Pentax details the challenges in downsizing the K-1 body

bwDraco · 03-27-2016, 12:03 PM

Challengers | PENTAX K-1 Special site | RICOH IMAGING

Absolutely incredible how much they went through to downsize the K-1 camera body. In summary:

Overhauled SR system uses redesigned coils and sensor plate optimized for efficiency to ensure it doesn't take up an excessive amount of space.
Mirror mechanism must be large enough to allow for a viewfinder with near-100% coverage yet fit within an extremely limited space, due to both the fixed flange back distance and space lost to the SR system (which forced the shutter to be moved towards the mount), while not colliding with the mount when flipping up and, even harder still, accommodating optics with protruding rear elements. The new mirror design actually requires less damping than the one on the K-3.
Viewfinder assembly needed redesigned optics to maximize brightness, avoid distortion caused by the larger finder, and deliver near-100% coverage. Changes include using an asphere in place of a condenser lens directly below the pentaprism and AR coatings on both sides of the transmissive LCD.

Your thoughts?

Fenwoodian · 03-27-2016, 12:10 PM - **1 Like**

Most of these challenges would not have been present if they had gone with a "mirrorless" full frame.

Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and made the K1 a mirrorless full frame. They would have been to market a year sooner, and I'm guessing the price would have been around $1,400!

bertwert · 03-27-2016, 12:12 PM

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

Most of these challenges would not have been present if they had gone with a "mirrorless" full frame.

Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and make the K1 a mirrorless full frame. They would have been to market a year sooner, and I'm guessing the price would have been around $1,400! Now that's what I would have wanted more the the current K1.

Stop going on about mirrorless!

If you want a mirrorless camera

makes FF ones.

**monochrome** · 03-27-2016, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

Most of these challenges would not have been present if they had gone with a "mirrorless" full frame.

Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and made the K1 a mirrorless full frame. They would have been to market a year sooner, and I'm guessing the price would have been around $1,400!

It probably would have taken significantly longer, and cost substantially more than that since Pentax has zero embedded manufacturing engineering for mirrorless.

Last edited by monochrome; 03-27-2016 at 02:49 PM.

normhead · 03-27-2016, 12:59 PM - **5 Likes**

I considered a

and decided against it. How disappointed would I be if Pentax had come out with one? Really, really disappointed.

"I won't buy one" disappointed.

Time for you mirrorless dudes to clue in. If I wanted one, I'd have one.

It is absolutely ignorant to keep thinking this would be an acceptable solution for me and many others. We are totally sick about hearing about

and mirrorless. to be blunt, the concept is at least in my opinion, completely disgusting, I'm tired of hearing about it, give it a rest. Go to some Sony forum.

Everyone who wants to know about mirrorless on the forum already knows. Most of us investigated when the first of the A7 series came out.

zmohie · 03-27-2016, 01:04 PM

it would be better to name it /K challenger!!!!
hard work to bring this amazing machine.
thanks Ricoh again and again!

Zygonyx · 03-27-2016, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

Most of these challenges would not have been present if they had gone with a "mirrorless" full frame.

Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and made the K1 a mirrorless full frame. They would have been to market a year sooner, and I'm guessing the price would have been around $1,400!

Like Sony A7 a couple of years ago ?
So serious that they are now painfully selling any of the second generation bodies... too high price levels, and almost forgetting to sort sensible lenses in the meantime.

Exactly the reason Pentax Kept K-mount... SR and the mirror : there are many lenses available.
Plus there is, and there will be for a few years to come (at least) innovations in DSLR.

pathdoc · 03-27-2016, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by bwDraco

Challengers | PENTAX K-1 Special site | RICOH IMAGING
Your thoughts?

My thoughts? Here they are:

No wonder they didn't decripple the mount. All is forgiven.

No, sorry, one more:

You want the aperture arm back? Be prepared to say goodbye to SR and Pixel Shift (unless you want to go to Foveon land, and that's its own debate). I would pay that price in an ultra-cut-down FF camera with absolutely no frills, but it will be a long, long time before they make such a thing.

Adam · 03-27-2016, 01:28 PM

I think they've done a great job pulling all of this off in the K-1. I'm sure future bodies will incorporate optimizations to further reduce size.

derekkite · 03-27-2016, 01:46 PM

What interests me is the reduced mirror slap. This is an issue with the K3. The necessary two part operation decreases the inertia. This is something that will be noticed only in its absence and will be a basis of recommendation. It is nice to not have to fight or work around the flaws of your hardware.

All this tech will trickle down. Lighter and more effective SR in apsc bodies, who knows what in the GR line.

Doing more with the same batteries also comes from making the circuits smaller with discrete function chips and the like.

tvdtvdtvd · 03-27-2016, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and made the K1 a mirrorless full frame.

I can imagine the complaints about the K-mount registration distance and lack of OVF. The challenges for a Pentax FF mirrorless are more
than just eliminating the mirror box.

**RobA_Oz** · 03-27-2016, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by pathdoc

…You want the aperture arm back? Be prepared to say goodbye to SR and Pixel Shift (unless you want to go to Foveon land, and that's its own debate). I would pay that price in an ultra-cut-down FF camera with absolutely no frills, but it will be a long, long time before they make such a thing.

Their work on the electro-magnets for the SR assembly suggests to me that Ricoh's engineers are capable of designing a small magnetic sensor for the aperture lever, which would be far less intrusive than the original potentiometer (and spring, IIRC) mechanism, considering that space in that area is the technical hurdle, and the associated circuitry could be parked elsewhere. A sound economic reason for doing it is another matter.

reh321 · 03-27-2016, 05:48 PM

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

Most of these challenges would not have been present if they had gone with a "mirrorless" full frame.

Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and made the K1 a mirrorless full frame. They would have been to market a year sooner, and I'm guessing the price would have been around $1,400!

Pentax's pride and joy is the PentaPrism; do not expect an MILC flagship product from them unless they are forced to do so by the market {so I don't preclude their experimenting around the margins}

**Schraubstock** · 03-27-2016, 10:04 PM

Originally posted by normhead

I considered a and decided against it. How disappointed would I be if Pentax had come out with one? Really, really disappointed. "I won't buy one" disappointed. Time for you mirrorless dudes to clue in. If I wanted one, I'd have one. It is absolutely ignorant to keep thinking this would be an acceptable solution for me and many others. We are totally sick about hearing about and mirrorless. to be blunt, the concept is at least in my opinion, completely disgusting, I'm tired of hearing about it, give it a rest. Go to some Sony forum. Everyone who wants to know about mirrorless on the forum already knows. Most of us investigated when the first of the A7 series came out

Good on you Norm, I could not have said it better myself. Thanks

Cheers

noelpolar · 03-27-2016, 11:02 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

Most of these challenges would not have been present if they had gone with a "mirrorless" full frame.

Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and made the K1 a mirrorless full frame. They would have been to market a year sooner, and I'm guessing the price would have been around $1,400!

Yep..... easy to imagine...... could've been the biggest mistake ever!

03-27-2016, 12:03 PM	#1
bwDraco Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: New York Photos: Albums Posts: 1,071	Pentax details the challenges in downsizing the K-1 body Challengers \| PENTAX K-1 Special site \| RICOH IMAGING Absolutely incredible how much they went through to downsize the K-1 camera body. In summary: Overhauled SR system uses redesigned coils and sensor plate optimized for efficiency to ensure it doesn't take up an excessive amount of space. Mirror mechanism must be large enough to allow for a viewfinder with near-100% coverage yet fit within an extremely limited space, due to both the fixed flange back distance and space lost to the SR system (which forced the shutter to be moved towards the mount), while not colliding with the mount when flipping up and, even harder still, accommodating optics with protruding rear elements. The new mirror design actually requires less damping than the one on the K-3. Viewfinder assembly needed redesigned optics to maximize brightness, avoid distortion caused by the larger finder, and deliver near-100% coverage. Changes include using an asphere in place of a condenser lens directly below the pentaprism and AR coatings on both sides of the transmissive LCD. Your thoughts?

03-27-2016, 01:28 PM	#9
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,595	I think they've done a great job pulling all of this off in the K-1. I'm sure future bodies will incorporate optimizations to further reduce size. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Architecture It's all in the details	Kerrowdown	Post Your Photos!	12	08-29-2018 11:14 AM
Details on the sensor in the K-1, hands-on impressions and photos	Adam	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	173	04-28-2016 07:07 AM
Pentax K-1 in the Spotlight at the Ricoh Booth	PF Staff	Homepage & Official Pentax News	2	02-26-2016 08:41 AM
Need Help Downsizing The Lens Collection	Yael	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	08-20-2014 03:50 PM
Nature Devil in the Details	FHPhotographer	Post Your Photos!	5	11-05-2009 04:56 PM

03-27-2016, 12:10 PM - 1 Like	#2
Fenwoodian Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,874	Most of these challenges would not have been present if they had gone with a "mirrorless" full frame. Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and made the K1 a mirrorless full frame. They would have been to market a year sooner, and I'm guessing the price would have been around $1,400!

03-27-2016, 12:12 PM	#3
bertwert Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Golden, BC Posts: 15,173	Originally posted by Fenwoodian Most of these challenges would not have been present if they had gone with a "mirrorless" full frame. Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and make the K1 a mirrorless full frame. They would have been to market a year sooner, and I'm guessing the price would have been around $1,400! Now that's what I would have wanted more the the current K1. Stop going on about mirrorless! If you want a mirrorless camera makes FF ones.

03-27-2016, 12:54 PM	#4
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by Fenwoodian Most of these challenges would not have been present if they had gone with a "mirrorless" full frame. Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and made the K1 a mirrorless full frame. They would have been to market a year sooner, and I'm guessing the price would have been around $1,400! It probably would have taken significantly longer, and cost substantially more than that since Pentax has zero embedded manufacturing engineering for mirrorless. Last edited by monochrome; 03-27-2016 at 02:49 PM.

03-27-2016, 12:59 PM - 5 Likes	#5
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	I considered a and decided against it. How disappointed would I be if Pentax had come out with one? Really, really disappointed. "I won't buy one" disappointed. Time for you mirrorless dudes to clue in. If I wanted one, I'd have one. It is absolutely ignorant to keep thinking this would be an acceptable solution for me and many others. We are totally sick about hearing about and mirrorless. to be blunt, the concept is at least in my opinion, completely disgusting, I'm tired of hearing about it, give it a rest. Go to some Sony forum. Everyone who wants to know about mirrorless on the forum already knows. Most of us investigated when the first of the A7 series came out.

03-27-2016, 01:04 PM	#6
zmohie Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: egypt Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 435	it would be better to name it /K challenger!!!! hard work to bring this amazing machine. thanks Ricoh again and again!

03-27-2016, 01:05 PM	#7
Zygonyx Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Ile de France Posts: 4,033	Originally posted by Fenwoodian Most of these challenges would not have been present if they had gone with a "mirrorless" full frame. Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and made the K1 a mirrorless full frame. They would have been to market a year sooner, and I'm guessing the price would have been around $1,400! Like Sony A7 a couple of years ago ? So serious that they are now painfully selling any of the second generation bodies... too high price levels, and almost forgetting to sort sensible lenses in the meantime. Exactly the reason Pentax Kept K-mount... SR and the mirror : there are many lenses available. Plus there is, and there will be for a few years to come (at least) innovations in DSLR.

03-27-2016, 01:19 PM	#8
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	Originally posted by bwDraco Challengers \| PENTAX K-1 Special site \| RICOH IMAGING Your thoughts? My thoughts? Here they are: No wonder they didn't decripple the mount. All is forgiven. No, sorry, one more: You want the aperture arm back? Be prepared to say goodbye to SR and Pixel Shift (unless you want to go to Foveon land, and that's its own debate). I would pay that price in an ultra-cut-down FF camera with absolutely no frills, but it will be a long, long time before they make such a thing.

03-27-2016, 01:46 PM	#10
derekkite Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Nelson B.C. Posts: 3,782	What interests me is the reduced mirror slap. This is an issue with the K3. The necessary two part operation decreases the inertia. This is something that will be noticed only in its absence and will be a basis of recommendation. It is nice to not have to fight or work around the flaws of your hardware. All this tech will trickle down. Lighter and more effective SR in apsc bodies, who knows what in the GR line. Doing more with the same batteries also comes from making the circuits smaller with discrete function chips and the like.

03-27-2016, 02:09 PM	#11
tvdtvdtvd Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 1,665	Originally posted by Fenwoodian Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and made the K1 a mirrorless full frame. I can imagine the complaints about the K-mount registration distance and lack of OVF. The challenges for a Pentax FF mirrorless are more than just eliminating the mirror box.

03-27-2016, 02:46 PM	#12
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,197	Originally posted by pathdoc …You want the aperture arm back? Be prepared to say goodbye to SR and Pixel Shift (unless you want to go to Foveon land, and that's its own debate). I would pay that price in an ultra-cut-down FF camera with absolutely no frills, but it will be a long, long time before they make such a thing. Their work on the electro-magnets for the SR assembly suggests to me that Ricoh's engineers are capable of designing a small magnetic sensor for the aperture lever, which would be far less intrusive than the original potentiometer (and spring, IIRC) mechanism, considering that space in that area is the technical hurdle, and the associated circuitry could be parked elsewhere. A sound economic reason for doing it is another matter.

03-27-2016, 05:48 PM	#13
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,180	Originally posted by Fenwoodian Most of these challenges would not have been present if they had gone with a "mirrorless" full frame. Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and made the K1 a mirrorless full frame. They would have been to market a year sooner, and I'm guessing the price would have been around $1,400! Pentax's pride and joy is the PentaPrism; do not expect an MILC flagship product from them unless they are forced to do so by the market {so I don't preclude their experimenting around the margins}

03-27-2016, 10:04 PM	#14
Schraubstock Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,386	Originally posted by normhead I considered a and decided against it. How disappointed would I be if Pentax had come out with one? Really, really disappointed. "I won't buy one" disappointed. Time for you mirrorless dudes to clue in. If I wanted one, I'd have one. It is absolutely ignorant to keep thinking this would be an acceptable solution for me and many others. We are totally sick about hearing about and mirrorless. to be blunt, the concept is at least in my opinion, completely disgusting, I'm tired of hearing about it, give it a rest. Go to some Sony forum. Everyone who wants to know about mirrorless on the forum already knows. Most of us investigated when the first of the A7 series came out Good on you Norm, I could not have said it better myself. Thanks Cheers

03-27-2016, 11:02 PM - 1 Like	#15
noelpolar Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Goolwa, SA Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by Fenwoodian Most of these challenges would not have been present if they had gone with a "mirrorless" full frame. Could you image if Pentax had taken the easier route and made the K1 a mirrorless full frame. They would have been to market a year sooner, and I'm guessing the price would have been around $1,400! Yep..... easy to imagine...... could've been the biggest mistake ever!