Reading mode: Light Dark

Mirrorless - do or die time now

Go to last post
Samsung, dead, with 2 mirrorless systems. Olympus barely turned around. Panasonic in trouble? Nikon 1 and Pentax Q, likely dead. Will Nikon's second attempt succeed? Don't open the champagne without even knowing what they're planning.

Going mirrorless is presented by its fans as the way to save the day, but it's not guaranteed to work. IMHO it would rather hurt Pentax than help, if done instead of completing the D FA lens line.

Alex
 
Alex Sarbu said:
Going mirrorless is presented by its fans as the way to save the day, but it's not guaranteed to work.
Click to expand...
Maybe true a year ago, but things change fast. The Sony A9 is a tipping point. We will have to wait a little till its capabilities filter down to the smaller sensor formats and then the benefits will be hard to argue against.
 
Model Mike said:
Agree, and I've lost patience waiting. It's not just the lack of investment in mirrorless, it's the lack of a coherent model range.

So I've decided to dip a toe into mirrorless with a Panasonic G80. If all goes well, it will eventually replace my K-70 / 55-300 PLM /16-85 kit. Reasons:
  • 30% weight and space saving, even with pro quality zooms.
Click to expand...
33% smaller sensor - 30% smaller size and 30% less weight - if this is important for you, why not taking the next step towards Pentax Q?

The reduction in sensor size is not just linked to more noise, but also less contrast range, less resolution, less options for cropping and less options for a small DOF.

The price for a 16 MP camera is high in my eyes.

Try it - and if you don't like it I would be glad to see you soon with K3iii ;-)

Best regards

Holger
Model Mike said:
  • Potentially better continuous AF and tracking.
  • Ricoh long term outlook does not encourage continued investment
Yes, it's a smaller sensor. On the other hand, focusing is consistently spot on, and the availability of fast, high quality glass means that there's still a good degree of DoF control. And people are getting good results from MFT and enjoy shooting with it.

It's early days, but it's going to be an interesting ride.

--
Mike
http://flickr.com/photos/rc-soar
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Meh. Speak for yourself. I moved from a K-5 IIs to a G85 and couldn't be happier. Granted, I moved from one 16 MP camera to another, but the point I'm trying to make is that IQ wasn't the limiting factor in my shooting. If it had been, I'd be shooting a K-1 right now.

The small IQ penalty is a fair tradeoff for the vast benefits of AF capability & accuracy, size & weight, lens selection, video and overall flexibility. Looking at my gallery, I can't see an appreciable difference between my K-5 IIs shots and G85 shots.

--
https://www.youtube.com/user/derekaggs11
 
Last edited:
Model Mike said:
Model Mike said:
Going mirrorless is presented by its fans as the way to save the day, but it's not guaranteed to work.
Click to expand...
Maybe true a year ago, but things change fast. The Sony A9 is a tipping point. We will have to wait a little till its capabilities filter down to the smaller sensor formats and then the benefits will be hard to argue against.
Click to expand...
It's not just the Sony A9. That one has got all the publicity, but new-ish cameras like the Olympus E-M1.2 or the Panasonic GH5 do roughly the same in different fields. A gap has opened up across the board in the past year, I think, and the tech will be filtering down by the end of 2018. Hence I suspect the sudden increase in interest in mirrorless expressed by Canon and now Nikon.
 
Holger Bargen said:
Holger Bargen wrote:
33% smaller sensor - 30% smaller size and 30% less weight - if this is important for you, why not taking the next step towards Pentax Q?
Click to expand...
Somehow I don't think that's a serious question :) But just in case: the Pentax Q doesn't offer an acceptable compromise between size and image quality.
Holger Bargen said:
Try it - and if you don't like it I would be glad to see you soon with K3iii ;-)
Click to expand...
If the K-3iii ever comes to market, it's likely to be too big for my purposes. All this kit has to fit in a backpack along with other equipment. The K-5/K-70 form factor was acceptable until now, but I need something smaller.

I'm looking forward to exploring the G80's capabilities. I have a good feeling because it's surprised a lot of people who've downsized from APS-C - and even full frame.

Perhaps I'll post a report after it's has some frames behind it.

--
Mike
http://flickr.com/photos/rc-soar
 
Last edited:
OlyPent said:
I hope they don't rush it. The D500 took ages to release but it least it isn't suffering from the problems their other cameras have.
Click to expand...
Just by the nature of less components, mirrorless camera should have a shorter product development cycle. In addition I think the work done on the half-baked DL line should have laid a solid ground for a fast-track APS-C mirrorless product.
 
Model Mike said:
Model Mike said:
Going mirrorless is presented by its fans as the way to save the day, but it's not guaranteed to work.
Click to expand...
Maybe true a year ago, but things change fast. The Sony A9 is a tipping point. We will have to wait a little till its capabilities filter down to the smaller sensor formats and then the benefits will be hard to argue against.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but what's the connection between Sony introducing its A9 and mirrorless being guaranteed to work? IMHO: none. If anything, it only adds to the technological challenges Ricoh would have to face, if attempting a new mirrorless line.

Also, the A9 doesn't have the potential to kill the DSLRs (I can't understand why MILC fans are always pushing lack of choice as being somehow better...). It's still catching up.

I'm afraid this qualifies as kettle logic used in support of mirrorless.

Alex
 
Last edited:
Alex Sarbu said:
I'm sorry, but what's the connection between Sony introducing its A9 and mirrorless being guaranteed to work? I
Click to expand...
The A9 demonstrates how mirrorless cameras are challenging and even overtaking conventional dSLRs in areas which used to be their sole preserve. Like continuous shooting. The A9 can do this without blanking the viewfinder - this is impossible with conventional dSLRs.

And while dSLRs have physical limits to size and capability, mirrorless will continue to develop. The writing is very firmly on the wall for the conventional dSLR, it just needs some will from the big boys to embrace the technology before they get left behind.
 
Batdude said:
it would be ridiculous if Ricoh came out with a FF mirrorless and still no Updated FF lenses. If they haven't done so for their K1 why on earth would they build and try to sell another "incomplete" system?
Click to expand...
It is a chick-n-egg thing and you have to start somewhere. MILC actually presents Ricoh a perfect opportunity to reboot its camera business. Build the camera body with a new non-K lens mount and a few essential starter lenses. Provide a lens adapter to bridge the lens transition from K-mount to the new mount. Eventually Ricoh will the lens demand to justify the lens expansion for the new mount. Ricoh needs to get the baggage of film-day lenses off its back to have a health camera business in the future.
 
Model Mike said:
And while dSLRs have physical limits to size and capability, mirrorless will continue to develop. The writing is very firmly on the wall for the conventional dSLR, it just needs some will from the big boys to embrace the technology before they get left behind.
Click to expand...
The two biggest boys are now realized that they need a foot on the MILC bandwagon to maintain its position.
 
Model Mike said:
Alex Sarbu said:
I'm sorry, but what's the connection between Sony introducing its A9 and mirrorless being guaranteed to work? I
Click to expand...
The A9 demonstrates how mirrorless cameras are challenging and even overtaking conventional dSLRs in areas which used to be their sole preserve. Like continuous shooting. The A9 can do this without blanking the viewfinder - this is impossible with conventional dSLRs.
Click to expand...
Yes, with the A9 the mirrorless cameras are becoming more competitive. But, I can clearly see how you're completely ignoring my question ;-)

The more you praise the A9, the more you're actually telling us how risky it would be to compete against such a camera.

Or perhaps it's Sony for whom mirrorless must work, not Ricoh Imaging? An easy way of killing a competitor - make him play by your own rule, then crush it because you have the advantage? ;-)
Model Mike said:
And while dSLRs have physical limits to size and capability, mirrorless will continue to develop. The writing is very firmly on the wall for the conventional dSLR,
Click to expand...
That's FUD; you folks are trying to "kill" the MILC competitors' - to kill the choice different than yours - with propaganda.

I'd rather see DSLRs evolving past (some of) their limitations.
Model Mike said:
it just needs some will from the big boys to embrace the technology before they get left behind.
Click to expand...
Why would you want that?

Alex
 
Remember people claiming how it was "way too late" for a FF? Yet the K-1 is a successful product. 9 years after Nikon, 14 years after Canon, and 14 years after Kodak; it was late for sure, but not too late.

Same for a MILC system. OMG, if they won't do it now it would be too late! No, it wouldn't.

Alex
 
Model Mike said:
Model Mike said:
Holger Bargen wrote:
33% smaller sensor - 30% smaller size and 30% less weight - if this is important for you, why not taking the next step towards Pentax Q?
Click to expand...
Somehow I don't think that's a serious question :) But just in case: the Pentax Q doesn't offer an acceptable compromise between size and image quality.
Model Mike said:
Try it - and if you don't like it I would be glad to see you soon with K3iii ;-)
Click to expand...
If the K-3iii ever comes to market, it's likely to be too big for my purposes. All this kit has to fit in a backpack along with other equipment. The K-5/K-70 form factor was acceptable until now, but I need something smaller.

I'm looking forward to exploring the G80's capabilities. I have a good feeling because it's surprised a lot of people who've downsized from APS-C - and even full frame.
Click to expand...
If size and weight is important for you I think that you are on a good way. I remember an AF test in a German photo magazine - a test with controlled conditions and objects moing as certain speed towards the camera - and a Panasonic camera (GH5) was the winner - and Nikon second and Canon and Pentax in the middle - and Leica at the last place.

I need IQ - resolution is important for me as I do a lot macro photography where details matter - and I do a lot of cropping. For my job I often have to take photos of small things and we have to count them - for all these tasks 16MP is simply not enough. Thus, MFT would be not my coup of tea ...

But I don't think that it would be wise for Pentax to enter this field, too. The have good cameras at half format and FF as well as APS-C. All of these systems could be better equipped with lenses and other parts of gear (e.g. distance rings which keep functions of the lenses).

Of course, there is a market for MFT sized cameras - but we have a few good systems in this sector - and I don't think we would need another one.

Best regards

Holger
Model Mike said:
Perhaps I'll post a report after it's has some frames behind it.

--
Mike
http://flickr.com/photos/rc-soar
Click to expand...
 
I do have CIPA bookmarked. I look at the data for the USA only. Its never proven me wrong with ILC, well it did slightly. I always said in the USA everyone knows what a real PROcamera looks like. A Pentax flagship APC/FF with battery grip is one nice camera system. If I am going to spend over a $1000 or $2000, I want it to look like I did. Bigger is better. Typical USA stuff. But younger buyers in their 20s or 30s may like mirrorless.

It is a bit odd to have a big 300mm prime ff lens on a mirrorless ff body or worse APC body.

Pentax has a nice niche market who sees it value. The K3II can take landscape or other static pictures with FF quality. The K1 can take the same with medium format IQ and both have a lot of features and value. Review sites are in the business of selling cameras never forget that. Pentax dSLRs have been very reliable as well. Plus there just the right size!

Think of it, a camera that rivals MF with static scenes. And only Pentax can do it. Pentax has stayed around for a reason.
 
jamesm007 said:
I do have CIPA bookmarked. I look at the data for the USA only. Its never proven me wrong with ILC, well it did slightly. I always said in the USA everyone knows what a real PROcamera looks like. A Pentax flagship APC/FF with battery grip is one nice camera system. If I am going to spend over a $1000 or $2000, I want it to look like I did. Bigger is better. Typical USA stuff. But younger buyers in their 20s or 30s may like mirrorless.

It is a bit odd to have a big 300mm prime ff lens on a mirrorless ff body or worse APC body.
Click to expand...
Major size changes for a 300mm lens of a specific speed are basically impossible, no matter what sensor is used. A 300mm f/4.0 lens has to be a certain size as does a 300mm f/2.8, no way around it.
 
jamesm007 said:
I do have CIPA bookmarked. I look at the data for the USA only. Its never proven me wrong with ILC, well it did slightly. I always said in the USA everyone knows what a real PROcamera looks like. A Pentax flagship APC/FF with battery grip is one nice camera system. If I am going to spend over a $1000 or $2000, I want it to look like I did. Bigger is better. Typical USA stuff. But younger buyers in their 20s or 30s may like mirrorless.

It is a bit odd to have a big 300mm prime ff lens on a mirrorless ff body or worse APC body.
Click to expand...
Interesting, though we used to traipse about in the wild with a Tamron 60-300 adaptall + 2X multiplier mounted on a tiny ME Super and didn't think much about it being odd. The ME Super can't be much larger than a Sony mirrorless perhaps a bit smaller. I guess the RGB sensor, SR cradle, LV monitor and sensor stack make the DSLR larger today.
jamesm007 said:
Pentax has a nice niche market who sees it value. The K3II can take landscape or other static pictures with FF quality. The K1 can take the same with medium format IQ and both have a lot of features and value. Review sites are in the business of selling cameras never forget that. Pentax dSLRs have been very reliable as well. Plus there just the right size!

Think of it, a camera that rivals MF with static scenes. And only Pentax can do it. Pentax has stayed around for a reason.

--
jamesm007, Pentax K5, K20D
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesm007/
http://s195.photobucket.com/albums/z77/jamesm700/
Click to expand...
 
Petroglyph said:
jamesm007 said:
I do have CIPA bookmarked. I look at the data for the USA only. Its never proven me wrong with ILC, well it did slightly. I always said in the USA everyone knows what a real PROcamera looks like. A Pentax flagship APC/FF with battery grip is one nice camera system. If I am going to spend over a $1000 or $2000, I want it to look like I did. Bigger is better. Typical USA stuff. But younger buyers in their 20s or 30s may like mirrorless.

It is a bit odd to have a big 300mm prime ff lens on a mirrorless ff body or worse APC body.
Click to expand...
Interesting, though we used to traipse about in the wild with a Tamron 60-300 adaptall + 2X multiplier mounted on a tiny ME Super and didn't think much about it being odd. The ME Super can't be much larger than a Sony mirrorless perhaps a bit smaller. I guess the RGB sensor, SR cradle, LV monitor and sensor stack make the DSLR larger today.
Petroglyph said:
Pentax has a nice niche market who sees it value. The K3II can take landscape or other static pictures with FF quality. The K1 can take the same with medium format IQ and both have a lot of features and value. Review sites are in the business of selling cameras never forget that. Pentax dSLRs have been very reliable as well. Plus there just the right size!

Think of it, a camera that rivals MF with static scenes. And only Pentax can do it. Pentax has stayed around for a reason.

--
jamesm007, Pentax K5, K20D
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesm007/
http://s195.photobucket.com/albums/z77/jamesm700/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I used ILC as mirrorless. Mirrorless look....

That lens is about the size of the Pentax DA55-300mm, but more heavy being metal.

Lens for FF digital cameras have to be larger because the sensor wants light to hit them, not from an angle but straight on. APS sensors need lens about the size of older FF film lens. APS was perfect IMO. FF digital need larger lens than the old FF film lens. Unless you use digital aberration control then you can make them a bit smaller. But...

--
jamesm007, Pentax K5, K20D
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jamesm007/
http://s195.photobucket.com/albums/z77/jamesm700/
 
Last edited:
John Michael Winterbourne said:
That link provides about as much information as a picture of a black cat in an unlit cellar taken with a camera that doesn't do high ISO.
Click to expand...
Exactly. And, as I have written in this thread, it is more likely a smartphone adapted 1" system camera. Which is "mirrorless".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top