Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-04-2018, 03:33 PM   #31
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,923
QuoteOriginally posted by Rico Quote
Ricoh is one of the largest corporations in Japan and the world.
Yes, and the 67 mirrorless manufacturing plant will be on the moon...thats about as far out as that concept is!

09-04-2018, 06:08 PM - 1 Like   #32
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 997
QuoteOriginally posted by surfar Quote
Yes, and the 67 mirrorless manufacturing plant will be on the moon...thats about as far out as that concept is!
No I think the 67 mirrorless manufacturing plant will be the same place the 645Z manufacturer plant is located.
09-04-2018, 06:17 PM   #33
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,923
QuoteOriginally posted by Rico Quote
No I think the 67 mirrorless manufacturing plant will be the same place the 645Z manufacturer plant is located.
Did that get washed away in yesterdays Typhoon?
09-06-2018, 07:07 PM   #34
Pentaxian
kooks's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: San Josť, Costa Rica
Photos: Albums
Posts: 793
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rico Quote
Ricoh should not do what Canon and Nikon have done creating a whole new mount for mirrorless.
IMO thats a key factor.. the point here is not if mirrorless is better than DSLR or the other way.. my concern and what im afraid of is that if RICOH/Pentax doesn't jump on the boat or do something extraordinary soon there will not be such a market for them to make it profitable, and they will just shut down the production. That worrys me because how good will it be for us to invest thousands of $$$$ in a new camera or lenses of a brand that we dont know if will survive another "market punch"? of course the cameras will be there, we will have our lovely K5s, K3s, KPs, K1s for who knows how long.. but eventually those models will become obsolete in a short time or will just break, so not having the attitude to follow a market path, like it or not, will affect us at different levels.

645 mirrorless is a good concept, but that will be expensive, and how many Pentaxians will invest in such a system? it is a nichy market too (same as the K1 is), besides it will have to compete with the Fuji system, so it have to be equal or better than what Fuji did, same thing is going on with the new Canikon mirrorless, people expected to be equal or better than Sony's and many of them are just disappointed with what they got.

IMO is not if we want a mirrorless Pentax camera, it's just that eventually i think that the market is telling us that it might be the path to follow to not be left behind. Same as when digital cameras came to the market..or when AF came to the market, or when digital FF start being the favorite pros tool instead of APS-C... it's just what the market shows, but ofcourse I could be totally wrong.


Last edited by kooks; 09-06-2018 at 08:46 PM.
09-06-2018, 07:30 PM - 2 Likes   #35
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,250
To me, yes, because its where the market is going and Canikony, PanOly, Fuji are not fools, though we'd like to think they Pentax with their large 1960's market share knows better.

MILC does quite a few things better.
1. Smaller body; though the mounted lens plays a part, there are nice options that really make a small package.
(eg. DA limiteds; M20/4, M28/2.8; FA28/2.8; FA50/1.4; FA limiteds; RF type lenses )
2. Manual focus - magnification and focus peaking
3. Metering with manual lenses - just set to Av mode, Auto ISO and close down the aperture accordingly (no need green button metering)
4. Histogram on EVF (even with manual lenses)
5. Blown highlights on EVF
6. Cheaper to make (for the sake that Pentax stays profitable)

There are downsides of course, but there is really no harm to chase after this segment of the market while also providing the DSLR option (and perhaps slowing down releases for both since yearly launches are not realistic anyway)

I have lots of manual lenses.
Unfortunately, Pentax does not make a MILC for them as much as I'd like to use a Pentax, so I use a modified A7.
The K1 is mainly for my AF lenses.
I'd really hope that I give my money to Pentax for the next MILC for the MF lenses than a Canikony...
09-07-2018, 12:07 PM - 1 Like   #36
New Member




Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Somewhere west of where you are
Posts: 9
I like Pentax. I like mirrorless. I have K mount lenses. Of course I'm interested.
09-08-2018, 08:22 PM   #37
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,429
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
If you are concerned about the sustaining of your K mount glass, worrying about Pentax not doing mirrorless is a contradiction. Why is that a contradiction?
Usually, the motive for having Pentax staying afloat is to be able to keep using the lenses you already own without having to spend money again into another system such as Canon, Nikon etc. That's why you're concerned by Pentax staying alive. Now, if you ask for Pentax to make a mirrorless with a different lens mount, that's basically equivalent for asking to switch systems, in that case, you should not give a damn and move to whatever brand you like. So, you're thinking logic is screwed.
If Pentax does make a MILC, most likely it will have a K-mount, so your "logic" is irrelevant.
09-08-2018, 11:11 PM   #38
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,436
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
If Pentax does make a MILC, most likely it will have a K-mount, so your "logic" is irrelevant.
I think you did not understand my point, I was referring to customer purchase logic where "most likely Pentax MILC will have a K mount is not considered" by the OP. It makes no sense to be frustrated by Pentax not offering a MILC with a different lens mount. Anyway, from customer standpoint, one of the benefit of a mirrorless system is to be smaller and lighter that is why MILC are designed with a new mount with shorter flange distance. That means, ultimately the customers buying mirrorless camera also will buy new lenses for the new mount. That is as costly as switching brand. Here, a lot of the opinions such as "I don't need to buy new lenses, I'll get an adapter" are short term fallacies. You will see that in the long term, people will renew their lenses completely, just look at Sony MILC customers, they now get G master lenses. The "foot in the door" sales technique is being used all the time, and customers know it, but since they desire to buy something new, they act like if they are not aware of the "foot in the door" technique. When Pentax release the K1, they said "With the K1, you can use ALL the lenses you already own" (implting = "you don't have to spend money on the lenses") , oh yes,and after that they sold the DFA28-105, DFA24-70, DFA70-200, DFA150-450, and now DFA*50, and customers are now complaining that new lenses aren't coming fast enough. The promise of MILC is the same, the promise is , with the adapter you won't need to buy new lenses you'll be able to use the lenses you currently own; what happens immediately after is they sell new lenses for the MILC new mount.


Last edited by biz-engineer; 09-08-2018 at 11:21 PM.
09-08-2018, 11:41 PM - 1 Like   #39
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,436
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
If Pentax does make a MILC, most likely it will have a K-mount
I do believe they tried that. I spent a few minutes with the K-01 and was unimpressed with the form factor and handling. A decent EVF might make for a better viewing experience, but would not provide the compact form expected from a MILC. In other words, the size would be similar to the K-1 with much of the bulk being in the form of 45.46 mm of empty space between sensor and lens flange.


Steve
09-09-2018, 12:39 AM   #40
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 26
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
In other words, the size would be similar to the K-1 with much of the bulk being in the form of 45.46 mm of empty space between sensor and lens flange.
Not necessarily. It could be a new type of lenses, that will have rear lens closer to the shutter, while keeping other K-mount specs. This is something that was briefly discussed at the moment when k-01 was just released. These new lenses will not be compatible with old bodies due to the mirror. Yes, the body will still be thicker but with lens attached -- not so much.

Btw k-01 is my main camera for last 4 years. The only thing I can complain is that overall performance was crippled. I believe it was done intentionally for the sake of the flagship-of-the-time sales. I mean poor controls, slow fps etc. I totally abandoned AF and focus manually. Yes I miss some shots but I totally forgot how frustrating is to miss the focus.

I want a bigger boat more resolution and perhaps a FF. K-1 would do, but.. I mean, I can use LV with focus peaking and pretend that slapping mirror and pathetic Safox are not there. But man, it is heavy! Twice as my k-01. Just can't force myself into it. Also, the choice of body colors is so boring..
09-09-2018, 03:01 AM   #41
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 19,116
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
I do believe they tried that. I spent a few minutes with the K-01 and was unimpressed with the form factor and handling. A decent EVF might make for a better viewing experience, but would not provide the compact form expected from a MILC. In other words, the size would be similar to the K-1 with much of the bulk being in the form of 45.46 mm of empty space between sensor and lens flange.


Steve
There are a couple of things. The K-1 is a beefy camera and the K-01 is about half its size. I don't know that adding an EVF would increase its size as much as you think. I have been using my K-01 for quite awhile and it is tiny compared to the K-1. Yes, the depth at the lens mount is the same, but the rest of it is way smaller.

On the other hand, Pentax could release a pretty small full frame SLR if they want to. Certainly nothing as small as some of the film cameras of years gone by, but I think they could get the weight down considerably and shrink the size as well, while still having a nice optical viewfinder and decent specs. The problem is that they have wanted to be known for cameras with "excellent builds" and that apparently takes a lot of metal and ends up with a pretty big and heavy camera.
09-09-2018, 04:01 AM   #42
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,305
QuoteOriginally posted by Rico Quote
surfar I am just pointing to some facts that support EssJayEff hopes. Pentax might be a small fish compared to Nikon and Canon but Ricoh is one of the largest corporations in Japan and the world.
Well on this list....

The World?s Largest Public Companies List

Ricoh is currently #1205 and some years ago it was in the top 500. Ricoh has some trouble of their own. So throwing money in a camera venture to see what sticks is not on their agenda.
09-09-2018, 09:23 AM   #43
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2016
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,158
My first own camera had an evf (not counting family's film cameras from before), it was a canon pro 1 bridge camera from the mid 2000s. I've tried more recent cameras with evfs, namely the olympus om-e10 ii and fuji x-t2 (not owned them, just tried for a few minutes). They're fine, but aside from minor lag and sharpness loss, they still look like a monitor and not like real life in terms of color and contrast. I'd rather trust the camera's meter instead of looking at a screen overloaded with focus peaking, histogram etc. And if you disable all those aids, then what's left from the evf advantages?


This whole mirrorless push reminds me of other changes in which convenience and features took over the market in favor of how nice something feels in use or how much control it offers. In some cases the "nice to use" market has been large enough to support alternatives (stick shift cars), in others it hasn't (mechanical keyboards for phones)
09-09-2018, 09:40 AM   #44
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,436
QuoteOriginally posted by HoundFrog Quote
Not necessarily. It could be a new type of lenses, that will have rear lens closer to the shutter, while keeping other K-mount specs.
The K-mount spec is lens flange 45.46 mm from the focal plane. Any native K-mount mirrorless body will have an empty space that deep as part of the design. Think of it as a mirrorbox without a mirror. You can definitely mount a deeper optic into that space,* but that does not change the implications for camera size, which would be similar to an A7RIII with a K-mount adapter attached. The difference would be that the extra length is permanent.

QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The K-1 is a beefy camera and the K-01 is about half its size. I don't know that adding an EVF would increase its size as much as you think. I have been using my K-01 for quite awhile and it is tiny compared to the K-1. Yes, the depth at the lens mount is the same, but the rest of it is way smaller.
Yes, the K-01 is tiny compared to the K-1, but so is the KP. The K-01 is not so strikingly petite next to the KP. An easy way to visualize a FF K-mount mirrorless is to use the comparator at the camerasize Web site for K-1 vs. Nikon Z 7.** With the two in top-down view, imagine the Nikon with another 30mm depth to the lens mount and with additional top space to support the expected plethora of dials on a higher-end Pentax camera. It might also be helpful to note the position of the focal plane indicator for both cameras and line them up mentally with that mark in the same plane.

Camera Size | Pentax K-1 vs. Nikon Z 7

I agree, regarding the notion of an extremely compact FF K-mount SLR. A few things would likely fall by the way (AF drive motor, dual SD slots, articulated rear monitor, etc.), but the resulting product might likely be close in size to a K-3 and considerably lighter than the K-1.


Steve

* Not such a good idea without a lens specifically designed to mount close to a digital sensor.
** I intentionally chose the Nikon over Sony product due to the difference in build quality. The Sony A7 series are amazingly compact, but not so robust in build.

Last edited by stevebrot; 09-09-2018 at 09:55 AM.
09-09-2018, 10:02 AM   #45
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,436
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
An easy way to visualize a FF K-mount mirrorless is to use the comparator at the camerasize Web site for K-1 vs. Nikon Z 7
Just for kicks, I did the comparison between the K-01 and Nikon Z 7. Add the Z 7 EVF to the K-01 plus a functional grip, the needed space for the larger sensor and flip-out screen and one gets something that looks like fairly stout Z 7.

Camera Size | Pentax K-01 vs. Nikon Z 7

...so perhaps the K-01 as a point of comparison is not such a bad idea.


Steve
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, adapter, bit, brand, camera, cameras, canon, change, customer, dslrs, ff, full-frame, k-1, k-mount, lenses, mirrorless, mount, pentax, people, photography, screen, shutter, size, system, time, users, view
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: All the filters you will ever need! Singh-Ray, Hitech, Cokin, all for Cokin P system gsrokmix Sold Items 6 06-19-2018 10:14 PM
Do I need Hss triggers, or optical slave system would suffice? awscreo Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 31 04-13-2018 02:27 PM
Suggestion A "Hater" system, just like the like system Clinton Site Suggestions and Help 42 08-22-2013 06:33 AM
Nikon Q system using 1/2.3" sensor too = Pentax Q system? ogl Pentax News and Rumors 31 07-14-2011 07:47 PM
Need help determining which system is better for Photo Editing Shogo Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 2 01-04-2010 06:53 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:14 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