure the camera may look funny with the older mount, but the customers will get used to it and many customers will appreciate the benefits of saving the old mount - and their investment in their current lenses.
To me a phone looks funny as a camera but people sure buy a lot of them and hardly use the phone part at all - just the social media, text and camera functions.

A 645z looks really funny as a camera but users seem to have gotten used to it.

The big Sony breakthrough was combining technology design and manufacturing process design. One assumes many of the engineering decisions limiting legacy mounts were manufacturing limits rather than technology limits. At Pentax, the design costs of manufacturing OVF technology are entirely sunk costs - from a manufacturing process design perspective dSLR's are essentially free.

I suppose the big question for Ricoh Imaging is whether the parent company will ever allocate enough capital to the Imaging Division to manufacture a MILC in a manner efficient enough to justify the investment in a new mount and lenses at the volume Pentax could likely sell. I personally don't believe it will happen. I have read equity analyst writings arguing the investment necessary to make Ricoh Digicams truly competitive on a volume basis is cost-prohibitive for Ricoh. A K-mount MILC - a derivative MILC - seems much more likely.

The future of Pentax remains opaque to me. I believe camera volume globally is headed to the pre-boom level before 2006 and will stabilize there. That might actually work in Pentax's favor since they won't need to 'rationalize' plant, equipment and employees when the volume finally dries up. Or it might be the death knell for Pentax - not enough room for a third full-line camera maker.

I've not heard any contradiction yet to the spring 2013 statement, "Pentax is committed to K-mount, Q and 645".

12-27-2014, 08:47 PM - 1 Like   #62
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,739
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
it's amazing how something as useless as an ovf, could still be a preferential choice for some people.
Ignoring the fact that OVFs have been used for hundreds of years, and many photographers have earned millions of dollars with their craft. Not bad going for something you call "useless".
12-28-2014, 10:59 AM   #63
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
The future of Pentax remains opaque to me. I believe camera volume globally is headed to the pre-boom level before 2006 and will stabilize there. That might actually work in Pentax's favor since they won't need to 'rationalize' plant, equipment and employees when the volume finally dries up. Or it might be the death knell for Pentax - not enough room for a third full-line camera maker.

I've not heard any contradiction yet to the spring 2013 statement, "Pentax is committed to K-mount, Q and 645".
I do see the volume going down to that level or close to that. The question if there is room for Pentax is the question on can they maintain their production at current level and increase their marketshare to that number. I don't see room for Pentax half the size it is now in salesnumbers.

I also don't see any new mounts coming to thise three....K-, Q- and 645 are good enough for the market.

No idea how many 67 camera's where sold in the past and how many lenses there are. Otherwise there is a market for a panoramic camera based upon that system.

Last edited by RonHendriks1966; 12-28-2014 at 11:05 AM.
01-02-2015, 04:31 AM   #64
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Have you noticed how different that is for the Japanese market? They buy smaller lenses for their preferred smaller camera's.
I noticed. But IMHO, Japan is no indicator of the future. Even in Asia w/o Japan, the lens market is dominated by FF now.

My personal prediction is this:
  1. The lens market will shrink overall
  2. Only two types of lenses will eventually survive (in photography):
    - Full frame (in the enthusiast niche -- niche like in tube amps for high end audio)
    - No mount (i.e., with embedded sensor, no specific sensor size)
My prediction: people will simply loose interest in the concept of interchangeable lenses. It is anachronistic (and has a few technical problems). Anachronistic like the vacuum cleaner my mother once used. A vacuum cleaner which could be "interchanged" into a hairdryer or blender! Rather, cameras like the RX10 or LX100 will take over. And as soon as these cameras start to transmit their images into the smart phone memory in a seamless manner with no user intervention necessary, will people simply use multiple such cameras rather than multiple lenses. Professionals use multiple cameras rather than change lenses, in the field, anyway. I predict special cameras for wide angle or tele. And eventually, the cameras become obsolete and are replaced by a digital rear caps for each lens.

In that regard, the current mirrorless cameras are more dead end than the current full frame dSLRs. Because for the latter, at least the lenses will survive, maybe using an adapter of some kind.


Last edited by falconeye; 01-02-2015 at 04:44 AM.
01-02-2015, 05:39 AM   #65
Pentaxian
cxdoo's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Limassol, Cyprus
Posts: 1,092
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Only two types of lenses will eventually survive (in photography): - Full frame (in the enthusiast niche -- niche like in tube amps for high end audio) - No mount (i.e., with embedded sensor, no specific sensor size)


I see two problems with your prediction.


First, "full frame" is just an arbitrary size. There is no reason why "niche" market wouldn't want to move further up when technology and prices allow.
Second, marrying sensor to glass makes no sense as long as the electronics advance much faster than the optics (and I assume they will continue to do so). Why would I want to be stuck with 5+ years old electronics on a, say, Zeiss Otus?
01-02-2015, 06:05 AM   #66
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,101
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote

My prediction: people will simply loose interest in the concept of interchangeable lenses. It is anachronistic (and has a few technical problems). Anachronistic like the vacuum cleaner my mother once used. A vacuum cleaner which could be "interchanged" into a hairdryer or blender! Rather, cameras like the RX10 or LX100 will take over. And as soon as these cameras start to transmit their images into the smart phone memory in a seamless manner with no user intervention necessary, will people simply use multiple such cameras rather than multiple lenses. Professionals use multiple cameras rather than change lenses, in the field, anyway. I predict special cameras for wide angle or tele. And eventually, the cameras become obsolete and are replaced by a digital rear caps for each lens.
Yes, very much my thoughts, too. We are not far off that either. An LX100 or a GR, an FZ1000 and a K3 + two primes - wide and portrait - would cover my needs almost completely, from social to street to travel to architecture and bokeh, with pseudo-macro, safari-type stuff and even 4K video covered as well. The total cost is comparable to only a modest FF outfit, not even a top one, but is far more adaptable, easier to carry and less ostentatious in many social situations. The results on a screen will be excellent from any of these cameras. What the camera-makers have yet to do is tie it all together so that the user can stick with one brand, one interface, one "look", one software program where output lands on the phone or tablet, etc, etc. My impression from friends and family is that a lot folks would like a camera which can do a lot more than a smartphone (though not an expensive camera), but have closed their pocket books and gone on a buying strike because the camera-makers are dragging their feet over integration with mobile and comms beyond token efforts, at least so far, and are still addicted to the old system camera approach with bags full of lenses and complicated controls predicated on the analogue era. I'd guess part of that is a power struggle between the camera industry and the mobile industry. if so, the camera industry will go down in flames.

Last edited by mecrox; 01-02-2015 at 06:11 AM.
01-02-2015, 06:19 AM - 1 Like   #67
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,739
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Professionals use multiple cameras rather than change lenses, in the field, anyway. I predict special cameras for wide angle or tele. And eventually, the cameras become obsolete and are replaced by a digital rear caps for each lens.
*ahem*

I rarely use multiple cameras in my work - And I'm a huge fan of interchangeable lenses. I know of several photographers that do use multiple cameras and to be honest, to me it smacks of excessive 1980's materialistic thinking that in this current economic climate cannot be sustained. For example: Annie Leibovitz uses multiple cameras - she shoots at high FPS with continuous lighting - and as soon as one cameras buffer fills, she is handed another camera by her principal assistant which she fires at high FPS...etc.etc so on and so forth - to me this is criminally wasteful and it was a symptom of the factors that led to her financial woes*. Make no mistake Annie Leibovitz is an excellent photographer, but in terms of photographic technique she is extremely inefficient.

Large format cameras have interchangeable lenses,bellows, rails, shutters, standards,you name it. Medium format you have less interchangeability, and then there is 35mm which is even more restricted than medium format - Fixed lens cameras will only make that worse.

Fixed lens cameras are a great Idea for casual photography, for dilettantes who don't have demanding requirements. Falk, how many people are going to buy a camera with a fixed 800mm f/5.6 lens? or perhaps a fixed lens camera with an 8mm fisheye?- not many people use exotic optics like that, and even if they do, they don't use them 100% of the time - which turns a fixed lens camera into a bad investment, which will lead to lower sales, less innovation, lower production volumes and drag photography back to the ages where focal lengths under 24mm and over 100mm were rare.


*Repair and replacement costs for shutter units and mirror assemblies are costly, and you have a camera out of commission. And if you are working with a fixed lens camera that can be problematic- you're losing money working with a fixed lens system.

Last edited by Digitalis; 01-02-2015 at 06:38 AM.
01-02-2015, 07:03 AM   #68
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,175
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
A vacuum cleaner which could be "interchanged" into a hairdryer or blender!
"Es saugt und bläst der Heinzelmann, ..."


Sorry, for anyone not being able to follow the German.

01-02-2015, 08:17 AM - 1 Like   #69
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,748
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
*ahem*

I rarely use multiple cameras in my work - And I'm a huge fan of interchangeable lenses. I know of several photographers that do use multiple cameras and to be honest, to me it smacks of excessive 1980's materialistic thinking that in this current economic climate cannot be sustained. For example: Annie Leibovitz uses multiple cameras - she shoots at high FPS with continuous lighting - and as soon as one cameras buffer fills, she is handed another camera by her principal assistant which she fires at high FPS...etc.etc so on and so forth - to me this is criminally wasteful and it was a symptom of the factors that led to her financial woes*. Make no mistake Annie Leibovitz is an excellent photographer, but in terms of photographic technique she is extremely inefficient.
Sony Interview - Photokina 2014:

Mathieu: Mirrorless cameras are proving they can do very well in a professional environment. Take for example the a6000 and its autofocus capabilities. Do you think that mirrorless cameras are completely ready for professional use?

Nogami: Yes. But you know what, professional photographers normally use several cameras–one for one project, maybe two for another. So they are not throwing away one camera when they take a new one. Canon users and Nikon users started using the A7 as a second or third camera. And the good thing is that our cameras can use their lenses with an adapter. So this is the way the current situation has evolved so far. But still it’s not taking over the main camera position yet. When we introduced the RX1, we seeded the product to professionals and they loved the concept very much, and they are still using it as sort of a third or second camera. And Alpha 7 is more or less an RX1 with an interchangeable-lens.

At one point I was using the Contax 645, Canon 5D and the Olympus E-3 (Sold for a K-7). Different cameras, like different lenses server different functions. I'm glad you don't get to decide what is "criminal". Annie was still using a Canon 1Ds last time I saw a video of her working. That's a 14 year old body, and it only has a 10 shot buffer. Once the buffer is full it drops to 1 shot every 8 seconds. If you want to lock people up for being criminally wasteful and materialistic we can start with the Leica users. Anyone owning Leica should be the first thrown in jail when we outlaw materialism.
01-02-2015, 11:46 AM   #70
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
"Es saugt und bläst der Heinzelmann, ..."


Loriot Vertreterbesuch - YouTube
Sorry, for anyone not being able to follow the German.
Hilariously, thanks for posting. For non German speakers ... three travelling salesman meeting each other while visiting a German house wife, supposed 60's.

However, my mother had this device:
-> Universalhaushaltsgerät ?Piccolo? und Werkzeugsatz ?Mach es selbst?, 1960er-Jahre – Technisches Museum Wien

Able to: "mix, grate, grind, juicing, vacuum, blow-dry, disinfect, painting, sawing, drilling, grinding"

This kind of device makes sense if one part (the motor) is much more valuable than the rest. Motors became a commodity and such multi devices disappeared. The same wil lhappen to camera bodies, that's for sure. I am just not sure how fast it will happen.
01-02-2015, 12:17 PM   #71
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,316
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
The same wil lhappen to camera bodies, that's for sure. I am just not sure how fast it will happen.
So long as the camera body I have accepts the lenses I have I really con't care.
  • My K-3 certainly still works
  • My K10D still works (just like a mechanically good but elderly car, little bits such as the spring on the battery door are giving out)
  • My K-01 still works
  • My KX'es, MX and LX still work
They all accept the lenses I have and will continue to accept them until the lenses are irretrievably broken.

Whether there will ever come a day that all my cameras are broken beyond repair and no new camera will accept my lenses I do not know - but I suspect I will be long dead before that comes to pass - and I'm not that old!!
01-02-2015, 12:52 PM   #72
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,227
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
The same wil lhappen to camera bodies, that's for sure.
No, that's not for sure. It's an intriguing idea, but I can't see it happening.
The need for lenses will continue (at least for enthusiasts). It can't possibly go niche, to the way high end audio (a hobby more expensive than digital medium format) is niche. And you can't have a camera attached to each lens, complete with grip, viewfinder etc. That would take a lot of space in your bag. How about a K-S1-sized camera on each of my Limiteds, and a K-3-sized one on the 60-250? No chance that will happen.
It's one thing for an electric motor to become cheap enough (my Philips vacuum cleaner didn't cost pennies), and one thing for an entire camera to become as inexpensive as rear caps.
01-02-2015, 02:30 PM   #73
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
"Es saugt und bläst der Heinzelmann, ..."


Loriot Vertreterbesuch - YouTube
Sorry, for anyone not being able to follow the German.
You should be sorry, the video looked like a total hoot! As near as i could understand, they were all discussing the future of digital cameras - and having a good time. Guess i'll give up on learning German.
01-02-2015, 03:39 PM   #74
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by cxdoo Quote
First, "full frame" is just an arbitrary size. There is no reason why "niche" market wouldn't want to move further up when technology and prices allow.
Second, marrying sensor to glass makes no sense as long as the electronics advance much faster than the optics (and I assume they will continue to do so). Why would I want to be stuck with 5+ years old electronics on a, say, Zeiss Otus?
Full frame isn't that arbitrary. It is the format the best and biggest choice of interchangeable lenses does exist for. Therefore, in a climate where interchangeable lenses risk to become extinct (my prediction), it is the most likely format to survive. Moreover, interchangeable lenses for smaller format sensors will hit technological barriers earlier (mount and AF tolerances, aberrations at big apertures etc.).

I agree, a niche market could move further up indeed. But I then see the embedded sensor lenses to take over instead.

Second, I agree marrying sensor to glass makes no sense as long as the electronics advances fast. But I do not agree that this is the case still (it actually may still be, but not for long anymore).

Today, sensors are already close to physical limits (higher than 50% quantum efficiencies and less than 2 electrons read out noise leave little room for improvements). A sensor marryied to a lens already today allows for an optical quality not achievable by an interchangeable lens which isn't at least as expensive as lens plus body, cf. RX1 which has a Zeiss lens almost touching the sensor. And the manufacturer may offer to retrofit a newer sensor down the road. The improvements will be with the software which would continue to reside outside the sensor and lens. I do not say this has happened already (it did not, sensors are still a significant portion of overall cost). But soon, that will no longer be the case.

---------- Post added 02-01-15 at 23:58 ----------

Maybe, I didn't express myself well.

I do think interchangeable lenses for dSLRs will continue to survive for quite a while -- for as long as we love our dSLRs (APSC for Pentax, FF for Canikon).

But ...

I am less sure about interchangeable lenses in the mirrorless world. It simply doesn't make any sense at all.

First ... mirrorless needs no OVF, so no reason to let the light escape through the rear end

Second ... mirrorless (already today) has all kinds of sensor sizes, Q, 1", 4/3, APSC, FF. It simply makes a better camera to accept any lens with matching pair of optics and sensor. Why should a photographer accept a limitation for a single format if already investing in a new system? BTW, this renders moot the argument that each lens would come with its own camera. It would only come with its own sensor. It would still be the photograher's decision how many cameras to use.

Third, especially mirrorless has to honour a size fetish, to make a camera as small and as good as possible. This is challenging from a technological point of view. IMHO, the best possible lenses which are small too can't be done with a mount. They must be embedded designs like the 41 megapixel Nokia 808 Pureview lens, or the RX1, RX10, RX100, LX100 lenses. Already today, if you do the arithmetic, combining an RX100m3 (24-70) plus an RX10 (tele) beats any system camera with zoom lenses except with a full frame one.

Last edited by falconeye; 01-02-2015 at 04:02 PM.
01-03-2015, 07:35 AM   #75
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
But ...

I am less sure about interchangeable lenses in the mirrorless world. It simply doesn't make any sense at all.

First ... mirrorless needs no OVF, so no reason to let the light escape through the rear end

Second ... mirrorless (already today) has all kinds of sensor sizes, Q, 1", 4/3, APSC, FF. It simply makes a better camera to accept any lens with matching pair of optics and sensor. Why should a photographer accept a limitation for a single format if already investing in a new system? BTW, this renders moot the argument that each lens would come with its own camera. It would only come with its own sensor. It would still be the photograher's decision how many cameras to use.

Third, especially mirrorless has to honour a size fetish, to make a camera as small and as good as possible. This is challenging from a technological point of view. IMHO, the best possible lenses which are small too can't be done with a mount. They must be embedded designs like the 41 megapixel Nokia 808 Pureview lens, or the RX1, RX10, RX100, LX100 lenses. Already today, if you do the arithmetic, combining an RX100m3 (24-70) plus an RX10 (tele) beats any system camera with zoom lenses except with a full frame one.
Very true and a camera Like the Panasonic FZ1000 with the 1" sensor and 25-400mm lens can do for the average holiday person anything they used to bring a dslr and 18-270mm lens for. Still not a small camera.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
24x36mm, advantage, apsc, camera, cameras, canon, electronics, ff, figures, format, full-frame, lens, lens sales, lenses, line, milc, nikon, ovf, pentax, post, sales, sense, sensor, sensors, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Refurb. Nikon D600+kit lens, FF for $1699 (adorama via ebay) LFLee Pentax Price Watch 18 07-30-2013 04:07 PM
FF camera without FF lens? jatrax Pentax Full Frame 41 04-28-2013 03:32 PM
Hood suggestion for FF lens makers c a sugg Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 01-24-2012 11:41 AM
Is there a thread or forum for LENS sales ONLY? bokehbetty Site Suggestions and Help 11 12-30-2010 01:54 AM
What wide angle lens for Pentax FF? ozlizard Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 03-02-2010 06:05 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:50 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top