[mecrox]

Or one body with different modes?

A Pentax with a switchable OVF/EVF could work. Or even a OVF model with a plug-in EVF. Or an EVF with a plug-in active OVF. Or a hybrid OVF with a rich EVF overlay.

Lots of possible permutations, patents permitting.

And speaking of the A7 r II, any talk of a smart E-mount to K-mount adapter being produced by anyone yet (ie one that does screw or SDM AF)?

A hybrid VF is adding greatly to complexity and expense (R&D, manufacturing, etc) but at what gain? It's quite likely that such an approach would quickly be sidelined: folks would either insist on one (OVF) or declare that they were happy enough with the other (EVF) not to need both. Potential savings in weight, size and assembly cost would all be lost. I can see a hybrid being done but I can't see it being successful. At best it is just a stopgap until EVFs improve even further and before then the "good enough" factor will probably carry the day anyway.

I'd guess - without much evidence of course - that folks are attracted to cameras like the A7 series or the Fuji ones by a combination of factors, not just one. The OVF/EVF question is only one and still leaves a lot of other things DSLRs aren't really known for such as fast CDAF, focusing acuity (i.e. no need for PDAF calibration and faffling), size and weight savings arising from new mount, adaptability (use of mount adapters means you can choose from a huge variety of lenses), generally more friendly in terms of modern tech (wifi, apps and the like). So simply dropping an EVF into a monster Canon (or Pentax) DSLR would not stop people continuing to buy Sony, Fuji or Olly mirrorless.

---

Last edited by mecrox; 07-30-2015 at 03:53 AM.

[Winder]

In a friendly discussion way, i don't believe that to be successful, EVFs have to equal the human eye in all respects,

To be successful. No. Once the EVF exceeds what a person can perceive, then the OVF will be pointless. Technology isn't going to stop. The EVF will exceed what the human eye can perceive whether it needs to or not.

And speaking of the A7 r II, any talk of a smart E-mount to K-mount adapter being produced by anyone yet (ie one that does screw or SDM AF)?

I doubt it. There are not enough people using K-mount that are willing to spend the money.

---------- Post added 07-30-15 at 05:36 AM ----------

A Pentax with a switchable OVF/EVF could work. Or even a OVF model with a plug-in EVF. Or an EVF with a plug-in active OVF. Or a hybrid OVF with a rich EVF overlay

Would be expensive to produce and given the lower cost of the EVF, it would make it hard to compete with a camera like the A7II. Would there be enough people willing to pay a premium for the same features that can be had in an EVF for less money?

[Fogel70]

A hybrid VF is adding greatly to complexity and expense (R&D, manufacturing, etc) but at what gain? It's quite likely that such an approach would quickly be sidelined: folks would either insist on one (OVF) or declare that they were happy enough with the other (EVF) not to need both. Potential savings in weight, size and assembly cost would all be lost. I can see a hybrid being done but I can't see it being successful. At best it is just a stopgap until EVFs improve even further and before then the "good enough" factor will probably carry the day anyway.

I'd guess - without much evidence of course - that folks are attracted to cameras like the A7 series or the Fuji ones by a combination of factors, not just one. The OVF/EVF question is only one and still leaves a lot of other things DSLRs aren't really known for such as fast CDAF, focusing acuity (i.e. no need for PDAF calibration and faffling), size and weight savings arising from new mount, adaptability (use of mount adapters means you can choose from a huge variety of lenses), generally more friendly in terms of modern tech (wifi, apps and the like). So simply dropping an EVF into a monster Canon (or Pentax) DSLR would not stop people continuing to buy Sony, Fuji or Olly mirrorless.

I agree, and it easy to see which seems to works best comparing FI Sony A-mount with Sony E-mount. Or Fujis with combined OVF/EVF or only EVF.
The best selling mirrorless cameras seems to be those cameras that focus on what mirrorless do best.
Trying to combine the best things from both DSLR and mirrorless, risk end up with a kludge with the worst from both instead.

[philbaum]

When i mentioned above that Canikon or Pentax should (in my humble but worthless opinion :-)) build a "parallel EVF model.

What i meant by that is that Canikon or Pentax should build an all mirrorless model with a smaller registration distance. The smaller registration distance allows a design team to take advantage of the EVF mirrorless style of camera, but yet use all the legacy lenses via SMART ELECTRONIC ADAPTERS. I believe the Canon patent at the start of this thread is an indication they are going in that direction.

In addition, the A7RII announcement featured on dpreview stated:

At the press launch in New York we even got a glimpse of the a7R II autofocusing Canon EF lenses using a Metabones electronic adapter. Focus appeared to be on par with OVF focus on a native Canon body, and the AF experience itself didn't appear to be limited simply because you're using a third party lens (full coverage and tracking are available).

I don't think the Sony announcement of the metabones adapter is any kind of coincidence. I suspect that Sony has been working behind the scenes with Metabones to make this adapter happen. There are currently 4 Smart EF to e-mount adapters out there, metabones, commlite, fotodiox, and signstek. There is an announcement out there on an upcoming electronic Nikon F mount to e-mount adapter. I've not heard of any electronic K-mount to e-mount adapter - but wouldn't that be wonderful

I don't think - correct me if i'm wrong please - that this hurts Canon so much. They get to sell a lot more lenses to Sony mirrorless owners. Which gives them time to develop and build their own premium mirrorless camera, if they choose to do so.

Nikon - whither Nikon? This puts more pressure on them to do something. They've got great lenses and bodies, but they seem to be stepping closer to the sidelines - or is its my imagination?

[mecrox]

When i mentioned above that Canikon or Pentax should (in my humble but worthless opinion :-)) build a "parallel EVF model.

What i meant by that is that Canikon or Pentax should build an all mirrorless model with a smaller registration distance. The smaller registration distance allows a design team to take advantage of the EVF mirrorless style of camera, but yet use all the legacy lenses via SMART ELECTRONIC ADAPTERS. I believe the Canon patent at the start of this thread is an indication they are going in that direction.

In addition, the A7RII announcement featured on dpreview stated:



I don't think the Sony announcement of the metabones adapter is any kind of coincidence. I suspect that Sony has been working behind the scenes with Metabones to make this adapter happen. There are currently 4 Smart EF to e-mount adapters out there, metabones, commlite, fotodiox, and signstek. There is an announcement out there on an upcoming electronic Nikon F mount to e-mount adapter. I've not heard of any electronic K-mount to e-mount adapter - but wouldn't that be wonderful

I don't think - correct me if i'm wrong please - that this hurts Canon so much. They get to sell a lot more lenses to Sony mirrorless owners. Which gives them time to develop and build their own premium mirrorless camera, if they choose to do so.

Nikon - whither Nikon? This puts more pressure on them to do something. They've got great lenses and bodies, but they seem to be stepping closer to the sidelines - or is its my imagination?

My guess is that over the next couple of years we will see something from Canon and/or Nikon that is roughly the shape of whatever ends up replacing the classic DSLR. Who knows what form that will take, but the new technology now becoming available means that the old incumbents can't continue indefinitely to inflict unnecessary limitations on people in order to protect their businesses via lock-in. More and more I read on sites like LULA or Fred Miranda of people selling up the big guns and replacing them with smaller, lighter kit that's both more modern and still of excellent quality. It has to be having an impact since these folks tend to be enthusiasts who are opinion-formers too, at least for those around them, and they are the big spenders on all those lenses and accessories. Going on an extended walkabout? You can take a full Olympus kit and a full back-up kit in less space/weight and at considerably less lost than a single big kit from Canonikon.

Canon are the number one camera company and this is a source of immense pride and importance to them. A threat to that is a big deal indeed, and being number one doesn't involve ending up as a supplier of accessories (lenses) to one of your competitors because they have the gear, the better sensors and the adapters that you don't. I doubt the present impasse will continue.

[philbaum]

.... More and more I read on sites like LULA or Fred Miranda of people selling up the big guns and replacing them with smaller, lighter kit that's both more modern and still of excellent quality. It has to be having an impact since these folks tend to be enthusiasts who are opinion-formers too, at least for those around them, and they are the big spenders on all those lenses and accessories. Going on an extended walkabout? You can take a full Olympus kit and a full back-up kit in less space/weight and at considerably less lost than a single big kit from Canonikon.

Canon are the number one camera company and this is a source of immense pride and importance to them. A threat to that is a big deal indeed, and being number one doesn't involve ending up as a supplier of accessories (lenses) to one of your competitors because they have the gear, the better sensors and the adapters that you don't. I doubt the present impasse will continue.

What's that cliche - Pride goeth before the fall. Many big companies, with the exception of Microsoft and Apple, seem to inhibit new ideas. This is the way we've always done it type syndrome. It'd be interesting to be a fly on the Canon Boardroom wall and hear what's being said about sales and the marketplace. Suggestions for change are sometimes seen as disloyalty and discouraged. Takes a young kid to say "The king doesn't have any clothes on"

[Rondec]

When i mentioned above that Canikon or Pentax should (in my humble but worthless opinion :-)) build a "parallel EVF model.

What i meant by that is that Canikon or Pentax should build an all mirrorless model with a smaller registration distance. The smaller registration distance allows a design team to take advantage of the EVF mirrorless style of camera, but yet use all the legacy lenses via SMART ELECTRONIC ADAPTERS. I believe the Canon patent at the start of this thread is an indication they are going in that direction.

In addition, the A7RII announcement featured on dpreview stated:



I don't think the Sony announcement of the metabones adapter is any kind of coincidence. I suspect that Sony has been working behind the scenes with Metabones to make this adapter happen. There are currently 4 Smart EF to e-mount adapters out there, metabones, commlite, fotodiox, and signstek. There is an announcement out there on an upcoming electronic Nikon F mount to e-mount adapter. I've not heard of any electronic K-mount to e-mount adapter - but wouldn't that be wonderful

I don't think - correct me if i'm wrong please - that this hurts Canon so much. They get to sell a lot more lenses to Sony mirrorless owners. Which gives them time to develop and build their own premium mirrorless camera, if they choose to do so.

Nikon - whither Nikon? This puts more pressure on them to do something. They've got great lenses and bodies, but they seem to be stepping closer to the sidelines - or is its my imagination?

I still am not sure why you need a shorter registration distance for mirrorless. It does make it possible to create smaller wide angle primes, I suppose, but your longer lenses are actually a little bigger. And the decreased size isn't huge. I would rather have a little bigger camera from an ergonomic standpoint, if I am shooting full frame. None of these cameras are pocketable anyway, but stick a DA 40 on K-01 and it is just as pocketable as any of the other mirrorless cameras out there.

The whole adapter thing doesn't excite me very much. I have a full line up of K Mount lenses and don't want to have to buy an adapter to use them on forth coming Pentax cameras.

[dylansalt]

I personally don't think mirrorless aps-c/ff cameras are taking over from dslrs at this present moment - I travel lots and I can say that it's cellphones and dslr's that dominate in the young and older photographer. On a recent trip to Victoria Falls (a very popular destination) I didn't see one Sony, Fuji or Olympus aps-c/ff mirrorless cameras in their hands.

Which surprised me - I did though see quite a few Sony RX100's being used.

Lastly my iPhone does better Panorama shots than my Sony RX100. When up in the helicopter my wife shot video with the Sony(which uses double steady shot) and I used the iPhone - the iPhone gave me perfectly stabilised smooth video (how it did this i don't know) - the Sony video was unusable.
I also took footage at 240fps using the iPhone.

I personally think the threat is more from cellphone cameras

[osv]

i think that iphones don't have zoom lenses? it's a fixed ~33mm wide shot, while the rx100 is a 28-100mm zoom, at a different aperture?

if the rx100 was zoomed in much, it would have been harder to keep steady, similar to shooting stills at longer focal lengths.

agree that smartphones are taking over everything tho.

[mecrox]

I personally don't think mirrorless aps-c/ff cameras are taking over from dslrs at this present moment - I travel lots and I can say that it's cellphones and dslr's that dominate in the young and older photographer. On a recent trip to Victoria Falls (a very popular destination) I didn't see one Sony, Fuji or Olympus aps-c/ff mirrorless cameras in their hands.

Which surprised me - I did though see quite a few Sony RX100's being used.

Lastly my iPhone does better Panorama shots than my Sony RX100. When up in the helicopter my wife shot video with the Sony(which uses double steady shot) and I used the iPhone - the iPhone gave me perfectly stabilised smooth video (how it did this i don't know) - the Sony video was unusable.
I also took footage at 240fps using the iPhone.

I personally think the threat is more from cellphone cameras

The camera companies need to look a few years down the line, I guess. So an argument goes that by 2010-2012 pretty well everyone who wanted one had a DSLR. And, of course, there is a huge weight of custom and practice behind the DSLR anyway: it's what people have always bought when they want a good camera and they've been quite right to, as well. However, the uncertainty starts when current owners begin to look for something to replace what they purchased in around 2010-2014. If there's any likelihood that by then folks will be splitting off in numbers either to cellphones or to mirrorless, then the DSLR is in trouble as the default choice for the broad mass of the market. I'd be very surprised if Nikon and Canon didn't have ready-to-roll prototypes of a post-DSLR camera sitting in their labs to tempt "splitters" to stay with their brands because the chances of this happening are pretty darn high, imho. I agree with you about things like panoramas and video, too. If the camera outfits cannot get this kind of thing right then folks will just continue to go on over to cellphones instead of purchasing a first or replacement camera. One issue is whether mirrorless cameras make such features inherently easier to do and better executed. Many would say yes but I dunno not least because nearly all cameras including mirrorless are just too complex for most folks and are pretty hopeless at connecting to the net as well. Compare a cellphone where a couple of taps will tidy up the image in snapseed and another one will land the image on a website.

[philbaum]

I personally don't think mirrorless aps-c/ff cameras are taking over from dslrs at this present moment - I travel lots and I can say that it's cellphones and dslr's that dominate in the young and older photographer. On a recent trip to Victoria Falls (a very popular destination) I didn't see one Sony, Fuji or Olympus aps-c/ff mirrorless cameras in their hands.

Which surprised me - I did though see quite a few Sony RX100's being used.

I can't explain what you saw but the CIPA data shows that mirrorless ILCs make up about 25% of those ILC manufactured and sold - about. So somebody must be buying those mirrorless and hiding them in a really big closet 25% is what it is - its not a majority of ILC by any means, Always have liked the Rx100 design .

I still am not sure why you need a shorter registration distance for mirrorless. It does make it possible to create smaller wide angle primes, I suppose, but your longer lenses are actually a little bigger. And the decreased size isn't huge. I would rather have a little bigger camera from an ergonomic standpoint, if I am shooting full frame. None of these cameras are pocketable anyway, but stick a DA 40 on K-01 and it is just as pocketable as any of the other mirrorless cameras out there.

The whole adapter thing doesn't excite me very much. I have a full line up of K Mount lenses and don't want to have to buy an adapter to use them on forth coming Pentax cameras.

One of the reasons to go with a shorter registration distance is to enable more legacy lenses from varying manufacturers. Dont have any real information why Sony went this way - my guess only.

I don't find it a problem using adapters. I bought 2 Fotodiox for PK to emount. I mostly use native emount lenses at this point, except for macros. Macros are fun to use on my Nex6, especially the DA35 macro ltd.

[TomB_tx]

One of the reasons to go with a shorter registration distance is to enable more legacy lenses from varying manufacturers. Dont have any real information why Sony went this way - my guess only.

I don't find it a problem using adapters. I bought 2 Fotodiox for PK to emount. I mostly use native emount lenses at this point, except for macros. Macros are fun to use on my Nex6, especially the DA35 macro ltd.

I have no native lenses for my A7. I bought the body to use with my various orphaned SLR lenses that have no FF digital support. However, more money is made by selling lenses than bodies, so I don't expect this to be a design goal for most companies.

[Lakai]

I have no native lenses for my A7. I bought the body to use with my various orphaned SLR lenses that have no FF digital support. However, more money is made by selling lenses than bodies, so I don't expect this to be a design goal for most companies.

Well what you just did is already a good reason for Pentax to make an Adaptall camera body. To sell cameras to people who has old or new lenses regardless of mount design and doesn't need new ones. I do agree that lenses are more profitable but if you are already having a hard time selling your lenses because majority of the market is already using other lens brands , then make a body that can accept these lenses. It is better to be able to sell something than not being able to sell anything at all. Given the chance to choose between Sony A7 vs a hypothetical FF or APS Pentax mirrorless with EVF equipped with IBIS and and standard hotshoe and can accept different mount designs not to mention that Pentax is relatively cheaper feature-feature. Which do you think will sell?
Of course this doesn't necessarily mean that Pentax is abandoning their lenses which is contrary because being able to sell camera bodies is as good as promoting your name along with your other products.

---------- Post added 08-16-15 at 01:45 AM ----------

I still am not sure why you need a shorter registration distance for mirrorless. And the decreased size isn't huge. I would rather have a little bigger camera from an ergonomic standpoint, if I am shooting full frame. None of these cameras are pocketable anyway,.

Shorter registration distance = versatility
Ergonomics in terms of size is relative. If you have a child say 12 years old whom you want to impart your passion for photography, an average DSLR may not be ergonomically acceptable. Not all shooters have big strong hands and bones.
Not all mirrorless users buy mirrorless only because of the size or being pocketable. Again one reason is versatility.
I do however agree that it is hard to use long lenses with mirrorless bodies but then again that's just me

cheers

[Rondec]

Well what you just did is already a good reason for Pentax to make an Adaptall camera body. To sell cameras to people who has old or new lenses regardless of mount design and doesn't need new ones. I do agree that lenses are more profitable but if you are already having a hard time selling your lenses because majority of the market is already using other lens brands , then make a body that can accept these lenses. It is better to be able to sell something than not being able to sell anything at all. Given the chance to choose between Sony A7 vs a hypothetical FF or APS Pentax mirrorless with EVF equipped with IBIS and and standard hotshoe and can accept different mount designs not to mention that Pentax is relatively cheaper feature-feature. Which do you think will sell?
Of course this doesn't necessarily mean that Pentax is abandoning their lenses which is contrary because being able to sell camera bodies is as good as promoting your name along with your other products.

---------- Post added 08-16-15 at 01:45 AM ----------



Shorter registration distance = versatility
Ergonomics in terms of size is relative. If you have a child say 12 years old whom you want to impart your passion for photography, an average DSLR may not be ergonomically acceptable. Not all shooters have big strong hands and bones.
Not all mirrorless users buy mirrorless only because of the size or being pocketable. Again one reason is versatility.
I do however agree that it is hard to use long lenses with mirrorless bodies but then again that's just me

cheers

I just think that when you come to a certain sensor size and aperture, the lenses are really pretty similar in size. There wouldn't be a big difference in a 70-200 f2.8 lens created for the FE mount as compared to a similar K or F mount lens. The easiest way to make lenses smaller is just to make their maximum aperture smaller.

As for the whole versatility thing, there are only so many folks who want to mount weird off brand or ancient lenses on their camera. I would far rather have a lens that I can natively mount k mount lenses on, even if it means I have to give up shopping for Leica lenses, than have a shorter lens mount that requires an adapter for my k mount lenses and all of the negatives that such an adapter would bring (extra cost, probably poorer auto focus).

As for the size advantage, shorter registration makes a camera shallower, but otherwise, size stays the same. Put a DA 40 on a K-01 and you are about as small as most of the NEX APS-C combos you could find. For that matter, a K-S1 or kx and a DA 40 is going to be as easy to manage as any of the NEX options out there.