[MrB1]

Quote - "A Pentax DSLR gets bigger and heavier with every new version"

When recent Pentax DSLRs at a similar level are compared, there is little difference in size - a K-70 is slightly smaller than the K-30 and K-50, but very slightly heavier probably due to the extra structure of the articulated screen. It is not unreasonable to expect the full-frame K-1 to be bigger than the APS-C models.

Philip

[ThorSanchez]

I agree on the wifi points. Regarding batteries, mobile phones are a bad model to copy. Too many mobile phones have non-serviceable batteries.


Removable batteries let us continue photographing without a powerbank dangling from the camera. And, after a battery dies due to age, I don't want to ship my camera to Precision for a $300 battery replacement.

Why would anyone think that replaceable batteries and wireless charging have to be mutually exclusive? I want a camera that will charge the battery wirelessly when it's sitting on my desk, and also be able to swap out the battery in the field with one I've charged at home.

[zzeitg]

The whole wifi thing is just not worthwhile if you shoot RAW files. I do transfer downsized jpegs and they go pretty quickly to my phone or ipad, but even a full sized 36 megapixel jpeg takes a long time to transfer.

Speaking about wi-fi, my router supports 60GHz 802.11ad (standard existing since 2012). Are there devices supporting this standard? Virtually no. Not even my iPhone XS from 2018 (i.e. 6 years after).

[ThorSanchez]

I, too, don't really see much value to these proposed features. Worse, I do not want the added weight and cost of wireless charging, added in-camera battery charging circuits, or a more expensive (and power-hungry) high-speed wifi system. I really prefer swappable batteries, a separate battery charger, and separate card reader for high-speed downloading files off the memory card.

Maybe these features could be added to an accessory grip but I hope they are not added to the body.

Innovation will come. Not if, but when. Someone will add better connectivity and charging and processing to ILCs. They'll sell a lot of cameras to people who'd previously seen ILCs as dinosaurs, and just as many to folks who love big-sensor image quality with fewer of the hassles. I'd like to think that Pentax could be that company, but probably not.

[photoptimist]

Speaking about wi-fi, my router supports 60GHz 802.11ad (standard existing since 2012). Are there devices supporting this standard? Virtually no. Not even my iPhone XS from 2018 (i.e. 6 years after).

Unfortunately, it's very unlikely that phones will ever support 802.11ad because 60GHz signals are far too easily disrupted by human bodies, furniture, walls, and even a simple wooden door. The 60 Ghz band is best used by relatively immobile devices located where nothing can move between the device and the base station.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

- no battery charging without removing the batteries
- no wireless charging (with batteries in the camera, obviously)
- nearly useless wifi speed
- nearly useless wifi functionality (e.g. cannot browse the camera storage over a local network, for drag/drop file transfer; this is done by implementing Samba shares)

Not having these features, doesn't bother me, but I'd welcome them very much in a future DSLR & yes! Convenience trumps a lot of other things for a lot of folks.

A lot of my friends prefer the photos out of my K-50 over their cell phone pics, but they're not willing to learn how to use a camera. A lot of them also don't like the hassle of downloading the pictures to a PC, putting them in a folder, uploading the pictures to some social account, & all that jazz. A lot of them just don't like using any type of PC or Mac, period. They just want to point, shoot, & get an image without any effort that's good enough for them & also have the ability to share it instantly through whatever text messaging and/or social network service that they use. Not to mention that they have instant access to it on their phones. Even my wife has stopped using her red K-50 & only shoots with her phone now. Makes me sad. Hahaha!

[GUB]

I, too, don't really see much value to these proposed features. Worse, I do not want the added weight and cost of wireless charging, added in-camera battery charging circuits, or a more expensive (and power-hungry) high-speed wifi system. I really prefer swappable batteries, a separate battery charger, and separate card reader for high-speed downloading files off the memory card.

Maybe these features could be added to an accessory grip but I hope they are not added to the body.

Plus one on photoptimist. What worries me is someone will convince Pentax of this pointless stuff and they will lose their primary focus on Image Quality. The same goes for optimising a Dslr for video and compromising its primary purpose - still images.

[mikesbike]

It would be nice, I suppose, to be able to instantly and easily just push a button on the camera, where any given images will be transferred to a mobile phone for sharing purposes, files downsized in the process. As to the battery charging, I for one, would not buy a camera specifically because of this feature. The camera business being so competitive, if it caught on so many brands offered it among their features, most likely soon all would do so. But putting a battery into a charger is not much of a hassle compared to setting the camera onto a charging pad, which puts it out of service during that period. For most of us it is a non-issue.

Hey, I've got a great idea- you all know about the K-70's pull-out rear LCD screen, what about making it so it can be switched into being a detachable, full-featured mobile phone?? And any photos taken can be loaded onto it? Now that would sell some cameras!

[Fenwoodian]

Not having these features, doesn't bother me, but I'd welcome them very much in a future DSLR & yes! Convenience trumps a lot of other things for a lot of folks.

A lot of my friends don't like the hassle of downloading the pictures to a PC, putting them in a folder, uploading the pictures to some social account, & all that jazz. A lot of them just don't like using any type of PC or Mac, period. They just want to point, shoot, & get an image without any effort that's good enough for them & also have the ability to share it instantly through whatever text messaging and/or social network service that they use. Not to mention that they have instant access to it on their phones.

It all depends upon what the end uses of your photos are.

If you want wifi this and instant that for posting to "social media", a smart phone is all you need. Don't mess with the design of DSLRs in order so they can compete with smart phones. Completely different markets and user bases.

But if your goals are making prints (especially large ones) then the DSLR/ICL-Mirrorless "big" cameras are something you must take the time to learn.

[peterh337]

The battery is already rechargeable so it can be same with wireless charging. Actually we don't even have in-camera charging via a cable, which is really poor.

Great point about messing up the seals via repeated opening of the covers.

Current-technology (I mean the last 5 years) wifi transfers about 20 megabytes per second (that is application to application) if correctly implemented, which would transfer a raw file in 2-3 seconds. Here are some RAW files



The F* ones are from my Samsung S7 phone which I use mostly in RAW too (12 megapixel).

Wireless charging is a great feature. I have not bought the best camera phone currently out - the Huawei P20 PRO, which should finally match the amazing camera of the Nokia 808 - simply because I don't want to be constantly plugging in and pulling out the rather stiff USB-C cable. Especially with a car holder where you have to do it single-handed... another story.

Unfortunately people do compare DSLRs with phones, and walk away when they see how features which are obviously really easy to implement aren't implemented, and there is no clear reason for that.

And the number of people who are willing to carry a 2kg+ "weapon" to get great photos is reducing all the time. Not quickly, because phones are constrained by physics and are making very very slow progress, but it is happening. For social media a phone is already good enough. We have already seen the almost total death of pocket cameras (a 500 quid one is as good as a DSLR, in suitable and fairly common circumstances).

I am putting my Canon Legria G40 on Ebay shortly. Bought it 2 years ago and hardly used it. Fantastic video quality, HD at 50/60fps (I wish the K1 did that; it soooo easily could), totally stunning stabilisation. But it is too bulky, which limits its use to ... almost no opportunity at all.

[reh321]

This sound's like a lot of sour lemons from a cell phone user. Comparing phones to SLRs is not exactly a science (to say it lightly). The two just don't compare.

For one, I don't want to stop in the middle of a shoot and put my camera on a wired OR wireless charger and wait for it to charge before I can use it again. Replaceable batteries allow just that - reloading without any need to wait. With spare batteries, there is no need to carry a charger nor a need for 110 VAC to recharge.

I do have WiFi with my K-1 and although it's slow, I rarely use it to transfer files. I have downloaded phone files and it's no faster once the phone is connected to a computer (in fact an SD card will usually download faster).

Just think twice before condemning the "lowly" DSLR to history. It has a lot to offer beyond cell phones for the professional and advanced photographers out there, or they would all be using cell phones for their cameras.

I have the device shown below



only because my smart phone ran out of electrons one day. Now I can plug in the USB cable from my phone, and charge/run the phone off AA batteries. For my KP and my Q-7 I just carry a spare battery/batteries around with me, which is much easier/simpler.

[reh321]

It would be nice, I suppose, to be able to instantly and easily just push a button on the camera, where any given images will be transferred to a mobile phone for sharing purposes, files downsized in the process. As to the battery charging, I for one, would not buy a camera specifically because of this feature. The camera business being so competitive, if it caught on so many brands offered it among their features, most likely soon all would do so. But putting a battery into a charger is not much of a hassle compared to setting the camera onto a charging pad, which puts it out of service during that period. For most of us it is a non-issue.

Hey, I've got a great idea- you all know about the K-70's pull-out rear LCD screen, what about making it so it can be switched into being a detachable, full-featured mobile phone?? And any photos taken can be loaded onto it? Now that would sell some cameras!

Doesn't your K-70 already have WiFi capability to transfer images to a real full-featured mobile phone??

[reh321]

Why would anyone think that replaceable batteries and wireless charging have to be mutually exclusive? I want a camera that will charge the battery wirelessly when it's sitting on my desk, and also be able to swap out the battery in the field with one I've charged at home.

Problem is, that adds more size and weight to the camera - a cost most of us aren't interested in 'paying'.

[clackers]

Just a little list:

- no battery charging without removing the batteries
- no wireless charging (with batteries in the camera, obviously)
- nearly useless wifi speed
- nearly useless wifi functionality (e.g. cannot browse the camera storage over a local network, for drag/drop file transfer; this is done by implementing Samba shares)

A mobile phone can and does do all these things.

All of it is technically doable, some trivially.

DSLR makers seem to think that their customers hold the view that "real men" will take the battery out and put it in a charger, after every job.

I have a K1, a 24-70 f2.8, a Milvus 18mm, a 70-300 Tamron, and love this kit for the quality of the pics, especially with the Milvus. Friends jokingly refer to the camera as a "weapon" and you could certainly use it to crack somebody's skull with it A Pentax DSLR gets bigger and heavier with every new version (I've had most of them). I carry it only if travelling to a new place and one which is expected to be scenic.

Well, no one should buy a MILC or DSLR if they just point a 28mm equivalent lens at a cup of coffee or their cat, Peter. It's a waste of money and waste of the camera's capabilities, a phone will do that happily.

But that's not you, or you wouldn't own a telephoto zoom or an ultrawide prime.

If you ever stopped taking interesting pictures, you should sell your K-1 to someone who does, that's obvious, you'd both be better off.

BTW, I do not think sales have ever been lost due to browsing the SD card across a local network. I don't know anyone who implements a Samba server on their phone to do this.

[boriscleto]