Some mirrorless options for Pentax

Started Aug 25, 2018 | Discussions thread
Barry Pearson
OP Barry Pearson Veteran Member • Posts: 8,723
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax

johnami wrote:

flektogon wrote:

I don't think that it would be wise for Pentax to come with a new mount. If an average Pentax user like myself (who likes the Pentax brand, but is not crazy in love with Pentax) wants to switch to a MILC, well, there are dozens of options already available from Sony, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, Canon and now even from Nikon. But Pentax in my opinion could improve their DSLR cameras to be smaller (if not lighter as well), closer to how the MILC look like. Especially the FF DSLR cameras should be smaller. Here I do not understand why for example the K-1 has to be such a monster. Why such a FF DSLR can't be like the K-3 for example? The K-3 "chamber" should be already large enough to accommodate the FF-sized sensor and mirror (if not, here Pentax should concentrate their effort), so I really I do not see any reason why the Pentax FF DSLR cameras can't be smaller. They don't need to have articulated LCD panels, I wouldn't mind if they didn't have any back LCD at all, as I do not use the LV mode. I think this is the way most suitable for Pentax.

I have to agree with you. Small is beautiful. Pentax had the technical skills to produce the smallest SLRs on the market (along with Olympus) when film was king.

Today's DSLRs are very different boxes, Electronic and complex. The new K 1 2 has a more complex mother board than the K1. All this stuff takes space.

Perhaps the next generation FF will be lighter, smaller and simpler. I would certainly welcome that.

If small is required, why use FF?

It is possible to shoot with an APS-C camera, crop, print at A3+, and put this in front of a judge with success. (I've done so with a Pentax K-5iiS).

If what is required is to enter a digital image competition, or upload to a web gallery, the same applies, probably more so.

FF is not some target sensor size that has to be aspired to. It is simply one of a whole range of possibilities that can be selected according to requirements.

The bigger the sensor, the greater the size, weight, and price, of the camera, inevitably. Larger raw files. Probably slower burst rates and buffer capacity. Perhaps the need for bigger batteries.

That applies to lenses as well as cameras. They tend to scale up rapidly with sensor size. And the bigger the sensor, typically the smaller the zoom-ratio on average. The larger the filters. (Etc).

Someone who is prepared to buy into all of that is likely to have expectations that won't be satisfied with a reduced-feature camera.

(I'm speaking as someone with m4/3, Q-mount, APS-C, and FF, equipment).

To take the mirrorless road with a new mount just to have a smaller body would be

an error IMO.

I want mirrorless, perhaps in just one APS-C or FF camera, because of the benefits I would have from not having to view via a mirror!

I sometimes spend hours on end shooting (hand-held) with a K-1ii plus battery grip plus D FA 150-450mm lens. As long as the combination is not much more than 3 kikograms, I'm not particularly concerned about the size and weight. (I need the exercise!)

My Lumix LX100 is my "carry everywhere" camera. And even a small camera like that can deliver surprisingly good photos.

 Barry Pearson's gear list:Barry Pearson's gear list
Ricoh WG-6 Panasonic LX100 Ricoh GR III Pentax K-7 Pentax K-3 II +27 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow