[pathdoc]

Ironically if they did a MILC at all, possibly the best thing they could do is put a functioning M42 mount in front of it. There are vast numbers of M42 lenses out there, in the hands of large numbers of people who would be delighted to be able to shoot them in digital with full stop-down on shutter actuation. Sure, you might only get open focusing with green button metering (more or less a Spotmatic), and asking for ES or F-type linkages might be a bridge too far, but it would still be something nobody else had done.

Even an M42 DSLR would be a novel surprise. I think people would snap it up. And Pentax has the advantage that its mirror box/mount assembly still maintains the correct register distance. The only thing they would need to re-engineer and revive is the flapper plate.

If they are going to do ANYTHING outrageous or retro, I think it should be that.

[disconnekt]

Ironically if they did a MILC at all, possibly the best thing they could do is put a functioning M42 mount in front of it. There are vast numbers of M42 lenses out there, in the hands of large numbers of people who would be delighted to be able to shoot them in digital with full stop-down on shutter actuation. Sure, you might only get open focusing with green button metering (more or less a Spotmatic), and asking for ES or F-type linkages might be a bridge too far, but it would still be something nobody else had done.

Even an M42 DSLR would be a novel surprise. I think people would snap it up. And Pentax has the advantage that its mirror box/mount assembly still maintains the correct register distance. The only thing they would need to re-engineer and revive is the flapper plate.

If they are going to do ANYTHING outrageous or retro, I think it should be that.

If they did a K-01 with a m42 mount it would be interesting, espcially since there's alot of M42 mount lenses available online and I'm sure it wouldn't be hard for them to make a deal with a company like DZOptics or Mitakon to make some updated/faster lenses & wider lenses (<24mm to fill in the gap). Although it would be a tough thing to gain enough interest in the market to sell enough to make a profit from.

[Pentaxke]

There is no better way to bringing Pentax/Ricoh on the brink of collapse than introducing yet another system that is incompatible with an existing system (there are only so much customers that buy an adapter and for good reason as the lens mostly won't work as smoothly as used natively.)
So, that would leave us with a possible K-02 (ie. ILC with K-mount): like others already said, the reason why the K-01 never was a success, was because of the fact that there were only disadvantages when removing the mirrorbox: no compacter system, slower AF, no vf,..

Then there are also other things to consider:
- It took Fuji about 5 years to take of with their X-system; same for Sony and even longer for m43's. What makes you think Pentax can do that any faster?
- it would take too much resources to develop a new lens system. Resources Pentax doesn't have.
- the K-1 (as displayed perfectly in your excel) is a very capable camera and bests most competition, all for a better price. Pentax stated that it is actually the first camera in years that draws customers from other systems. For Pentax to draw even more public they have to develop more lenses for the system (and get to better the AF system in a probable K-1 SII although IMHO they still have time to do that.)
- Pentax has an ILC system with the Q. Also IMHO they should get out a new Q-camera.
- then there is the Pentax crowd that is longing for a K3 SIII
- and of course I didn't even mention the Foveon idea which IMHO is a bad one

In conclusion, what Pentax should do (all IMHO of course):
- first and foremost bring out new D-FA's. Make the rest of 2017 and 2018 a lenses year!
- bring out a new DA lens. Make it something that draws attention, like a 10-20 f/5,6 LTD zoom or a T/S of some sorts or a 2x macro (let your imagination flow - the thing is to draw the crowd without the lens necessarily being popular.)
- bring out a new Q camera (and Pentax, please if you listen make it with an EVF - even an optional one can be good.)
- finally somewhere in 2018 introduce K3 sIII (although I am puzzled as what they can add that the K3 S!! doesn't have.)

Just my 0,05€

[Aristophanes]

Adapters


don't


work!


Almost every serious review and DxO measure conclude that native lenses deliver optimal optical performance. Camera bodies are designed by each manufacturer to meet their lens mount specifics.

And the money in the industry is in the optics (glass), not the bodies.

The surest way to bankrupt Pentax is to make a body where people buy other brand glass.

[Rondec]

Adapters


don't


work!


Almost every serious review and DxO measure conclude that native lenses deliver optimal optical performance. Camera bodies are designed by each manufacturer to meet their lens mount specifics.

And the money in the industry is in the optics (glass), not the bodies.

The surest way to bankrupt Pentax is to make a body where people buy other brand glass.

For sure. At best releasing a new mount with almost no glass and telling people to use their old glass with an adapter that costs between 100 and 200 dollars (depending on the functionality) is a kludge.

To me, the first order of business is just to get the full frame lens line up complete and then they can think about other mounts.

And the idea of them releasing an M42 mount is really odd. Whether or not there are a lot of those lenses already out there, its registration distance is basically the same as the k mount, so why not just stick with that? The point of a new mount is to allow for easier design of wide angle lenses, to shrink the size of the camera body, and to allow for the mounting of any lens with longer registration distance via an adapter. An 42 mount does none of those things, as far as I can tell.

If Pentax released a new mount, it would need to be well thought and planned -- how they are going to fill out basic glass for it as well as how it will stand out from existing mirrorless models like Sony and Fuji cameras currently on the market.

[Aristophanes]

If Pentax releases a new mirrorless mount it is unlikely to be FF, more likely APS-C.

And I doubt it will be named Pentax. It will more likely be based on the GR, so Ricoh. The GXR was a failed concept, but innovative.

[Rondec]

If Pentax releases a new mirrorless mount it is unlikely to be FF, more likely APS-C.

And I doubt it will be named Pentax. It will more likely be based on the GR, so Ricoh. The GXR was a failed concept, but innovative.

I don't know. I nice niche to target would be to try to release something like Fuji has with regard to lens line up, but with full frame sensor and Pentax ergonomics.

[Aristophanes]

I don't know. I nice niche to target would be to try to release something like Fuji has with regard to lens line up, but with full frame sensor and Pentax ergonomics.

It's a cost barrier. m43 and APS-C dominate mirrorless even at the expense of FF mirrorless (Sony). When an Olympus m43 flagship or similar Fuji X-trans can sell for $2500 new, imagine what an FF flagship mirrorless would cost. You get into Sony RX1 territory really fast, and that's not really a solid place to be. You just cannot reach enough market at those price points.

And looking at the Fuji MF mirrorless the form factor really doesn't shrink all that much. And if they do, you get the Sony overheating issues etc. The mirrorless market is also eating the dedicated video cam market nearly completely so video has to be a high priority, as Fuji found out.

Also, the GR has an untouchable pedigree. It is *the* compact street and casual shooter for hobbyists and "those in the know". The brand continuity is all there. The current APS-C GR is already 2/3 of the way to being a mirrorless mount in and of itself. The control system is outstanding, especially compared ti Fuji. The menus are top flight, not like the disaster that is Sony. The ergonomics and form factor (even anticipating being larger with a true ILC mount) are ideal.

[geo444]

Money is mostly in Lenses... not Bodies...

This is True for brands that already have a Large Number of FF Bodies in use :
Canon, Nikon, and now Sony !

Pentax is coming from the times they had a Large Number of Film Bodies in use.
Glorious times = Chinon, Cosina, Pentax, Petri, Ricoh, etc... shared the K Mount.
The # of lenses manufactured lowered the Price (I had the Mx, MeS, Lx, SuperA)

Now that Pentax only holds ~1% of the Full-Frame Market, it's 100% the opposite :
they have to sell rebranded Tamron "K" at Higher Price than Tamron "Eos", "F",...
I won't be surprised if Tamron "K" earn less money than Tamron "Eos", "F", etc...

Now, starting from ~1%... to increase their Market Share...
... Pentax have to make it known they can deliver the Best FF Image Quality !
Not to Pentaxians only... But to Canonists, Nikonians, Sonysts too !

[Pentaxke]

Snip

Pentax is coming from the times they had a Large Number of Film Bodies in use.
Glorious times = Chinon, Cosina, Pentax, Petri, Ricoh, etc... shared the K Mount.
The # of lenses manufactured lowered the Price (I had the Mx, MeS, Lx, SuperA)

I am too lazy to look it up, but I am pretty sure that even in its' haydays Pentax didn't have more bodies at any given time than Minolta, Nikon or Canon did. Pentax tried to make the K-mount universal but never really succeeded: Ricoh, Chinon ed all may very well shared the K-mount for some time, it doesn't mask the fact it all sheddered when Pentax introduced the A-mount: all brands resolved automatic aperture in a different way. Rulling out some exceptions, nowadays only the K-mount lenses made by Pentax (and only then some) hold value second hand, and for good reason: not only where they optically as mechanically top notch, Pentax also had SMC which is why they don't disintegrate (IQ speaking) when used digital...

Now that Pentax only holds ~1% of the Full-Frame Market, it's 100% the opposite :
they have to sell rebranded Tamron "K" at Higher Price than Tamron "Eos", "F",...
I won't be surprised if Tamron "K" earn less money than Tamron "Eos", "F", etc...

The Tamron rebranded thingy is getting way out of hands. Every manufacturer does it. But even then I am pretty sure Pentax did it to get sth out in time (developing lenses costs time!)

Now, starting from ~1%... to increase their Market Share...
... Pentax have to make it known they can deliver the Best FF Image Quality !
Not to Pentaxians only... But to Canonists, Nikonians, Sonysts too !

The thing is, I think everyone considering a ff cam (and even a lot more people) knows that the K-1 is top notch IQ wise. Like I said: Pentax is for the first time since long drawing crowds from other brands. They said as much in a review. To draw even more people they have to release lenses. And that costs time...

[pathdoc]

Whether or not there are a lot of those lenses already out there, its registration distance is basically the same as the k mount, so why not just stick with that?

Because a functional M42 mount with the flapper plate would give full-open focusing (and if fully implemented out of the ES-II/F version, open aperture metering) with M42 lenses, rather than the stop-down-to-meter thing we have today. I'm not saying they SHOULD do it (they've got more important things to accomplish first), but if they wanted to do something oddball, this would be something to consider.

You need to have shot a Spotmatic to fully understand what I'm on about.

[Winder]

I would love to see a MILC from Ricoh, but it doesn't appear that Ricoh has the resources to develop the K-mount or 645 system as it is. Adding a 3rd mount doesn't seem to be very practical if you can't develop for what you already have.

[biz-engineer]

Now, starting from ~1%... to increase their Market Share...

Give me your K1 , I'll transform it into a mirrorless, free of charge :-)

[disconnekt]

I would love to see a MILC from Ricoh, but it doesn't appear that Ricoh has the resources to develop the K-mount or 645 system as it is. Adding a 3rd mount doesn't seem to be very practical if you can't develop for what you already have.

Pretty much, they already have enough on their plate with their Digital 645 system and the Full frame & Aps-c k-mount system, adding another system & mount right now will hurt them in the long run.

[mecrox]

If Pentax releases a new mirrorless mount it is unlikely to be FF, more likely APS-C.

And I doubt it will be named Pentax. It will more likely be based on the GR, so Ricoh. The GXR was a failed concept, but innovative.

Yup, I am sure you are right. Pentax placed their bet with the K1 DSLR system and that decision essentially rejects mirrorless for the foreseeable future.

I would love more action from the great Ricoh line of Gxxx cameras, but the Theta makes me wonder whether Ricoh have decided the entire camera market is essentially a bust and the better move is to leap over it and concentrate on clever smartphone-like products for the next generation. The Theta has probably gotten Ricoh more brand recognition and favourable attention than any single mirrorless camera ever would.