[Trickortreat]

Exactly what are you talking about? Your position kind of depends on this.

Now what are you talking about? What position? :/
Why wide lens only? This one, for example supports all lenses.
FotodioX Nikon F G-Type Lens to Micro Four Thirds NIKG-MFT-DLX

[reh321]

And you really think that Youngnuo will have a sturdy metal body?

I have never had an ILC camera with a plastic mount. Even my two Canon Rebels, each of which had a mostly space-age plastic body and was kitted with a lens having a space-age plastic mount, the lens mount itself was metal and the tripod mount was solidly connected metal. That is also true of my tiny Pentax Q-7 body.

The less-expensive {only type I purchased} EF lenses were much lighter than the Pentax lenses that replaced them.

[normhead]

Exactly what are you talking about? Your position kind of depends on this.

How about a link to a landscape lens with attachable lens collar.

OK, now I get it. You want your camera to be 18mm thinner so you're going to add a n adapter that's at least that big and weighs .pounds, 120 grams. Now your camera is both bigger and heavier than a Q, plus a lot more fetching around.

I'm surprised you don't see the limitations of this system, As I said. You seem to have little understanding of what a pain it is to work with adapters. You're giving up a lot of convenience for taking 18mm off the thickness of the body. But is that's what you want, go for it. I hope you understand some of us see more limitations than utility.



Imagine putting this thing on your camera every time you want to use a tripod.

[RGlasel]

tripods tend to be used by only the more serious photographers,

Assuming this Yongnuo Android thing is not someone's custom built Frankencamera, nothing about it looks serious. Form always follows function, serious cameras need to look and feel like serious cameras.


Now that I think about it, what should a camera primarily designed for tripod use look like? For starters, it doesn't have to be wider than tall and it doesn't need hand grips. It should be heavier, so it isn't necessary to put ballast on the tripod, and to provide stability regardless of the lens mounted on it. It must have some type of detachable or remote monitor (otherwise the photographer is restricted in the situations where a tripod can used). Without a built-in monitor or viewfinder, the exteriour should be as unbreakable as practical. The Yongnuo Frankencamera is a total fail for tripod use.

This topic has moved from the impending doom of an entire class of cameras, which happens to constitute all of the current Pentax lineup, in the opinion of the original poster (who is selling all of their Pentax equipment, including a KP, to go to an APS-C Fuji camera, because even the KP is too heavy?), referring to an hysterical article in Amateur Photographer that has been sanitized of any logical reasoning or careful analysis; to the impending doom of a class of cameras of which only a single prototype exists in the real world (which could conceivably be only a photomontage of two otherwise unrelated and unconnected components), as determined by a couple of hysterical websites, who can't be bothered to look for real world confirmation of any of the statements they publish. Now that I've set a record for the longest sentence ever posted on Pentaxforums, I would like to suggest that anything that has been in existence for more than half a century (again, it is the form and function of an SLR that is important, not the size or technical characteristics of the recording media) and inspires such fervent anguish, especially from those who desire nothing so much as to have and hold something new and different, is still a very long way away from reaching the end of its natural life.

TLDR; Anyone expecting the end of DSLRs is very likely to be disappointed and anyone expecting the Yongnuo Frankencamera to displace DSLRs is also very likely to be disappointed.

[ThorSanchez]

And adding a tripod mount to such a tiny body would just make a weak link unless the whole body is made of titanium or something like that, which I sincerely doubt Yongnuo would do.
Besides - there are add on collars that can be attached to any lens providing much better support than a small hole on a (plastic) EF mount lump.

Or you could just use a cell phone clamp-on tripod mount. I'm guessing that'll handle reasonably sized lenses, and you're probably not putting a 3-pound hyper-corrected full frame lens on this thing.

[reh321]

tripods tend to be used by only the more serious photographers

Now that I think about it, what should a camera primarily designed for tripod use look like? For starters, it doesn't have to be wider than tall and it doesn't need hand grips. It should be heavier, so it isn't necessary to put ballast on the tripod, and to provide stability regardless of the lens mounted on it. It must have some type of detachable or remote monitor (otherwise the photographer is restricted in the situations where a tripod can used). Without a built-in monitor or viewfinder, the exteriour should be as unbreakable as practical. The Yongnuo Frankencamera is a total fail for tripod use.

I agree. In nearly four years, my Q-7 has never been on a tripod. I do use a monopod for stability when I'm using it with a 'long' K-mount lens, but then I attach the monopod to the tripod mount on my K-to-Q adapter {and the Hoodman clone to the tripod mount on the camera}.

[normhead]

I agree. In nearly four years, my Q-7 has never been on a tripod. I do use a monopod for stability when I'm using it with a 'long' K-mount lens, but then I attach the monopod to the tripod mount on my K-to-Q adapter {and the Hoodman clone to the tripod mount on the camera}.

Ours has. Usually a lightweight tripod. When we want to keep the weight down we keep the weight down. ( You gotta remember what you're doing, hard as that may be as you get older.) It might be problem in a strong breeze, but typically strong breezes cause so much movement the pictures aren't spectacular in any case.

[monochrome]

I agree. In nearly four years, my Q-7 has never been on a tripod. I do use a monopod for stability when I'm using it with a 'long' K-mount lens, but then I attach the monopod to the tripod mount on my K-to-Q adapter {and the Hoodman clone to the tripod mount on the camera}.

I have a similar rig, but I stopped using it (and Q7) altogether. I hat’s the point? That rig is bigger than a KP.

The ergonomics or the ILC phone sound awful.

[Rondec]

Why it wouldnt work? Its not 3/4 inch its 44mm more than it should be. And you really think that Youngnuo will have a sturdy metal body?


Universal collars? Never heard about those things?

Where does 44 mm come from? The micro four thirds mount registration distance is roughly 20mm, the EOS mount is 44 mm. That is 24 mm difference. Acting as though micro four thirds mount has a registration distance of 0mm is silly. Every camera out there has some depth, some just have a little more than others, but we are literally talking about a little less than an inch difference in depth between the two mounts and I can't imagine that making a difference in any sort of real world situation.

[normhead]

I bought my setup like the one above for one purpose. Some years the MNR drags a road kill moose onto he flood plain Sunday Creek where it is can be views from the observation deck of the visitors centre. Every predator moving in the winter turns up. Wolves, foxes, fishers, etc. They area long way off, at least 300 meters, maybe more. I was thinking the Q-S1, DA*60-250 might get me some cool video and stills. However, since we bought the Q, we haven't had the opportunity. But sooner or later it will fulfill it's destiny.

[Theov39]

Actually it is shame that Fuji exited the DSLR market as their sensors are fantastic.

I had a Fuji S3 Pro DSLR and a Fuji S5 Pro DSLR that produced beautiful JPEGs straight out the camera. Indeed, what made me switch to Pentax was that it was the closest I could get to that beautiful 'Fuji-look' tonal quality.

However, while the current Fuji mirror-less cameras produce beautiful images, In terms of functionality and actual use i just prefer DSLRs. There always seems to be a micro-second moment of delay when shooting mirror-less that I find so frustrating. I also just don't like using EVFs compared to using OVFs.

[reh321]

I have a similar rig, but I stopped using it (and Q7) altogether. What’s the point? That rig is bigger than a KP.

The ergonomics or the ILC phone sound awful.

I was never satisfied with the shots I was getting with crop-sensor cameras - some things are just too far away. I briefly considered getting a Canon SX50, but it really is big and heavy. My yellow Q-7 does get lost once I've strapped all the extra black things on it, but it is the best birding kit I've ever had - a 300mm lens on it gives me the same view I would get from a 900mm lens on a KP.
Best bang for the buck long 300mm tele for Q? - Page 5 - PentaxForums.com

[Alex645]

Actually it is shame that Fuji exited the DSLR market as their sensors are fantastic.

I had a Fuji S3 Pro DSLR and a Fuji S5 Pro DSLR that produced beautiful JPEGs straight out the camera. Indeed, what made me switch to Pentax was that it was the closest I could get to that beautiful 'Fuji-look' tonal quality.

A lot of what you may have liked were the CCD (vs. CMOS) sensor qualities which were last seen in the Pentax 645D and K-m/K2000. Part of the results will be from the lens rendering and the sensor, but also the the processing of the jpeg by Fujifilm. You can compare the same Sony sensor in a Sony, Nikon, and Pentax camera, but get differently rendered jpegs.

[Trickortreat]

I'm surprised you don't see the limitations of this system, As I said. You seem to have little understanding of what a pain it is to work with adapters. You're giving up a lot of convenience for taking 18mm off the thickness of the body. But is that's what you want, go for it. I hope you understand some of us see more limitations than utility.

Well, tbh, now that i think about it - the mount seems the best part to put an tripod mount. What boggles me is why m43 sensor and EF mount? Wouldnt it be more sensible to get the proper m43 mount? I think those EF lenses would just be an overkill. m43 are much smaller and better fit for that body.

[clackers]

Well, tbh, now that i think about it - the mount seems the best part to put an tripod mount. What boggles me is why m43 sensor and EF mount? Wouldnt it be more sensible to get the proper m43 mount? I think those EF lenses would just be an overkill. m43 are much smaller and better fit for that body.

Yongnuo make lenses for the most popular mount in the world (Canon) but none for m43.