Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-28-2015, 01:23 PM   #31
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 455
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The smallest cameras Pentax has released in recent years have both been pretty derided -- the K-S1 and the K-01
I think the problem is Pentax did not take these cameras seriously. It is said that the best camera is the one you have with you. Sometimes you just don't have the space to carry a full size dslr and you want to be able to take quality dslr pictures. What about seniors, people with back problems etc.? Don't they deserve to have a lighter weight camera with excellent IQ and most of the features of the flagship model so they can take the best quality pictures. Why should Pentax continue to lose customers to micro four thirds and other small aps-c cameras when they were making small lenses, primes and zooms before some camera companies had interchangeable lens cameras ? When I want to travel lite, I'll take my K-01, A, F, FA, FA limited, DA limited lenses and can shoot different subjects and not carry a lot of weight.

05-28-2015, 03:50 PM   #32
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 647
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The smallest cameras Pentax has released in recent years have both been pretty derided -- the K-S1 and the K-01. I guess it was mostly for styling issues, but still, if small size with good image quality is where it is at, then both of those cameras should have sold better (I'm still carrying a torch for the K-01).
uhh... The K-S1 and the K-01 aren't even close to the smallest cameras Pentax has released in recent years. Remember the whole Q system? Oh, the Ricoh GR is part of the family now too! As for the K-01, probably the most widespread gripe was its size, as compared with M4/3 and that ilk.

---------- Post added 05-28-15 at 05:58 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Vantage-Point Quote
When I want to travel lite, I'll take my K-01, A, F, FA, FA limited, DA limited lenses and can shoot different subjects and not carry a lot of weight.
Having owned a K-01 myself for a couple of years, and being particularly fond of the 21mm LTD, I understand your viewpoint here. You're kidding yourself if you think the sort of kit you describe is going to win any mass acceptance in the marketplace, though. In particular, the vast majority of people today just don't get primes. Even if they did, though, one could still argue that those compact primes would be even better on compact mirrorless bodies. (Let's not forget how pricey those Limiteds are, too.)

Last edited by Tony Belding; 05-28-2015 at 03:59 PM.
05-28-2015, 05:44 PM   #33
Veteran Member
Pepe Le Pew's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 589
QuoteOriginally posted by Imp Quote
TELEPATHICALLY HEAR WHAT WE ARE SAYING, RICOH... or just read this post

we're ready for a k-03!
Ain't going to happen
05-29-2015, 09:45 AM   #34
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,108
I think everyone would appreciate the option of a smaller, lighter, and simpler K-mount body but we're faced with design restrictions based on the mount. That cylinder of space taken up by the K-mount design must be retained and it is not small. Everything around it is free to change, like the top panel layout, rear display, side grip, etc. Then it becomes a matter of features vs. market price acceptance vs. margins vs. R&D costs. How bare bones of a body are people willing to accept? Pentaprism vs. penta-mirror? How many buttons can I take out? What about the battery? Even if the body was made small and light you have to ask if the design is ergonomic.

One could argue that Apple managed to pack a lot of technology into a very small package - the iPhone. Yes, it can be done but it wasn't cheap or easy. The iPhone sells for $500 and Apple makes millions of them. Could the price be lower at the expense of thinner margins? Probably ... but probably not too much lower. We also have to keep in mind that the camera body has a lot of moving mechanical bits which the iPhone doesn't have.

Ricoh also has to be careful what they would be competing against should this bare bones body be released. Is the market big enough and empty enough for a camera like this? Would it start competing against a well established u4/3 ecosystem? All of us here on the forum may fall in love with this new body but there's a bigger market out there.

Lots of things to think about for sure!

---------- Post added 05-29-15 at 09:57 AM ----------

Here's a comparison of the Q7 vs. Olympus OM-D E-M10 vs. K-01 vs. K-S1 vs. K-S2 vs. K-3 on camersize.com. You may have to zoom out in the web app to see all the bodies.

Compact Camera Meter

The K-mount cylinder of space is clearly visible. I believe Ricoh is working hard to squeeze out as much bulk as possible while maintaining a practical K-mount body. How do you reduce the overall body while supporting the K-mount and giving people something to hold on to?

05-29-2015, 10:39 AM   #35
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,550
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
I think everyone would appreciate the option of a smaller, lighter, and simpler K-mount body but we're faced with design restrictions based on the mount.
And not just the mount but the beloved SR mechanism, which pushes the sensor forward and forces the body to be thicker. Pentax without SR.. just isn't!

Maybe they can pixel-shift a 4:3 sensor around and capture APS.c or even FF data, so we can have tiny lenses and big images? Or even a Q?? naaah

For me the K-s2 is almost ideal: WR, 20Mpx, small. I'd prefer tip not flip screen and latest SAFOX, and the Li90 battery life - but we'll see what's on sale when my next upgrade cycle begins
05-29-2015, 11:21 AM   #36
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,108
Good point, jimr-pdx. SR takes space too - whether its in the lenses or in the bodies. Pentaxians pride ourselves on having some of the smallest lens possible that deliver stellar optical performance for the format. Would we be willing to go for the small body / big lens combo?
05-30-2015, 09:00 AM   #37
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,415
QuoteOriginally posted by Kerrowdown Quote
I'm reassured to hear that, so I can't join "Freaks R Us" just yet then.
Add me to the club! I have trouble finding gloves that are long enough in the fingers and broad enough across the palm. With my K-3 I curl the pinky finger of my right hand UNDER the camera. With the left hand, the thumb goes against the ARCA tripod plate with the index finger curled OVER the flash housing. The rest of the fingers go around the lens!


Steve

(...for the record, would still like a small/light minimalist dSLR...)
05-30-2015, 09:21 AM   #38
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,415
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
I think everyone would appreciate the option of a smaller, lighter, and simpler K-mount body but we're faced with design restrictions based on the mount.
I have several K-mount cameras that look like midgets compared to my K-3 and even those look large compared to the MX film camera. The bulk/weight can be broken down to the following:
  • The electronics. For perspective, look at the position of the focal plane indicator of the K-3 and as compared to the same on a film SLR. The teardown of the Sony A7II at Lensrentals.com is a good example of what eats space. LensRentals.com - The A7II Teardown: A Look Inside Sony's New Camera
  • The SR mechanism. Again, a good example would be the A7II which acquired additional depth with the addition of SR.
  • Battery (heavy and bulky). Remove the batter and notice the difference in how the camera handles.
  • Motor-driven shutter (heavy)
  • Motor for AF drive (heavy)
  • Rear LCD (thicker than you might think)
  • Built-in popup flash (compare special edition silver K10D to the normal model)
For flagship models, you can also add the alloy metal body to the factors increasing weight. As a result even the MX and LX film cameras were fairly dense and heavy feeling.

In short, if you remove the power-hungry stuff (AF, rear LCD, and motor driven shutter) you can make due with a MUCH smaller and lighter battery along with the bulk/weight savings of taking that stuff off. A minimalist dSLR would be possible in a package about the same size as the LX film camera at a similar weight. Add motor drive, field monitor, and AF support as optional plug-in components.


Steve

05-30-2015, 10:56 AM   #39
Moderator PEG Judges
Kerrowdown's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Highlands of Scotland.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 32,653
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Add me to the club!
Aye, the Pentax K20 with grip, the Nikon D4 and the Canon EOS-1D X are all just about the right size for me.
06-01-2015, 04:54 AM   #40
Veteran Member
derelict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NoVa
Posts: 415
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
I think everyone would appreciate the option of a smaller, lighter, and simpler K-mount body but we're faced with design restrictions based on the mount. That cylinder of space taken up by the K-mount design must be retained and it is not small.

Ricoh also has to be careful what they would be competing against should this bare bones body be released. Is the market big enough and empty enough for a camera like this? Would it start competing against a well established u4/3 ecosystem? All of us here on the forum may fall in love with this new body but there's a bigger market out there.

Lots of things to think about for sure!

---------- Post added 05-29-15 at 09:57 AM ----------

Here's a comparison of the Q7 vs. Olympus OM-D E-M10 vs. K-01 vs. K-S1 vs. K-S2 vs. K-3 on camersize.com. You may have to zoom out in the web app to see all the bodies.
So, as someone who has abandoned Pentax APS-C for an Olympus EM10 M4/3 camera, let me say this: never going back. Here are my reasons why:
1. Lightweight
2. NO bulk
3. Ease of shooting
4. EVF (sorry Q)
5. Do not have to make excuses for image quality (sorry Q)

I looked at the Q system but was entirely underwhelmed by a couple of things. The feel of the body and the quality of the images. Now, they are not bad but beyond a certain point, they turn to mush it seems. The M4/3 system is just everything that I have been looking for. Quick autofocus with an insane amount of points to choose from, compact and lightweight (yet, not cheap feeling unlike the Q), and an image quality that does not need to be explained/ qualified. If Pentax had gone into the M4/3 market, instead of the fashion accessory/ toy camera that is the Q, I would still be completely in the fold. Sigma, Olympus, and Panasonic are turning out great lenses that truly deliver. AND they are doing it at affordable prices.

I went to a car museum this weekend where I took a white balance and back lighting class. I was the most mobile due to having the smallest body and I did not have to continue going back to a bag off to the side to switch lenses as my next prime was in my chest shirt pocket because the Sigma 30/ 2.8 is light and small enough to fit there without any issues at all. Shooting the has made shooting FUN again. I can carry the same gear but eliminate 70% of the bulk. I truly considered the K01 but it did not eliminate the weight of the body or the lenses the way the OMD line does.

The problem is the K mount. It is simply just too large. I can understand the advantages of the mount being backwards compatible with many past generations of lenses, a huge plus, but if they were serious about a more compact camera, the Q is not it. They would need to invest in something. Ideally, an M4/3 entrant would be fantastic giving compatibility with existing lenses from other makes giving them the ability to spend more time developing their own line. I paid $499 for the EM10 brand new from B&H and it is loaded with tools and options. It is 100% NOT bare bones.

*I still use Pentax gear but only with film now.
06-01-2015, 07:05 AM   #41
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,108
@derelict -

You bring up a lot of great points for discussion. I learned to look at each camera and lens ecosystem for its strengths. The Q's strengths lie with the 01, 06, and 08 lenses. There is no way a K-mount or u4/3 system will deliver the same FoV and match the physical outline of the Q with any of these three lenses mounted on it. The Q system is perfect for when I can't or don't want to carry anything like an evening stroll with my family. There is a price to be paid and that price is a lack of EVF and higher noise levels. A lack of EVF is not a deal breaker in most cases for me. I find the noise levels low enough at high ISO for 4"x6" - 5"x7" prints. ISO 400 to ISO 800 is still OK - not great, but still OK. At low ISO, like 100, IQ is great for larger 8"x10" and 8"x12" prints. The Q system can also be great system for air travel. I always say that I took my original Q to the UK with all of my lenses in ZipLock bags. It was so nice having a such a teeny tiny system!

The u4/3 system's strength is its primes. There are primes from pancakes to baseball bats from UWA to extreme telephoto priced from peanuts to platinum. I also ordered a M10 for its low price in May. My plan is to build up a four kit that has 3 primes (WA, normal, and tele), a general purpose zoom. If I'm flying somewhere then this would probably be the biggest kit I would want to take. Perhaps with the right bag I can fit both the Q and the M10 systems. The K-mount kit is too big and too bulky for me to carry through an airport when I already have bags in tow. Since the camera kit hasn't arrived I can't say much more about it but I'm sure I will soon.

My K-mount kit is for the ultimate shooting experience, like at special social events, sporting events, foul weather, or when I want the supreme IQ of a FA Limited on a high resolution sensor with an OVF. This kit goes with me when I can afford the weight and bulk. Car travel and solo local walks easily qualify. I think we all know the power of the K-3 so not much more to say here either.

I have a strong feeling that I'll upgrade to a FF body eventually. Then I will have my small-medium-large kits that I can choose from for how I want to shoot and what I want to shoot with.
06-01-2015, 07:24 AM   #42
Veteran Member
derelict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NoVa
Posts: 415
I just got tired of having the bulk and got over the need for different 'kits'. The EM10 does every single thing that I want it to do. It has the ISO performance that a Q system cannot match with the size smaller than that of my ist DS. It is actually a little smaller than my ZX5 film body and only a little heavier. I can easily carry the 14-42 IIR zoom (actually a pretty good lens), Panasonic 14/ 2.5, SIgma 30/ 2.8, and Olympus 45/ 1.8 in a Flipside 200 with room for the ZX5 body and a 50. Those three primes give me ~28, ~55, ~85 in FF length and do it in a super small footprint.

My goal was to downsize. I really looked hard at the Q system but came away with it being more of a novelty camera than one that could function as an only camera. I love my K7 but got tired of carrying around a 14, 35, 50, 28-75/ 2.8 as my 'kit'. That is a lot of weight. I get the same size and quality RAW files out of the EM10 and I get great JPEGs for when I want to instantly share them with my wife over the phone. Once you figure out, and there is an indispensable book for it, the Olympus menu system, you begin to see how the OMD system is 100% capable of being a one and only system with little to no shortcomings.

If Ricoh/ Pentax puts some effort into an in between system, or better yet, gets into the M4/3 market, you will probably find an EM10 for sale. BUT until then, I am more than happy with my Olympus. As I was taking a picture yesterday, I found myself saying out loud how much I loved the camera. Something I have not said in a very long time.
06-01-2015, 08:24 AM   #43
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 647
QuoteOriginally posted by derelict Quote
I looked at the Q system but was entirely underwhelmed by a couple of things. The feel of the body and the quality of the images. Now, they are not bad but beyond a certain point, they turn to mush it seems. The M4/3 system is just everything that I have been looking for. Quick autofocus with an insane amount of points to choose from, compact and lightweight (yet, not cheap feeling unlike the Q), and an image quality that does not need to be explained/ qualified. If Pentax had gone into the M4/3 market, instead of the fashion accessory/ toy camera that is the Q, I would still be completely in the fold.
I've been using an E-M5 as my primary system for a while, and I understand your enthusiasm for it. However, I think you are being a bit unfair to the Q by calling it a "fashion accessory/ toy camera". My Q7 is not as upscale, but it's not a toy. It's a less expensive system, a more compact system, and it has: a markedly better user interface, interval shooting, HDR, in-camera RAW development, on-camera flash, focus peaking, Quick Dial, Smart Effects, Blur Control, multiple exposure. . .

To me the biggest shortcoming is the lack of an EVF, and that's a nuisance under bright sunlight. The E-M5 made me an EVF believer. If Pentax ever get on the bandwagon and produce a "Super Q" with EVF, I'll be all over that. As sensor technology continues to advance, I think the Q system has more future potential than the K system, at least outside of professional photographers. The Q was really ahead of its time.
06-01-2015, 09:13 AM   #44
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 4,094
I like Pentax DSLR's the way they are now. I have a K-5, Km and a K10D. I have battery grips on the K-5 and K10D mostly so I can get my big mitt a good grip on these camera bodies. I'm a relatively big guy and I find my K-m and Canon G12 kind of tiny for my large hands. With a battery grip on the other two K's...the ergonomics work well. I also like the extra heft...and no...I don't find carrying both the K-5 and the K10D around...tiring.

Pentax cameras are already not among the biggest camera bodies.

For me...the K series cameras, with battery grips make a significant positive difference to me, in my ability to grip comfortably.

If you want a smaller camera...the K series without battery grip should suit most fine, I would say.

Everybody is different and I think Pentax has done a pretty good job accommodating the majority of people...quite well.
06-01-2015, 09:36 AM   #45
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,415
Let me get this straight...the lighter, smaller dSLR is a mirrorless with EVF.



Right answer to wrong question?


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!
aluminum, apple, body, camera, cameras, design, dslr, fa, heat, iphone, k-01, k-mount, k-s1, lighter dslr, lot, magnesium, market, mirrorless, models, pentax, photography, primes, ricoh, size, smaller
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Shooting an 8x10 - or making a dSLR look like a P&S interested_observer General Photography 1 12-07-2014 11:57 AM
Introduction to DSLR video making MADDSNIPER Video and Pentax HDSLRs 4 07-19-2013 10:19 AM
Making use of A Defunct Kodak JR and Asahi Bellows :) Sliver-Surfer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 07-01-2013 08:01 AM
Making pictures smaller? deathspared Site Suggestions and Help 4 12-31-2008 02:10 PM
Basil and a lighter! thomasjmpark Post Your Photos! 10 04-01-2008 11:21 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:57 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