Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-30-2017, 07:41 AM - 1 Like   #76
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,113
QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
I don't really think mirrorless vs DSLR is that big of a problem. I think mirrorless will eventually overtake DSLRs simply because they reduce the number of moving parts...and I'm fine with that.
DSLRs may have a lot more moving parts that add costs but MILCs have a lot more moving electrons which also add costs in terms of transistors, high-speed interfaces, software, and power consumption (notice the extremely high price of the A9). Moreover, at the high-end of the photography market, cost is simply not an issue . It's only the low-end of the market that competes on cost.

The bigger issue is unavoidable usability downsides of replacing moving mirrors with moving electrons because those electrons actually spend a lot of time waiting. With an OVF the light bounces straight to the person's eyes at the speed of light. In contrast, MILCs force the image to: wait for the pixel to accumulate enough light; wait for the electronics to read the pixel; wait for the pixel value to go into the stacked RAM; wait for the stacked RAM to be read out, processed, and put into video RAM; wait for the display driver to read the video RAM and show the processed pixel. Sure, Sony is doing an admirable job of minimizing all those waiting times by putting in a lot more technology, but the lags are still there and are particularly unavoidable in low-light conditions. Note: I'm not saying EVFs always suck and OVFs always win. But it''s very clear that some people prefer OVFs over EFVs for good reasons caused by sticking electronics between the lens and the eyeball.

Finally, what's interesting to me is that a DSLR can be used like a MILC but a MILC can't be used like a DSLR (e.g., preliminary zooming, framing, focusing using a zero-lag viewfinder that requires zero power and keeps the sensor cool.) The most important attribute of a high-end camera system is in all the options provided with a broad portfolio of lenses; wide range of shutter speeds and ISOs; lots of exposure and AF modes for different situations; lots of bracketing/interval/HDR/pixel shift modes; etc. Sure, those modes come with added costs but pros and wealthy enthusiasts gladly pay more to get the added options.

Thus, I firmly believe DSLRs will always be an option in the high-end market even if most low-end ILCs go mirrorless.

04-30-2017, 07:50 AM - 1 Like   #77
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
How about... "educating" your customers to demand more features, higher levels of performance - for a lower price? Twice a year, if possible?
Some call it educating I guess.

"Advertising is selling people things they don't need to impress people they don't like."
04-30-2017, 08:27 AM   #78
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,574
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
DSLRs may have a lot more moving parts that add costs but MILCs have a lot more moving electrons which also add costs in terms of transistors, high-speed interfaces, software, and power consumption...

Uh...yeah...good luck with that.
04-30-2017, 08:30 AM   #79
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ehrwien's Avatar

Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 2,772
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
"Advertising is selling people things they don't need to impress people they don't like."
Spending money they don't have

04-30-2017, 08:59 AM - 1 Like   #80
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Syracuse, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,463
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The A9 is a bold move, but whether or not it helps or hurts Sony is yet to be determined. Especially given their flakey reputation.
I don't think Sony really cares. Their whole camera business is a loss leader to advertise their sensor business...
04-30-2017, 12:14 PM   #81
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Italia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 354
DSLR aren't doomed and, if so, in the future they'll be replaced by something we would use for the best. If it'll be MILCs , no problem. But perhaps another aspect of the raising of mirrorless is that some companies found simpliest ways of pain: look at Nikon , for example. They loose A LOT of loyal fans simply by repeated unfair politics related to flawed cameras: d7100 (high speed AF coupled with ridiculous buffer ) d600 (oil on the sensor) , d 750 (internal flare problems; problems related to the shutter). And they dissatisfied loyals as well as simple customers. Nikon is still alive because of its lenses ; as a plus too many people are so bound to lenses that's impossible to jump ship. Customer's satisfaction is now much more important than before.
04-30-2017, 01:26 PM   #82
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 771
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
Do you shoot a lot "wide open"?

If so, is that for subject isolation or to put light on the sensor?
uhh?? No, I don't typically shoot wide open. Most lenses get into some softness and vignetting when they are wide open. (Which might be just fine for portraits, but I don't shoot portraits!)

However, the shutter on the A7 does go to 1/8000th, as compared with 1/1000th on the old Ricoh SLR. That means when I'm outdoors in the sun, I can be at F5.6 or F4 instead of F11, and no faffing around with ND filters. The result, to my eyes, looks rather like medium format film. I like it.

At the other extreme, in dim light I can go to ISO 6400 and it still looks pretty clean for my uses.

04-30-2017, 04:00 PM   #83
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Flyover America
Posts: 4,469
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
The bigger issue is unavoidable usability downsides of replacing moving mirrors with moving electrons because those electrons actually spend a lot of time waiting. With an OVF the light bounces straight to the person's eyes at the speed of light. In contrast, MILCs force the image to: wait for the pixel to accumulate enough light; wait for the electronics to read the pixel; wait for the pixel value to go into the stacked RAM; wait for the stacked RAM to be read out, processed, and put into video RAM; wait for the display driver to read the video RAM and show the processed pixel. Sure, Sony is doing an admirable job of minimizing all those waiting times by putting in a lot more technology, but the lags are still there and are particularly unavoidable in low-light conditions. Note: I'm not saying EVFs always suck and OVFs always win. But it''s very clear that some people prefer OVFs over EFVs for good reasons caused by sticking electronics between the lens and the eyeball.
But the question was essentially about the future. Logically it's really a stretch to compare a mature technology that goes back to the late 19th century to one that is barely 10 years old.

If I was a CEO of a DSLR company I would worry more about how far EVFs have improved in the last decade rather than pat myself on the back for how good my OVFs are after over a century of development.

My guess is that's exactly what's going on right now at the board meetings of Nikon.

Last edited by wildman; 04-30-2017 at 04:09 PM.
04-30-2017, 05:29 PM   #84
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 771
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
The reason I asked was your comments about difficulty in manual focusing without a Katzeye. My personal experience has been that DOF at 5.6 is deep enough that when I take pictures using focus confirmation with an M42-mount or other pre-autofocus lens mounted on my K-30, I never have concerns at the time and never notice focus issues afterwards.
I tested both the A7 and a K-S2 with manual lenses. Sure, I could get focus in the K-S2, but my speed and confidence with the A7 was far better. And it's simply more pleasant to use that way.
04-30-2017, 06:33 PM - 1 Like   #85
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by wildman Quote
But the question was essentially about the future. Logically it's really a stretch to compare a mature technology that goes back to the late 19th century to one that is barely 10 years old.

If I was a CEO of a DSLR company I would worry more about how far EVFs have improved in the last decade rather than pat myself on the back for how good my OVFs are after over a century of development.

My guess is that's exactly what's going on right now at the board meetings of Nikon.
But you aren't the CEO of a DSLR company an we have no idea what you'd think if you were. We only know what you think you'd think.

---------- Post added 04-30-17 at 09:39 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Tony Belding Quote
I tested both the A7 and a K-S2 with manual lenses. Sure, I could get focus in the K-S2, but my speed and confidence with the A7 was far better. And it's simply more pleasant to use that way.
You test an FF worth a couple grand against a K-S2 APS-c worth $ 749 CAD and you found the A7 better?

Did the unfairness of that comparison escape you or were you providing a bit of humour?
04-30-2017, 07:42 PM   #86
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 771
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
You test an FF worth a couple grand against a K-S2 APS-c worth $ 749 CAD and you found the A7 better?

Did the unfairness of that comparison escape you or were you providing a bit of humour?
Yes, the unfairness of that comparison did escape me. I still don't really see it. The K-S2 has an excellent optical viewfinder. The one in the K-1 is bigger (because full-frame), but otherwise should work much the same AFAIK. There was nothing to lead me to believe I would have a much better experience with manual-focus lenses on it. And I certainly didn't spend anywhere near "a couple grand" on my used A7 found on fleaBay.
04-30-2017, 08:50 PM   #87
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,128
New A7 is pretty cheap these days, the 2nd edition is ok and better,edition 3 is imminent and should be pretty polished product and I'm guessing could have the stacked sensor???


The A 9 can do lotsa good things, TIME will tell if it penetrates the market its aimed for.Then, if it fails we could have a FIRE SALE because that's the only time I'm interested.
05-01-2017, 01:19 AM - 1 Like   #88
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 175
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by wildman Quote
But the question was essentially about the future. Logically it's really a stretch to compare a mature technology that goes back to the late 19th century to one that is barely 10 years old.

If I was a CEO of a DSLR company I would worry more about how far EVFs have improved in the last decade rather than pat myself on the back for how good my OVFs are after over a century of development.

My guess is that's exactly what's going on right now at the board meetings of Nikon.
That was the heart of my topic:

Ricoh Pentax is a small company in the decreasing ILC camera business.

They cannot, afford to have too many ILC systems, and they face the fast improving performance of mirrorless systems even in high end pro gear. Even Nikon failed, only Canon is big enough and profitable enough to do so.:
-Hasselblad and Fuji medium frame challenge the 645Z system
-Sony A9/A7 system chalenge the FF DSLR systems
-Sony A6*00, Fuji and M43 challenge the APS-C DSLR systems
-1" fixed lens cameras are challenging the lower tier of M43 system ILC

IMO, the question is not whether Ricoh-Pentax will have to move towards mirrorless to survive in the future.

The question is when and how:
Too early, could ruin them, but being too late to the party too.
A too bold move could mean very few sales for two or three years, yet having to fund high R&D and marketing money to settle the new system.

They always have had a very conservative and slow innovation pace, because they cannot afford boldness like Sony does, and, as Ricoh is restructuring its main business, I dont believe this might be different tomorrow..

That is why I was reckoning whether their first step into mirrorless might be an enthusiast/advanced mirrorless body in K mount, with KAF-4 features (electronic aperture support) but also, like in K1, an aperture lever and screwdrive AF ability to benefit of the whole K mount echosystem, and being able to operate all Pentax glass ever made without adapter.

Mirrorless allows easy manual focusing on legacy glass, thus postponing the urge to develop new lenses.

Some will of course complain that it would not benefit of the smaller size a new flange distance might allow, but for FF cameras the benefit is not so obvious, save in the 35-80mm FL range: wider lenses dont really benefit of a smaller flange distance, as digital sensors require to avoid oblique light incidence, and telephoto lenses need anyway to be long. Also FF ILC adress a different market segment than M43, Fuji APS-C or Sony A6*00.

But what would be decisive is that it would really need less investment, most R&D being focused on on sensor AF performance, and avoiding to cannibalize the K1 and D-FA lenses sales (if Ricoh-Pentax moves to a new mount, K-mount sales would immeditely collapse).

No need for massive advertising, just another FF body in K mount, aimed to compete with the Sony A7* (Sony A9 being in another performance league and price tag, targeted at pro shooters and needing a world wide pro support service).

This new body would generate lots of buzz on the web, thus no need for expensive advertising.

It doesnt need to be cheaper than its A7 competition, and, if Pentax can offer the same performance as the latest A7 models, even at a higher price, it could beat it on WR, ergonomy and handling, which are Pentax main force.

The move towards a new mount could be postponed a few years until Pentax will have sold enough FF Pentax K cameras, both K1 and this new mirrorless which could appeal to both the K-mount users, including K1 owners, and to newcomers, as an alternative body with different features, and of course a much better video experience.

---------- Post added 05-01-17 at 10:31 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Tony Belding Quote
I tested both the A7 and a K-S2 with manual lenses. Sure, I could get focus in the K-S2, but my speed and confidence with the A7 was far better. And it's simply more pleasant to use that way.
I agree: focusing Pentax MF legacy glass at f1.8/f2 using K3 OVF is a pain, even with an OVF magnifier.
On a M43 body with cheap adaptor MF is as easy and faster than it was in the film era with split screen stigmometer and microprism, and much more precise as you get up to x10 focusing loupe in the EVF, whether full screen or local. And the results are very sharp. Thus I trust it must be even better on A7.
05-01-2017, 04:13 AM   #89
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
Given that Sony has their A7 series and it works well with legacy MF glass, why would that market be at all of interest to Pentax? Perhaps it's a market Pentax is willing to ignore. As a company that ignored Auto-focus for years, Digital for years and heavy glass for years, they seem to have the mindset that until other companies have done something successfully for 5 years they don't need to pay attention.

That actually works for me. I'm not thinking the company is going to be a "push the edges state of the art" type company anytime soon. Although that's what people constantly seem to ask for.
05-01-2017, 05:59 AM   #90
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 771
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Given that Sony has their A7 series and it works well with legacy MF glass, why would that market be at all of interest to Pentax? Perhaps it's a market Pentax is willing to ignore. As a company that ignored Auto-focus for years, Digital for years and heavy glass for years, they seem to have the mindset that until other companies have done something successfully for 5 years they don't need to pay attention.
You may be right. I don't know if it's a naturally conservative mindset or if they're too stingy to pay for R&D, or a combination of the two. It would be nice to see some other company step up with a full-frame mirrorless camera and compete head-to-head with Sony. Because, you know, the A7 series does have some annoying quirks and rough edges -- more on the software side rather than the hardware.
Closed Thread

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!
aps-c, camera, cameras, canon, century, company, dslr, dslrs, ergonomics, ff, film, fountain, future, ideas, lenses, level, market, mirrorless, niche, pens, pentax, photography, reason, ricoh, sony, technology, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sony A9 Officially Announced Today Winder Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 552 07-20-2017 07:03 AM
Sony A9 D1N0 Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 2 04-19-2017 02:50 PM
Sony A9 $6799 surfar Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 9 04-02-2017 01:51 AM
Sony A9 to be a DSLR-Like Camera with Unlimited RAW Burst: Report Sliver-Surfer Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 8 04-07-2016 07:13 PM
New Sony A7II and A9 with IBIS Clavius Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 206 12-12-2014 05:37 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:12 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