Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-16-2018, 04:18 AM - 1 Like   #16
Pentaxian
robjmitchell's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne Aus
Posts: 1,446
Mirrorless sales were flat for 4 years with one good year last year. Still obviously better than colapsing DSLR sales but with Canon and Nikon jumping in its a pretty crowded market place. The weirdest thing to me about the mirrorless push is the necessity of creating a new mount, especially when it comes to larger formats like FF. Creating a new mount that saves a few mm while having to invest in a whole new range of lenses is just dumb. Stick a EVF on a K mount and you have an instant mirrorless camera system. Maybe we will get a K02 one day.

02-16-2018, 04:34 AM   #17
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 10,124
QuoteOriginally posted by robjmitchell Quote
The weirdest thing to me about the mirrorless push is the necessity of creating a new mount, especially when it comes to larger formats Like FF. Creating a new mount that saves a few mm while having to invest in a whole new range of lense is just dumb.
The shorter registration distance saves a lot more than a few millimetres... in Sony's case, A-mount is 44.5mm vs just 18mm for E-mount - a difference of 26.5mm. That allows for a much thinner body, plus access to a whole bunch of own-brand and third-party lenses via adapters. From a new system perspective, this means there's no shortage of existing glass to use while the brand gradually and steadily develops new native glass at its leisure.

I don't have a single native E-mount lens for my A7 MkII... I use my A-mount AF lenses via the LA-EA4 adapter (which works brilliantly... Nikon has a very similar adapter planned for its new mirrorless system), plus a wide range of manual M42, M39 SLR, M39 rangefinder, K-mount and Nikon F-mount glass via cheap, dumb adapters.

It's actually rather a good option for a company like Ricoh that's unlikely to develop and release lenses quickly. Release a mirrorless body with fully-functioning KAF4 adapter, and people have all the benefits of other mirrorless systems PLUS unique ability to use Pentax K-mount glass with full auto-focus. I don't think it'll happen, though, and in any case I'd rather see Ricoh continue to improve and specialise in its Pentax DSLRs and lenses...
02-16-2018, 05:09 AM - 1 Like   #18
Junior Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Essex
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 39
QuoteOriginally posted by TomB_tx Quote
I expect this trend is more of a transition. The last real disadvantage of mirrorless is the limited dynamic range of the EVF, making shadows black out in high contrast scenes so you can't see the details in the VF. Resolution, latency, etc. are constantly improving. While there is still something esthetically "magic" about viewing a true groundglass image, the complexity of the reflex mechanism makes the simplicity of mirrorless compelling. With the advances in electronic shutters even mechanical shutters will fade.
I still use SLRs for film with long lenses, but haven't used a dSLR since getting used to the A7. (But 90% of my shooting is with Leica Rangefinders - still mirrorless, but with optical VF.)
Funny I've been shooting older mirrorless cameras for years & I've never found EVF DR to be a problem at all.
For action shots a DSLR works better than my mirrorless cameras, but they doesn't win in any other categories IMO.
For flexibility the mirrorless cameras are streets ahead.
02-18-2018, 01:37 AM   #19
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,323
QuoteOriginally posted by robjmitchell Quote
Mirrorless sales were flat for 4 years with one good year last year. Still obviously better than colapsing DSLR sales but with Canon and Nikon jumping in its a pretty crowded market place. The weirdest thing to me about the mirrorless push is the necessity of creating a new mount, especially when it comes to larger formats like FF. Creating a new mount that saves a few mm while having to invest in a whole new range of lenses is just dumb. Stick a EVF on a K mount and you have an instant mirrorless camera system. Maybe we will get a K02 one day.
Maybe we’ve been conditioned to think registration distances have to be quite large - is there an optimal distance?

Likely a degree of differentiation going in here too. The mirrorless outfits had to offer something obviously different. The advantage of a new range of lenses is that people end up buying them and new sales are how the companies make their money. Secondhand is no good to them. It also means that the catalogue isn’t full of old stagers from analogue days.

My understanding is that on-sensor CDAF mandates different lens designs and motors if it is to work well. The moving focus groups within the lens need to be small and light to accommodate lots of small, fast adjustments. Traditional DSLR lenses aren’t so good at this because they are not designed for it. In addition, in-camera software correction means lenses can be designed differently and can be smaller - they do not require so many corrections built in to the lens elements. Maybe cost savings with this approach?

Mirrorless growth in Asia is quite impressive now. Too much of a honey pot for the companies to pass by, perhaps.

02-18-2018, 04:28 AM   #20
Veteran Member
Lord Lucan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: South Wales
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 328
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
The shorter registration distance saves a lot more than a few millimetres... in Sony's case, A-mount is 44.5mm vs just 18mm for E-mount - a difference of 26.5mm. That allows for a much thinner body, plus access to a whole bunch of own-brand and third-party lenses via adapters.
I don't really care about the camera body being 26mm thinner. Maybe someone would who wants to put their camera into their pocket or handbag, but then we are talking more about the P&S camera market. And the thinner body is no advantage if you then need to put an adaptor on it to make up the thickness for those legacy lenses, or indeed if the lenses for the mirrorless body are themselves longer for optical reasons - otherwise even standard focal length lenses are required to be of reverse telephoto design (a compromise) as most SLR wide angle lenses are now That's all fine for P&S and the budget market but less than opimal for the top end. I hate adaptors anyway, just something more to fiddle with and go wrong.

QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
Maybe we’ve been conditioned to think registration distances have to be quite large - is there an optimal distance?
Yes, zero. That would allow complete freedom in the design of the lens. That does not mean that the overall length of the optimum camera plus lens is necessarily any smaller though, as I have said above.
02-18-2018, 04:51 AM - 2 Likes   #21
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 10,124
QuoteOriginally posted by Lord Lucan Quote
I don't really care about the camera body being 26mm thinner. Maybe someone would who wants to put their camera into their pocket or handbag, but then we are talking more about the P&S camera market. And the thinner body is no advantage if you then need to put an adaptor on it to make up the thickness for those legacy lenses, or indeed if the lenses for the mirrorless body are themselves longer for optical reasons - otherwise even standard focal length lenses are required to be of reverse telephoto design (a compromise) as most SLR wide angle lenses are now That's all fine for P&S and the budget market but less than opimal for the top end. I hate adaptors anyway, just something more to fiddle with and go wrong.
Whether or not you care about the body being thinner for the sake of physical dimensions, the short registration distance gives a lot of flexibility in adapting MF and, in some cases, AF lenses from different mounts. That may not be of interest to you, but it vastly increases the number of other-system lenses that can be used with the camera. A good number of folks seem to value that... not just those that enjoy vintage glass, but those who might have favourite lenses from other systems.

If I'm shooting my A7 MkII with my A-mount lenses, I take it in my camera bag with the LA-EA4 AF adapter already fitted, and I have no need to remove it in the field. In that application, it's no smaller than a reasonably compact DSLR, but that's fine because I'm treating it like a native A-mount camera. Actually, it's still smaller and lighter than my HV (Sony A99), and whilst the camera plus adapter combination might look a little ungainly, it handles perfectly well even with bigger, longer lenses, despite the thinner body (in fact, the A7II + LA-EA4 adapter is remarkably similar in size and shape to the Pentax KP, with its thin body and protruding mirror box).

If I'm shooting other glass - which in my case is mostly vintage manual lenses in M39 RF, M39 SLR, M42, K and F-mount - I take the camera, an adapter or two, and the lenses I want to use. Again, size isn't a concern for me. Flexibility is. I don't care about being able to put the camera in my pocket or a handbag like a P&S. I do, however, care that the short registration distance allows me to use almost any lens on that one body - and it's the only camera I own that allows me to do that.

As for adapters being something else to fiddle with and go wrong, there's nothing to go wrong with a dumb adapter. For AF adapters, there's no more in those than you'd find in a DSLR or SLT camera. It's just in a separate unit that attaches like a teleconverter - and most of us are comfortable using those. Keep the contacts clean on the body and adapter (as you would a lens or TC) and you're good to go. Once it's fitted, unless you want to start using another system's lenses, you can leave it attached to the body and treat the camera plus adapter as one unit

Last edited by BigMackCam; 02-18-2018 at 06:30 AM.
02-18-2018, 08:18 AM   #22
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,735
It's sad we have to have these threads here. It's like DPReview with different colours.
02-18-2018, 09:47 AM - 1 Like   #23
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 495
I think that Pentax is missing a opportunity here. A smaller camera whether it is a Dslr or a mirrorless camera with improved features would be a commercial success for Pentax. If Pentax Ricoh would make a compact mid range camera (K-r, K-5, K-01, K-s1 size body with 2 control dials) with improved AF, better flash sync , better battery life, improved video features, has a WR body (either APS-C or Full Frame) that would sell well for Pentax. Those camera bodies that I mentioned are the same size or smaller than some micro four thirds camera bodies. They should update the optical formulas on the FA limited glass and make those lenses WR. The WR seals would also make the lenses quieter when auto focusing. They could also update the DA 40 and 70 and officially make those lenses Full Frame and WR as well. Smaller, lighter cameras people are willing to take with them more places. Bigger, heavier cameras get left at home more often.


Last edited by Vantage-Point; 02-18-2018 at 10:13 AM.
02-18-2018, 10:14 AM - 1 Like   #24
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 10,124
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
It's sad we have to have these threads here. It's like DPReview with different colours.
I'm completely OK with this thread, actually... everyone's being courteous, friendly and constructive. Differing opinions are good
02-18-2018, 11:23 AM - 1 Like   #25
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,763
Original Poster
Post 21 is a great rundown of practicality of the fun of adaptability,throw in the fact that Focal reducer/Speed booster style adapters(AF is emerging too) can make a lens set even more versatile.its fun with a capital FFFFF!

QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Differing opinions are good
Yes,we can always expect the glass half empty one!
02-18-2018, 03:55 PM - 1 Like   #26
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,735
QuoteOriginally posted by Vantage-Point Quote
I think that Pentax is missing a opportunity here. A smaller camera whether it is a Dslr or a mirrorless camera with improved features would be a commercial success for Pentax. If Pentax Ricoh would make a compact mid range camera (K-r, K-5, K-01, K-s1 size body with 2 control dials) with improved AF, better flash sync , better battery life, improved video features, has a WR body (either APS-C or Full Frame) that would sell well for Pentax. Those camera bodies that I mentioned are the same size or smaller than some micro four thirds camera bodies. They should update the optical formulas on the FA limited glass and make those lenses WR. The WR seals would also make the lenses quieter when auto focusing. They could also update the DA 40 and 70 and officially make those lenses Full Frame and WR as well. Smaller, lighter cameras people are willing to take with them more places. Bigger, heavier cameras get left at home more often.
I've argued against the viability of this in the past, but today I decided to measure the mount size of the Fuji X-Mount and rhe Pentax K mount. I turns out that the X-Mount is about 2 1/4 inches across the entire mount, the K Mount-is about 2 3/8 inches. What this means is that Pentax should be able to make an X-T1 sized body with a "new" mount that would be pretty much a K-Mount with short registration for a new series of lenses. Keep it as an APS-C format, and make a short extension tube adaptor for K-Mount lenses. Supply the adaptor in the kit.
They would need to have a reasonably complete series of lenses available at the time of introduction, or else no one would buy it as it wouldn't offer any advantage over the present series, some of which are pretty small already. There would be a disadvantage to keeping the K-Mount registration distance as that adds significantly to the depth of the body. In the picture below, look at how thick the adaptor is compared to the body.
The problem with small cameras is that they, by necessity, carry smaller batteries. Battery life is something to be very aware of with the Fuji cameras, much more so than with a full sized DSLR. The mirrorless camera is in live view all the time it is being used. On the X-T1, this can bring shots down to as little as 50 per battery, and even with very careful conservation, I don't think I have ever hit 250 shots on a battery. I've gotten as many as 1600 shots on one battery with a Pentax DSLR. However, this is a problem with the genre, so Pentax would be no different, but would probably still ruin the lives of a few people who think it should get more pictures per charge. It's something to think about when watching what you wish for.
Attached is a bit of camera porn showing you what should be possible.

Last edited by Wheatfield; 03-09-2018 at 09:44 AM.
02-18-2018, 04:08 PM   #27
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 10,124
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
I've argued against the viability of this in the past, but today I decided to measure the mount size of the Fuji X-Mount and rhe Pentax K mount. I turns out that the X-Mount is about 2 1/4 inches across the entire mount, the K Mount-is about 2 3/8 inches. What this means is that Pentax should be able to make an X-T1 sized body with a "new" mount that would be pretty much a K-Mount with short registration for a new series of lenses. Keep it as an APS-C format, and make a short extension tube adaptor for K-Mount lenses. Supply the adaptor in the kit.
Great post, Bill.

This is more-or-less what I've been suggesting for a while now... a new camera with short registration distance, and an adapter (you call it an extension tube - the end result is much the same) so that existing K-mount lenses can be used.

The only place you and I diverge here is the sensor format. Of course, I love the idea of an APS-C camera, as I'm quite heavily invested in DA glass, but I think both APS-C *and* full-frame are equally viable. It's already being done by Sony, and a combo of APS-C and full-frame cameras of this type from Pentax could grab a portion of sales from that market quite easily, IMHO.

As I posted earlier, my A7II plus LA-EA4 adapter is remarkably similar in dimensions and shape to a KP. It may not look quite as sleek and integrated, but that's just looks. It handles very well...

I don't think Pentax would need to offer a complete set of lenses at the outset... the advantage of being able to use a whole bunch of adapted lenses would be enough of a draw for many... but I do think the roadmap for providing native lenses would need to be aggressive. At a minimum, some space-saving primes and a compact, high quality variable aperture zoom would undoubtedly be needed at release. Something to show off the advantages of the form factor.

I agree about the battery life. For those that care (and I do), adding a battery grip is essential but straightforward. It negates some of the size advantage, but that's not really our main priority...

Last edited by BigMackCam; 02-18-2018 at 05:10 PM.
02-18-2018, 04:36 PM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 10,940
An APS-C only mount? Why should they repeat Fuji's mistake?
02-18-2018, 04:38 PM   #29
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 10,124
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
An APS-C only mount? Why should they repeat Fuji's mistake?
You had to go and say that, didn't you?
02-18-2018, 04:42 PM   #30
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,665
One little detail here: who would .purchase a Pentax MILC?? Pentax users are very conservative, as demonstrated by their dislike of "plastics"; I can imagine the complaining if the K-3ii were replaced by a K-03, for example. In recent years, Pentax hasn't dazzled anyone with their marketing to attract anyone other than current users. I would purchase a MILC priced under $1K ..... but they need many more sales.
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!
dslr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mirrorless sales collapsing worse than -30% in Japan the homecountry of mirrorless beholder3 Photographic Industry and Professionals 21 04-05-2017 04:58 AM
FF versus mirrorless Ric Pentax Mirrorless Cameras 43 02-23-2016 09:06 AM
Fastest Mirrorless AF versus D4s - surprise!!! philbaum Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 36 05-30-2014 03:47 PM
K-x Versus Q Versus Lumix TS3 knightzerox Pentax Q 9 10-09-2011 10:06 PM
1.4x TC + 55-300 versus 1.7x TC + 55-300 versus 55-300mm + cropping. Pentaxor Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 09-05-2009 02:41 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:11 PM. | 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