-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Mirrorless - do or die time now
- Thread starter rwl408
- Start date
James O'Neill
Veteran Member
Conversely the K1 is the biggest, heaviest (non-medium format) camera pentax have ever made. They do need to look at their heritage and make small light bodies with great ergonomics. One option for a mirrorless K Mount is to have the mount retract when the camera is off, but this isn't a trivial thing to do if you have a heavy lens attached.
Actually Mirrorless here could be an advantage, because it offers a chance to make a clean break from SAFOX rather than constantly trying to evolve it. I know some sony sensors have on chip PDAF, so that is a possible step forward.
Once burnt twice shy ? Was the Q a bad user experience because it was too , was its image quality too poor, or did it just lack lenses ? The K-01 had lenses but was too big.
What both proved is just saying "look no mirror" doesn't guarantee sales.
It's really just lenses. Either they keep K-Mount, which means building round the current mirror box dimensions - just without the mirror and prism (see K-01) or they introduce a new mount. A new mount with a K adapter is a bad solution. The worst solution of all would be a K1 chassis with an EVF.
Unfortunately (and I very truly mean unfortunately), it is not - in the sense that other manufacturers are making progress and Pentax is standing still. Neither K-1, nor K-70, nor KP saw any improvement in AF-S or AF-C over the K-3(II).
And, yes, I know of many examples of "good AF-C performance" on moving targets published here - but I do not know of a single one that wasn't a real test (i.e. the subject moved parallel to the focal plane) or was based of under critical focus estimation (i.e. close inspection showed that the things claimed to be in focus actually weren't).
But let's not hijack this thread. I just answered because the word "lie" did not seem to be appropriate to me in a discussion like this.
I have the K-01, the mirrorless camera that did not succeed and I doubt that I will ever buy a non-mirrorless again. My K-01 has good battery life, top-notch focus accuracy (autofocus + MF with focus peaking) and it's silent. I also bought an eBay loupe that you can stick to the LCD screen (via a magnet). It adds to the size but it's so cheap that you can always carry it with you and not worry. It's a big help on sunny days and you just take it off and put it on again with two fingers.
My K-01 is bulky for a mirrorless (but I don't care), its focus speed is comparable to my Ds (not good), the interface is sometimes inconvenient (e.g. the histograms, the directions on the wheel).
But if Pentax would update it with modern technology ... an electronic viewfinder, although that would add considerably to the cost of course ..., a higher resolution LCD screen (focus peaking etc.), better AF speed, ergonomics in line with other Pentax camera's, then I'd buy that update, even if it's bulky (preferably because of the battery).
But for me the most important advantage of mirrorless is focusing accuracy. I can take f/1.4 pictures with my FA 50mm and not worry too much (although it's still a hit-and-miss because of this moving world). And I can buy a Sigma lens and not worry either.
My K-01 is bulky for a mirrorless (but I don't care), its focus speed is comparable to my Ds (not good), the interface is sometimes inconvenient (e.g. the histograms, the directions on the wheel).
But if Pentax would update it with modern technology ... an electronic viewfinder, although that would add considerably to the cost of course ..., a higher resolution LCD screen (focus peaking etc.), better AF speed, ergonomics in line with other Pentax camera's, then I'd buy that update, even if it's bulky (preferably because of the battery).
But for me the most important advantage of mirrorless is focusing accuracy. I can take f/1.4 pictures with my FA 50mm and not worry too much (although it's still a hit-and-miss because of this moving world). And I can buy a Sigma lens and not worry either.
bladerunner6
Leading Member
There is a world of difference in not expanding a relatively mature line-up and support ending. Tamron and Sigma both make a variety of lenses for Pentax as versus none for Fuji and only a smattering for M43. Please try to remember that just saying something does not make it true.
"Getting Worse"? The performance of cameras already made and sold are getting worse? That is not possible. Please try to remember that just saying something does not make it true.
Please provide a reliable source for this. Thank you.
Currency fluctuations affect a lot of businesses.
They sold the 645 before the Pro Service and they continue to sell it afterwards.
The roadmap is being fulfilled. In fact, they have even exceeded the roadmap at times by adding lenses that were not on it like the 18-50 RE and the 55-300 RE. When was the last time Fuji or a M43 manufacturer exceeded their roadmap? That should be easy for Fuji since they have such a tiny lens lineup.
"Lenses outdated" is a vague and very subjective term. If I can use the lenses on my camera to take good images then they really aren't outdated by that standard.
Alex Sarbu
Forum Pro
Of course Ricoh would not just come out and declare its camera business is going south outright. But the indicators are there. Ricoh bought Pentax for about 10 billion yen and has to write off 3.9 billion yen in goodwill impairment after 6 years. Then there is another 3.7 billion yen charge for impairment of property, plant and equipment and intangible assets at camera business. Of course part of the second charge applies to the Ricoh (sub-)division. It will be hard to convince anyone that Ricoh's camera business is make money. You can say all the positive words but the numbers don't lie.
How about higher profit margin per unit?
Mark Ransom
Veteran Member
If you accept that anyone buying a mirrorless could have bought a DSLR instead, then they're most definitely fighting each other. Wishful thinking to pretend otherwise.
DDoram
Forum Pro
I would also buy a good mirrorless with full K mount like K01 but with an excellent EVF and AF improvements. Even with the K mount, it would be smaller and lighter than DSLRs. I agree with Thom Hogan, that both Canon and Nikon are likely looking at the FF mirrorless with native mounts as why ditch all those lenses. Same rationale goes for Pentax. The K01 was a failure because it was not a well executed camera; it has great IQ and is fun to use. With an EVF and good AF, I would get a K1M in an instant.
Dale
Dale
Alex Sarbu
Forum Pro
Perhaps MILC fans realize those DSLRs can't be obliterated so easily, so they're spreading FUD and misinformation to "help" the process (the stuff about going south and financial reports... if I call it for what it is, this post will be deleted).
They're as trusty as a CR1-rated rumor.
Alex
Holger Bargen
Veteran Member
Think about how long it took to get the FF K1.
Was it to late? Don't think so.
New lenses would be more important for the Pentax system.
I would not need a mirrorless camera. Don't even know why some people prefer it.
If it is the EVF I could imagine that Pentax offers an external one you can link to the camera or put it on your glasses. This way seems to be more useful for me instead of replacing the mirrorbox and the prism.
And regarding the size the flange of Pentax lenses is designed in a way to keep the lenses short - but you have more distance between mount and sensor layer within the camera. For this reason Pentax cameras with K-mount will never be as thin as Sony mirrorless cameras - but the lenses are shorter and this is more important for your camera bag.
Best regards
Holger
Was it to late? Don't think so.
New lenses would be more important for the Pentax system.
I would not need a mirrorless camera. Don't even know why some people prefer it.
If it is the EVF I could imagine that Pentax offers an external one you can link to the camera or put it on your glasses. This way seems to be more useful for me instead of replacing the mirrorbox and the prism.
And regarding the size the flange of Pentax lenses is designed in a way to keep the lenses short - but you have more distance between mount and sensor layer within the camera. For this reason Pentax cameras with K-mount will never be as thin as Sony mirrorless cameras - but the lenses are shorter and this is more important for your camera bag.
Best regards
Holger
What about a KP mirrorless like instead of the k01style.
If they keep kp design with no mirror adding a good EVF and good AF then I would buy it.keep the k mount plz.
DDoram
Forum Pro
Since I now shoot FF a KP style mirrorless would not be for me but is something for Ricoh to consider. Unfortunately, given the tight margins in the camera bussiness and Ricohs financial position, it may not happen soon.
Dale
Dale
DDoram
Forum Pro
Hi Alex:
While DSLRs will continue into the forseeable future, mirrorless (Oly, Panny, Fuji) have eaten into the overall market share over the past 8-9 years. Given the low margins in the camera business, why would not a company pursue simpler and lower cost designs. I like DSLR, but as am in the older demographic, that does not appear to be the future direction that the younger generation may want.
Dale
While DSLRs will continue into the forseeable future, mirrorless (Oly, Panny, Fuji) have eaten into the overall market share over the past 8-9 years. Given the low margins in the camera business, why would not a company pursue simpler and lower cost designs. I like DSLR, but as am in the older demographic, that does not appear to be the future direction that the younger generation may want.
Dale
noel2
Senior Member
Mirrorless does have many advantages, one of them being shooting in low light.
But, speaking as a predominantly landscape photographer - and having used my Sony A7II before the K-1 became available - I still prefer an optical viewfinder. The mirrorless viewfinder was always difficult to use in brightly lit snowy surroundings, and pointing and framing was often a matter of guesswork in those conditions.
Battery drain is also an important factor of the mirrorless viewfinder.
But, speaking as a predominantly landscape photographer - and having used my Sony A7II before the K-1 became available - I still prefer an optical viewfinder. The mirrorless viewfinder was always difficult to use in brightly lit snowy surroundings, and pointing and framing was often a matter of guesswork in those conditions.
Battery drain is also an important factor of the mirrorless viewfinder.
Alex Sarbu
Forum Pro
Do they? Or rather, MILCs found their place on the market alongside DSLRs?
That's a good point, however it reveals an issue: the mirrorless advantage is often for the companies, than for their users.
I've seen Sony being praised for using a simple, very efficient construction (revealed by LensRentals' teardowns). Yes, that's a cost saver... OTOH none of my DSLRs required a 3rd-party reinforced lens mount. The K-1 was even showcased as supporting a 3Kg lens, held by its back LCD.
There is an interesting discussion on the other forum; it turns out quite a few people can't comfortably use EVFs. Me included.
The younger generation might accept eye strain/fatigue and lag and smearing because they won't know it doesn't have to be that way. I'd rather have them make an informed choice; MILC fans would rather have them go MILC no matter what.
Alex
audiobomber
Veteran Member
Don't you get tired of coming here, year after year, to tell us that Pentax is Doomed!?
I sure am looking forward to that K-3 III.
--
Dan
I sure am looking forward to that K-3 III.
--
Dan
Last edited:
Alex Sarbu
Forum Pro
Indeed. It was/is a successful product, so it can't possible be too late.
Sure, it was better if they managed to launch it earlier, but... Hoya and stuff.
100% agree. I'm waiting for the new primes, especially a wide angle as I don't quite want to lug the 15-30 around.
Alex
DSLRs will exist in the future, could be forever, but only in the professional market that Ricoh can't join. (Hint: AF).
Depending on where the rumor is coming from.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum