[em-tx]

As I was researching some stuff I stumbled upon interesting video on opinion that FF DSLR might be obsolete to FF MILC. I wonder if Pentax would be also considering this and if we would get FF MILC (one day ) - especially since Pentax has none at the moment.

I know that DSLR vs. MILC is heated discussion with lot of pro and cons, but as Pentax is late catching CANIKON FF, do you think they would be catching up on Sony as well? Would that make sense?

Personally, I am ready to drop the mirror, but I wonder if there is interest by Pentaxians for FF MILC.

Either way, I am looking forward for FF as I am still happily using K5 and ready to swap to FF when comes the time.

You Tube

You Tube

[Na Horuk]

Some of us already enjoy using the K-01. And many are using the Sony and m43 mirrorless systems along with adapted Pentax lenses, or to fill the (perceived or real) gaps that Pentax cameras leave.

Some say that K-mount is too big for mirrorless, due to its big register distance. But I don't agree. First of all, a bigger register distance means that some lens designs can be more compact - like the DA limited pancakes. I don't think those are possible on E-mount, for example. And this holds true for many Pentax primes (and arguably, the primes are the main draw to Pentax). Secondly, with mirrorless, lenses can still be designed to fit into the camera body (empty mirror box). Some of us were expecting this design for the XS lenses, but that project was abandoned, and no XS lenses were made after the 40mm XS, even though we have seen some interesting prototypes.

Honestly, I gave up hope of seeing a K-mount mirrorless, APSC or FF. And I don't like too much debate about it, as it gets heated, and doesn't serve much purpose

[em-tx]

Some of us already enjoy using the K-01. And many are using the Sony and m43 mirrorless systems along with adapted Pentax lenses, or to fill the (perceived or real) gaps that Pentax cameras leave.

Some say that K-mount is too big for mirrorless, due to its big register distance. But I don't agree. First of all, a bigger register distance means that some lens designs can be more compact - like the DA limited pancakes. I don't think those are possible on E-mount, for example. And this holds true for many Pentax primes (and arguably, the primes are the main draw to Pentax). Secondly, with mirrorless, lenses can still be designed to fit into the camera body (empty mirror box). Some of us were expecting this design for the XS lenses, but that project was abandoned, and no XS lenses were made after the 40mm XS, even though we have seen some interesting prototypes.

Honestly, I gave up hope of seeing a K-mount mirrorless, APSC or FF. And I don't like too much debate about it, as it gets heated, and doesn't serve much purpose

I am coming from point that all FF lenses can be adopted on MILC. I am not sure for size of K mount - but I do not think A to E mount is much smaller though.
If there would be a good video functionality (which should not be an issue nowadays), there would be opportunity (besides smaller lenses) for multipurpose adapter (AF,ND,POL) and therefor to create smallish and truly versatile camera.

I honestly love design of K01 - but could not justify cause I have already K5 and there was not much of a win, except of design as well as I could not justify another system, since I have semipro film cam.

I was not aware of XS prototypes - would you mind to share a link?

[Rondec]

These sort of arguments are difficult. I would love to see a K-01 with a full frame sensor, PDAF points on the sensor (and thereby decent auto focus), an EVF, and typically good Pentax ergonomics. People focus on getting rid of the k mount a lot around here -- mainly, I think, so they can mount other lenses with shorter registration distances. That isn't a big deal to me and if you make a camera to small, decent sized full frame lenses get awfully unwieldy.

The K-01 is kind of a dirty word around here. It failed because it was too expensive at launch, had odd styling (Pentaxians are conservative folks who hate change), it had no EVF (there could easily be space for one), and the performance was really slow. I own one and it actually is a fun camera to use, but I think several Pentaxians would self-combust if Pentax released a second version of such a camera.

[em-tx]

These sort of arguments are difficult. I would love to see a K-01 with a full frame sensor, PDAF points on the sensor (and thereby decent auto focus), an EVF, and typically good Pentax ergonomics. People focus on getting rid of the k mount a lot around here -- mainly, I think, so they can mount other lenses with shorter registration distances. That isn't a big deal to me and if you make a camera to small, decent sized full frame lenses get awfully unwieldy.

The K-01 is kind of a dirty word around here. It failed because it was too expensive at launch, had odd styling (Pentaxians are conservative folks who hate change), it had no EVF (there could easily be space for one), and the performance was really slow. I own one and it actually is a fun camera to use, but I think several Pentaxians would self-combust if Pentax released a second version of such a camera.

For K1 - it was a pitty that it ended in this way.

For a MILC, probably there would need to be a new mount, but I guess there is not much more way to get smaller than A7s - and that's not that bad,less you have really long zoom. I will be happy to spare space and weight and getting rid of mirror box and pentaprism would be already a big benefit to me.


You have wonderful images on 500px.

[Na Horuk]

I am coming from point that all FF lenses can be adopted on MILC.

Hm, what do you mean? All K-mount FF lenses can already be mounted on K-mount camera. The reason many MILC allow adapted lenses from different systems (not just APSC vs. FF) is because of their short register distance. This is why Pentax can be mounted on Canon camera, but not the other way around (both same register distance, but Canon mount is bigger in diameter), and this is why Pentax lenses can be mounted on Q, but not the other way around (Q lens would have to be inside the camera, where the mirror is). If the register distance is wrong, then the lens will not be able to focus properly.

I was not aware of XS prototypes - would you mind to share a link?

The latest thread about these lenses: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/300214-if-p...d-xs-line.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/147-pentax-mirrorless-cameras/300292-poss...ification.html
There are links posted inside the first thread (post by cali92rs). The second thread shows the concept with old third party lens (posted by me, scroll down).

For a MILC, probably there would need to be a new mount,

Ah, and here is the problem. You already have Q, (micro) four thirds, Olympus, Fuji, the Sony mounts, Samsung, Panasonic.. there are plenty. Does Pentax really need to join? And throw away its main advantage - K-mount?
If Pentax makes a K-02, there is a good chance I would try to get one. But if its not K-mount? Meh, doubt it.

[Winder]

The idea of a FF MILC that uses K-mount is great. Pentax just failed in the execution. Partly because the technology needed was not available at the time and partly because of poor design and marketing. The ergonomics were poor. They design was butt ugly (IMHO). It lacked an EVF. PDAF on sensor was not available at that time.

If they were to relaunch with:
1. 42MP FF sensor with 399 PDAF
2. High quality EVF
3. Pentax LX styling
4. Full functionally for metering with M/K glass

I think the above camera would be much more successful than the K-01.

[Adam]

Hard to beat what Sony already has, IMO. They should focus on making something unique in a different way.

[Glorfindelrb]

Fully waterproof apsc or FF milc with a waterproof lens lineup and a K weather protected adapter ? That would be new and challenging.

But DSLR FF first and new lenses.

[Winder]

Hard to beat what Sony already has, IMO. They should focus on making something unique in a different way.

Is there are particular niche that would be a good fit for Ricoh? If they don't try to beat Sony at what Sony is doing or Canon at what Canon is doing, or Nikon at what Nikon is doing.... where do they go?

[rawr]

They should probably try and make the best (biggest, brightest) OVF in the market. That would be something Sony is no longer into. Then bring the AF up to D810/D750 specifications, apply Pentax strengths to the body (WR, handling, compactness, toughness), tweak video. Done.

[SyncGuy]

They should probably try and make the best (biggest, brightest) OVF in the market. That would be something Sony is no longer into. Then bring the AF up to D810/D750 specifications, apply Pentax strengths to the body (WR, handling, compactness, toughness), tweak video. Done.

Erm... Maybe a model each dedicated for stills and video please?

[rawr]

Maybe a model each dedicated for stills and video please?

OK, if we are going down that path , howabout a Pentax D750 equivalent, a Pentax D810 equivalent, then a Pentax clone of the A7s?

[ruggiex]

I think I'd prefer to see K-01 FF successor with PDAF, EVF etc instead of trying to go with a whole new mount and try to 'compete' with the top dogs when they probably can't keep up anyway. That's not going to win any awards or new audiences, but with the size of FF glasses, I'm not a huge fan of the smaller body. If they can shave off some weight instead of size, I am okay with it. A slightly larger K-S2 without mirror in terms of weight and size? Plus giving more room to the body might have less heat issues. Give me something with Pentax DNA without the compromises like reverting to 12bit during various modes will make me happy.

[RobA_Oz]

There is probably a market for such a camera among "slow" photographers, who aren't concerned about blazing fast predictive or tracking AF, or any AF at all, but who want the best possible image quality and functionality that they can get, and it's quite possible that a 35FF sensor in a mirrorless body could work, if designed with this in mind. I've long thought that the style of the Rollei SL2000 was a good starting point that would allow the K-mount to be reused, while providing flexibility with EVFs and LCD screen positioning, but I doubt it would be something that we'd see in the near future.