|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
04-04-2020, 02:16 AM
|
| |
There is nothing magical about a shorter registration distance that makes most of your lenses smaller. Or sharper. Canon could make a similarly sized and sharp 70-200 f2.8 for their EOS mount. They won't because they are now pushing their MILC mount, but the only lenses that are going to be smaller are lenses that are close to the registration distance -- that is to say, pretty wide angle lenses in the case of the new MILC mounts.
I suppose the other thing is that with the Z Mount and RP mount the mount is wide enough that they can do f1 primes and f2 zooms, but those aren't exactly small lenses.
I would say that there is a lot more processing going on behind the scenes to make MILC lenses appear sharp while keeping size small. We know that Sony does that, but my guess is that Canon is tweaking things a bit as well.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
04-03-2020, 08:49 AM
|
| |
I think biz-engineer is right. Maybe some of it has to do with lag and refresh rates, but a lot has to do with just having your eye really close to a screen. Some of us are more sensitive to that than others.
Beyond which, what everyone keeps saying is, "Well, this top end EVF in this really expensive camera is way better than those in the past and if you haven't tried it you can't really say you don't like them." But I don't really want to spend 3000 dollars on a camera (that gets worse battery life) just so I can get a semi-acceptable viewfinder that I still don't really like.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
04-03-2020, 03:24 AM
|
| |
I was speaking for myself and I shoot mainly landscapes and photos of my kids and neither one requires a silent shutter.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
04-03-2020, 03:00 AM
|
| |
Exactly. There is absolutely no indication that MILCs are cheaper than SLRs. There might be more profit per unit for the companies making them, but that certainly isn't passed along to the customers.
The reality is that every brand is trying to go upscale. If you can figure out how to sell a micro four thirds camera for 2600 dollars, that's what you do if you are Olympus.
Beyond all that, the only feature that I have seen that MILCs can do that SLRs don't do through the viewfinder (that I'm interested in) is eye AF. All of the rest of it is unnecessary clutter and features that may look great on a spreadsheet, but isn't something that I particularly want to use in real life shooting.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
04-02-2020, 10:08 AM
|
| |
I think odds are good that Ricoh would release any MILC products as Ricoh brand, particularly as it seems they are disinclined to release another K mount mirrorless.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
03-23-2020, 02:52 AM
|
| |
Let's just say that if Pentax invested the amount it would take to get an MILC with better tracking than their current cameras, along with super fast auto focus, top end EVF and no black out when shooting multiple frames they could have a really top end SLR that had all of those features too. The only feature that you probably can't get is eye AF shooting through the viewfinder.
If you've ever used a K-01 or an A7 then you know that these features are not necessarily innate features of MILCs and have only come because the brands have invested millions of dollars in updating them through multiple generations to bring them to where they are today. And if you don't need 20 fps frame rates, you can get awfully good performance from SLR cameras that matches similarly priced MILC performance.
I guess I keep coming back to the point that Ricoh seems to be willing to keep Pentax going as long as they don't burn through more money than what they (their not making money), the theta and GR cameras pull in. That isn't enough to think about launching a new mount -- even if joining with the existing L mount.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
03-21-2020, 03:01 AM
|
| |
Unfortunately, Nikon's results aren't particularly promising. They have sold some MILCs, but fewer than they had hoped and have had to discount things to do that. There is no indication that Ricoh could turn out something that would even compete with a Z6 from a technical standpoint, much less get a lens line up together.
Being the sixth or seven MILC company in the market feels like a recipe for disaster, but I am certainly not a prophet.
Edit: I should add that if there isn't a global recession due to COVID (making all new releases a moot point for awhile) I would be shocked.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
02-20-2020, 04:02 AM
|
| |
We can hash it a lot longer, but to me, unless Ricoh throws a bunch of money at Pentax they are going to continue in the same pattern they have been -- slow release of K mount gear, mostly focusing at this point on a single K mount SLR per year and a couple of full frame lenses.
The negatives for MILC development are pretty clear.
1. MILCs tend to emphasize things that Pentax has not done particularly well -- high frame rates, high end video, EVFs. To change this would take money.
2. Lens development has been very slow. Certainly Pentax could release a MILC with an adapter for K mount lenses, but the idea that their users would still be using that adapter to fill in the gaps in the year 2030 would be disheartening. Once again, this would take quite a bit more money than is currently allocated for R and D.
3. Most of the niches in the MILC market have already been targeted between Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji, Nikon, Canon, and Sony. Canon and Nikon have already discovered that simply releasing new MILCs is not a recipe for re-capturing lost sales.
4. The overall market is declining (both MILC and SLR). The idea of launching a new, expensive project right now could be the final straw that gets Ricoh to shutter things.
Pentax is in the situation of having a little bit of money from Theta and GR sales to work with, but they still need to make sure that each new item they release makes money. I suppose this is true for other brands, but it sure seems like Fuji and Olympus were willing to continue churning out cameras even if they didn't generate much income or even lost it (using Instax and endoscope moneys to make things work).
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
02-13-2020, 04:01 AM
|
| |
I don't see Pentax coming out with an MILC unless it would have a K mount -- basically a K-01 with better style and ergonomics and an EVF. That could work if the specs were there. True, it wouldn't be as thin as some of the other MILCs on the market, but there are plenty of chunky MILCs out there these days. The inability to buy lenses from shorter mounts and stick them on using an adapter is probably the biggest negative, but it would be negated (for Pentaxians) by being able to mount their lenses without an adapter and have them work out of the box.
I don't see Pentax coming out with a new mount, mainly for logistics reasons. Unless the camera market shifts dramatically, there just isn't money for them to create a new lens line up in any sort of decent time line. I know how people are complaining about the lack of full frame lenses and can't imagine if there was a new mount with one to two new lenses coming out per year. Technically they could join the L mount alliance, but it feels like the benefit to them would be minimal.
I will just add that there is a group of people who enjoy using optical viewfinders and find EVFs give them eye strain and headaches. I understand that those who don't have trouble with them don't understand this, but I am guessing that it is a sizable chunk of the market. If even 20 percent of photographers don't want to use EVFs for whatever reason, that is a nice segment of the market for Pentax to pursue and cater to, even as the other brands leave them behind.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
10-15-2018, 03:10 AM
|
| |
Actually, I am in favor of Pentax doing more mirrorless cameras. From a personal aspect I tend to get eye strain/headaches from all of the EVFs I've used, but hopefully I can figure that out over time. At the same time, with Pentax currently trying to support the K mount and medium format and working pretty hard to get new full frame K mount lenses out, I'm not sure if a new mount makes much sense for them.
As far as the viewfinder helps goes, it just isn't a big deal to me. I've shot long enough to know if I can get what I need from a scene and I can chimp pretty easily if I am unsure.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
09-23-2018, 11:28 AM
|
| |
Some for sure.
I thought the biggest draws were the ability to use all sorts of lenses due to the short registration distance and the smaller size that some mirrorless cameras have. Recently mirrorless has some very nice auto focus options like eye focus, but that is certainly not present on all models.
That said, as has been demonstrated elsewhere, mirrorless are growing a lot faster in Asia than in either North America or Europe. It is a mistake to think either that there is a huge shift to mirrorless or that most pros are dissatisfied with their SLRs. Some people have to have whatever is on the cutting edge, but for most people, they just want something that gets the job done and SLRs are as good as mirrorless in that respect.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
09-23-2018, 03:07 AM
|
| |
I know that on the Forum we are focused on viewfinders, but I have yet to be convinced that the "average Joe" cares about the viewfinder very much when he goes out to buy an ILC. Basically folks like that are looking for a camera that offers better image quality than their smartphone. Something that will do better in low light without flash or can use longer lenses so they can take photos at their kid's soccer games.
The whole EVF gives you the "results on the sensor" isn't true either. The EVF shows you what your out of camera jpeg will look like. That's all. But for anyone who shoots RAW and under exposes to protect the highlights, the end image is going to actually be quite different from what is shown in the EVF. Maybe I am just "too experienced" but at this point I don't really need the stuff that pops up in EVFs and like a cleaner interface with just basic exposure stuff showing. I know they are configurable, but if I'm going to configure it to match my OVF then what's the point?
|
