Some mirrorless options for Pentax

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

DiffractionLtd wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

DiffractionLtd wrote:

Why does this have to be so radical? KEEP the existing Pentax K mount and make a mirrorless camera with a shorter registration distance!!

What lenses would be used with it?

Are you including an adapter with the offering so that existing K-mount lenses can be used?

(If so, you are describing a variant of what I called "Option 3: New mount for mirrorless cameras". Where "New mount" means "simply a shorter registration distance").

Yes, that's it. Making a whole new mount is pointless.

My first thought is that what you are suggesting would have low design and development cost, and share existing components during manufacture.

 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
Barry Pearson
OP Barry Pearson Veteran Member • Posts: 8,723
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax

Fogel70 wrote:

DiffractionLtd wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

DiffractionLtd wrote:

Why does this have to be so radical? KEEP the existing Pentax K mount and make a mirrorless camera with a shorter registration distance!!

What lenses would be used with it?

Are you including an adapter with the offering so that existing K-mount lenses can be used?

(If so, you are describing a variant of what I called "Option 3: New mount for mirrorless cameras". Where "New mount" means "simply a shorter registration distance").

Yes, that's it. Making a whole new mount is pointless.

There are many points of making a new mount as a short register distance mount have to be designed differently to best support short register distance lenses. A larger mount would be better as short register distance lenses have large rear lens elements. K-mount is not large enough for this.

See my post above:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61554148

I believe a lens with rear elements of about 30mm diameter could fit within the body of a mirrorless K-mount camera. That is quite a substantial proportion of the 44mm image circle of an FF lens.

Mirrorless lenses will not use screw drive or mechanical aperture control, so why fit them in the camera with an added cost? Would it even be room to fit them in a short register distance mount?

Those are good points. My measurements (at the link above) were based on the D FA* 50mm f/1.4 lens.

The screw drive and mechanical aperture control have to be fitted in the adapter for those wanting to adapt AF K-mount lenses. For those adapting manual focus lenses do not need adapter with screw drive and aperture control.

Why re-used the extra complexity of having electrical connectors on the mount surface? For mirrorless new a brand new communication protocol will be introduced between camera and lens. So new pibs will probably gave to be introduced. With a larger mirrorless mount the connector will be designed like on 645-mount or Q-mount for less complexity.

Re-using K-mount will only introduce extra cost and complexity, and will cripple lens design for a mirrorless system.

I think it would be cheaper to design and develop, and it could share existing components in manufacturing. (And it wouldn't risk alienating existing users of Pentax K-mount cameras who have a substantial investment in K-mount lenses).

It obviously wouldn't cripple lens design for longer lenses! 
Whether it would significantly impact lens design for wide angle lenses depends on how much of a constraint that "30mm rear elements with a 35mm tube" would be. (Assuming that is the real constraint).

 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
Alex Sarbu Forum Pro • Posts: 10,200
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax

DiffractionLtd wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

DiffractionLtd wrote:

Why does this have to be so radical? KEEP the existing Pentax K mount and make a mirrorless camera with a shorter registration distance!!

What lenses would be used with it?

Are you including an adapter with the offering so that existing K-mount lenses can be used?

(If so, you are describing a variant of what I called "Option 3: New mount for mirrorless cameras". Where "New mount" means "simply a shorter registration distance").

Yes, that's it. Making a whole new mount is pointless.

That is a new mount. The K-mount specification includes the registration distance - change that, and you have a different mount.

The issue with a new mount is not designing it, but the need for new lenses.

And, if Ricoh would have a new mount, they will want it to resemble Nikon Z rather than the narrow K.

Alex

 Alex Sarbu's gear list:Alex Sarbu's gear list
Ricoh GR III Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax K-1 II Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 70mm F2.4 AL Limited +8 more
Barry Pearson
OP Barry Pearson Veteran Member • Posts: 8,723
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax

Alex Sarbu wrote:

DiffractionLtd wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

DiffractionLtd wrote:

Why does this have to be so radical? KEEP the existing Pentax K mount and make a mirrorless camera with a shorter registration distance!!

What lenses would be used with it?

Are you including an adapter with the offering so that existing K-mount lenses can be used?

(If so, you are describing a variant of what I called "Option 3: New mount for mirrorless cameras". Where "New mount" means "simply a shorter registration distance").

Yes, that's it. Making a whole new mount is pointless.

That is a new mount. The K-mount specification includes the registration distance - change that, and you have a different mount.

Yes. I made that point above. It is "Option 3", while copying much of the design and development of the existing K-mount.

The issue with a new mount is not designing it, but the need for new lenses.

With my "Option 2", there are already the existing K-mount lenses.

New lenses that exploit the benefits of not having a mirror to be avoided could be introduced over time. They wouldn't have to exist on first release of such a camera.

(The same applies to "Option 3" with an adapter)

Think of the next consultation!

 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
Alex Sarbu Forum Pro • Posts: 10,200
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax
1

Barry Pearson wrote:

Alex Sarbu wrote:

DiffractionLtd wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

DiffractionLtd wrote:

Why does this have to be so radical? KEEP the existing Pentax K mount and make a mirrorless camera with a shorter registration distance!!

What lenses would be used with it?

Are you including an adapter with the offering so that existing K-mount lenses can be used?

(If so, you are describing a variant of what I called "Option 3: New mount for mirrorless cameras". Where "New mount" means "simply a shorter registration distance").

Yes, that's it. Making a whole new mount is pointless.

That is a new mount. The K-mount specification includes the registration distance - change that, and you have a different mount.

Yes. I made that point above. It is "Option 3", while copying much of the design and development of the existing K-mount.

Yes it is, I'm just stressing out that it makes no sense to reuse the narrow K-mount (even a full electric version of it) as a basis for a new mount. They'd be making their job much more difficult this way.

Was it the Sigma CEO who said about Sony FE, that it's too narrow so lens design is quite difficult? Nikon knew to avoid this problem.

And few years ago, a Pentax Ricoh official said that if they'd make a mirrorless, they'd want to have a large diameter mount.

Alex

 Alex Sarbu's gear list:Alex Sarbu's gear list
Ricoh GR III Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax K-1 II Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 70mm F2.4 AL Limited +8 more
Fogel70
Fogel70 Senior Member • Posts: 1,302
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax

Barry Pearson wrote:

Fogel70 wrote:

DiffractionLtd wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

DiffractionLtd wrote:

Why does this have to be so radical? KEEP the existing Pentax K mount and make a mirrorless camera with a shorter registration distance!!

What lenses would be used with it?

Are you including an adapter with the offering so that existing K-mount lenses can be used?

(If so, you are describing a variant of what I called "Option 3: New mount for mirrorless cameras". Where "New mount" means "simply a shorter registration distance").

Yes, that's it. Making a whole new mount is pointless.

There are many points of making a new mount as a short register distance mount have to be designed differently to best support short register distance lenses. A larger mount would be better as short register distance lenses have large rear lens elements. K-mount is not large enough for this.

See my post above:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61554148

I believe a lens with rear elements of about 30mm diameter could fit within the body of a mirrorless K-mount camera. That is quite a substantial proportion of the 44mm image circle of an FF lens.

It is not only the rear lens element that would habe to be fitted inside the protruding tube. Several lens elements with lens fittings and focus mechanism would have to be fitted inside which will limit the image circle to less tham 30 mm.

Ideally a rear element very close to the sensor would have to cover the whole image circle so the the light hit the sensor in a straight angle. I believe this is what Nikon has planned with the new Z mount.

For DSLR lenses the rear element can be smaller as there is a long distance to the sensor. So 30mm is enough for a DSLR lenss but on mirrorless it risk creating problems and may only be enough for APS-C. I believe that is the problem for Sony on FF as they have the same sized mount as K-mount. Although they has less parts inside the mount that limit rear element size.

Mirrorless lenses will not use screw drive or mechanical aperture control, so why fit them in the camera with an added cost? Would it even be room to fit them in a short register distance mount?

Those are good points. My measurements (at the link above) were based on the D FA* 50mm f/1.4 lens.

The screw drive and mechanical aperture control have to be fitted in the adapter for those wanting to adapt AF K-mount lenses. For those adapting manual focus lenses do not need adapter with screw drive and aperture control.

Why re-used the extra complexity of having electrical connectors on the mount surface? For mirrorless new a brand new communication protocol will be introduced between camera and lens. So new pibs will probably gave to be introduced. With a larger mirrorless mount the connector will be designed like on 645-mount or Q-mount for less complexity.

Re-using K-mount will only introduce extra cost and complexity, and will cripple lens design for a mirrorless system.

I think it would be cheaper to design and develop, and it could share existing components in manufacturing. (And it wouldn't risk alienating existing users of Pentax K-mount cameras who have a substantial investment in K-mount lenses).

The design on the mechanical mount is a couple of hours work after they decided what specification it should have. The problem with K-mount is that it is combined electrical and mechanical interface and include a lot of extra features not needed on a mirrorless all electrical mount.

The real extra cost is that the K-mount require extra components and extra assembly time on each produced camera.

It obviously wouldn't cripple lens design for longer lenses!
Whether it would significantly impact lens design for wide angle lenses depends on how much of a constraint that "30mm rear elements with a 35mm tube" would be. (Assuming that is the real constraint).

On many wide angle lenses for mirrorless the rear lens element is larger than the front lens lement. But the camera need a lens mount that support this, FI like MFT, Fuji and now Nikon do. And it is only Nikon that has large enough mount to support this design on FF.

Fuji X use same sized mount as K-mount but for them it is only large enough for APS-C.

 Fogel70's gear list:Fogel70's gear list
Samsung GX-10 Pentax K-7 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony a7 Pentax K-3 II +17 more
Barry Pearson
OP Barry Pearson Veteran Member • Posts: 8,723
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax

Fogel70 wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

Fogel70 wrote:

.... There are many points of making a new mount as a short register distance mount have to be designed differently to best support short register distance lenses. A larger mount would be better as short register distance lenses have large rear lens elements. K-mount is not large enough for this.

See my post above:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61554148

I believe a lens with rear elements of about 30mm diameter could fit within the body of a mirrorless K-mount camera. That is quite a substantial proportion of the 44mm image circle of an FF lens.

It is not only the rear lens element that would habe to be fitted inside the protruding tube. Several lens elements with lens fittings and focus mechanism would have to be fitted inside which will limit the image circle to less tham 30 mm.

Did you really mean "image circle" in that statement?
Not "rear element diameter"?

Ideally a rear element very close to the sensor would have to cover the whole image circle so the the light hit the sensor in a straight angle. I believe this is what Nikon has planned with the new Z mount.

Are Nikon intending to have a rear element for their ultra-wide lenses of 44mm diameter, which is the FF image circle diameter? (Or 1.7 inches in old money?)

I would like to see evidence for that!

And, of course, the image typically doesn't emerge as parallel lines from the rear of a photographic lens. I found plenty of counter-examples here:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=light+path+through+a+photographic+lens

For DSLR lenses the rear element can be smaller as there is a long distance to the sensor. So 30mm is enough for a DSLR lenss but on mirrorless it risk creating problems and may only be enough for APS-C. I believe that is the problem for Sony on FF as they have the same sized mount as K-mount. Although they has less parts inside the mount that limit rear element size.

Mirrorless lenses will not use screw drive or mechanical aperture control, so why fit them in the camera with an added cost? Would it even be room to fit them in a short register distance mount?

Those are good points. My measurements (at the link above) were based on the D FA* 50mm f/1.4 lens.

The screw drive and mechanical aperture control have to be fitted in the adapter for those wanting to adapt AF K-mount lenses. For those adapting manual focus lenses do not need adapter with screw drive and aperture control.

Why re-used the extra complexity of having electrical connectors on the mount surface? For mirrorless new a brand new communication protocol will be introduced between camera and lens. So new pibs will probably gave to be introduced. With a larger mirrorless mount the connector will be designed like on 645-mount or Q-mount for less complexity.

Re-using K-mount will only introduce extra cost and complexity, and will cripple lens design for a mirrorless system.

I think it would be cheaper to design and develop, and it could share existing components in manufacturing. (And it wouldn't risk alienating existing users of Pentax K-mount cameras who have a substantial investment in K-mount lenses).

The design on the mechanical mount is a couple of hours work after they decided what specification it should have. The problem with K-mount is that it is combined electrical and mechanical interface and include a lot of extra features not needed on a mirrorless all electrical mount.

The real extra cost is that the K-mount require extra components and extra assembly time on each produced camera.

It obviously wouldn't cripple lens design for longer lenses!
Whether it would significantly impact lens design for wide angle lenses depends on how much of a constraint that "30mm rear elements with a 35mm tube" would be. (Assuming that is the real constraint).

On many wide angle lenses for mirrorless the rear lens element is larger than the front lens lement. But the camera need a lens mount that support this, FI like MFT, Fuji and now Nikon do. And it is only Nikon that has large enough mount to support this design on FF.

That ratio isn't what is important. What is important is the diameter of the elements inside the camera body. Not the diameter of elements outside the camera body.

Fuji X use same sized mount as K-mount but for them it is only large enough for APS-C.

 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
Barry Pearson
OP Barry Pearson Veteran Member • Posts: 8,723
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax (2)

Fogel70 wrote:

.... Ideally a rear element very close to the sensor would have to cover the whole image circle so the the light hit the sensor in a straight angle.

Leica tried another technique:  Micro Lenses in front of the the sensor that vary according to their radius from the centre of the sensor:

"Its unique pixel and microlens architecture enables optimum results at all apertures, particularly wide open – even rays of light arriving at the sensor from oblique angles are precisely captured by its photodiodes ...."

https://www.dpreview.com/news/8915550991/leica-announces-m10-with-new-sensor-slimmer-design

(I don't know how transferable this would be to a Pentax mirrorless camera).

 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
TacticDesigns
TacticDesigns Veteran Member • Posts: 6,218
Re: Stripped to the bones MILC version of K-1?

Greyser wrote:

Let's admit that K-01 was not really a flop. I think Pentax over reacted and came with it when MILC technology was not there yet. And recognised designer involvement was not smart move either.

Would you buy simplified not expensive Pentax K-mount FF MILC without all high end DSLR whistles, but with reliable AF, decent EVF, fast FPS, K-1 articulated screen, and IBIS? Some are crazy about Astrotracer, pixel shift, etc., but do we all use it every day? I'm talking about kind of "cheap student edition" K-mount style MILC. Or even further: new mount/K-adapter combo to test MILC waters without pretending to fill MILC leaders shoes. Yes, the main customer will be, most likely, existent Pentax shooters. But who knows? Such camera might be the least expensive way into MILC world to test and hone more mature further offerings. Recently I read somewhere that there is a trend in mobil phone industry back to simplified not as smart handsets.

+1

That sounds like something I'd be interested in.

I already have a good FF camera.

But I also have some old manual focus Pentax lenses I'd like to use.

So its a second body I'm looking for.

The K-1 is just too good a camera. Way over what I am looking for / and willing to pay for.

IMHO there is probably a lot of market (people) that would be into buying a K-mount camera, but aren't willing to spend as much as a K-1.

IMHO no need to lower the price of the K-1. Let it remain at its price point. It's worth it.

But instead . . . release lower end models at lower price points. But remove features to segment the products. Like other companies are doing.

But . . . make it a really fun camera! Not intimidating!

As simple to use as the old Pentax K1000!

A lot of the cameras compete on specs.

But there are cameras that compete on fun! Like the Fujifilm cameras (both digital and film).

I'd like to see a Pentax camera compete on fun!

Take care & Happy Shooting!

-- hide signature --
 TacticDesigns's gear list:TacticDesigns's gear list
Fujifilm XP80 Nikon D5100 Pentax Q Nikon D750 Pentax *ist DS +9 more
Fogel70
Fogel70 Senior Member • Posts: 1,302
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax

Barry Pearson wrote:

Fogel70 wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

Fogel70 wrote:

.... There are many points of making a new mount as a short register distance mount have to be designed differently to best support short register distance lenses. A larger mount would be better as short register distance lenses have large rear lens elements. K-mount is not large enough for this.

See my post above:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61554148

I believe a lens with rear elements of about 30mm diameter could fit within the body of a mirrorless K-mount camera. That is quite a substantial proportion of the 44mm image circle of an FF lens.

It is not only the rear lens element that would habe to be fitted inside the protruding tube. Several lens elements with lens fittings and focus mechanism would have to be fitted inside which will limit the image circle to less tham 30 mm.

Did you really mean "image circle" in that statement?
Not "rear element diameter"?

I ment to say that I the projection of the image circle may use 25mm of the 30mm rear element.

Ideally a rear element very close to the sensor would have to cover the whole image circle so the the light hit the sensor in a straight angle. I believe this is what Nikon has planned with the new Z mount.

Are Nikon intending to have a rear element for their ultra-wide lenses of 44mm diameter, which is the FF image circle diameter? (Or 1.7 inches in old money?)

I'm not saying thst Nikon will use 44mm rear element on every lens they design, but they do not want the new mount to limit lens design for now and the future.

It might not only be used for wide angle lenses, normal an tele lenses can benefit from that too.

I would like to see evidence for that!

Yes it will be interesting on how the lens formula will look on Nikon Z lenses. Especially the 58/0.95.

And, of course, the image typically doesn't emerge as parallel lines from the rear of a photographic lens. I found plenty of counter-examples here:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=light+path+through+a+photographic+lens

That is why most modern wide angle lenses has telecentric design.

For DSLR lenses the rear element can be smaller as there is a long distance to the sensor. So 30mm is enough for a DSLR lenss but on mirrorless it risk creating problems and may only be enough for APS-C. I believe that is the problem for Sony on FF as they have the same sized mount as K-mount. Although they has less parts inside the mount that limit rear element size.

Mirrorless lenses will not use screw drive or mechanical aperture control, so why fit them in the camera with an added cost? Would it even be room to fit them in a short register distance mount?

Those are good points. My measurements (at the link above) were based on the D FA* 50mm f/1.4 lens.

The screw drive and mechanical aperture control have to be fitted in the adapter for those wanting to adapt AF K-mount lenses. For those adapting manual focus lenses do not need adapter with screw drive and aperture control.

Why re-used the extra complexity of having electrical connectors on the mount surface? For mirrorless new a brand new communication protocol will be introduced between camera and lens. So new pibs will probably gave to be introduced. With a larger mirrorless mount the connector will be designed like on 645-mount or Q-mount for less complexity.

Re-using K-mount will only introduce extra cost and complexity, and will cripple lens design for a mirrorless system.

I think it would be cheaper to design and develop, and it could share existing components in manufacturing. (And it wouldn't risk alienating existing users of Pentax K-mount cameras who have a substantial investment in K-mount lenses).

The design on the mechanical mount is a couple of hours work after they decided what specification it should have. The problem with K-mount is that it is combined electrical and mechanical interface and include a lot of extra features not needed on a mirrorless all electrical mount.

The real extra cost is that the K-mount require extra components and extra assembly time on each produced camera.

It obviously wouldn't cripple lens design for longer lenses!
Whether it would significantly impact lens design for wide angle lenses depends on how much of a constraint that "30mm rear elements with a 35mm tube" would be. (Assuming that is the real constraint).

On many wide angle lenses for mirrorless the rear lens element is larger than the front lens lement. But the camera need a lens mount that support this, FI like MFT, Fuji and now Nikon do. And it is only Nikon that has large enough mount to support this design on FF.

That ratio isn't what is important. What is important is the diameter of the elements inside the camera body. Not the diameter of elements outside the camera body.

It is the inner diameter of the lens mount that will limit the size of the rear lens element in both cases. Even on a simple APS-C lens like Fuji 27/2.8 the rear lens element is almost as large as the lens mount allow, and with a tiny front lens.

Fuji X use same sized mount as K-mount but for them it is only large enough for A onPS-C.

 Fogel70's gear list:Fogel70's gear list
Samsung GX-10 Pentax K-7 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony a7 Pentax K-3 II +17 more
Fogel70
Fogel70 Senior Member • Posts: 1,302
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax (2)

Barry Pearson wrote:

Fogel70 wrote:

.... Ideally a rear element very close to the sensor would have to cover the whole image circle so the the light hit the sensor in a straight angle.

Leica tried another technique: Micro Lenses in front of the the sensor that vary according to their radius from the centre of the sensor:

"Its unique pixel and microlens architecture enables optimum results at all apertures, particularly wide open – even rays of light arriving at the sensor from oblique angles are precisely captured by its photodiodes ...."

https://www.dpreview.com/news/8915550991/leica-announces-m10-with-new-sensor-slimmer-design

(I don't know how transferable this would be to a Pentax mirrorless camera).

Yes. Sometimes it cost a lot by re-using an old mount. The small diameter of the M-mount and support of old RF-lenses have forced Leica use unconventional work around. But cost of equipment does not seem to be a problem for Leica users.

First they had to limit sensor size to APS-H. Then they needed to use a custom design FF-sensor. A sensor like that probably cost at least twice as much as Pentax pay for Sony 36MP sensor.

But a solution like this would not work for a DSLR-mount, as all existing DSLR lenses would perform worse.

 Fogel70's gear list:Fogel70's gear list
Samsung GX-10 Pentax K-7 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony a7 Pentax K-3 II +17 more
Barry Pearson
OP Barry Pearson Veteran Member • Posts: 8,723
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax

Fogel70 wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

Fogel70 wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

Fogel70 wrote:

.... There are many points of making a new mount as a short register distance mount have to be designed differently to best support short register distance lenses. A larger mount would be better as short register distance lenses have large rear lens elements. K-mount is not large enough for this.

See my post above:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61554148

I believe a lens with rear elements of about 30mm diameter could fit within the body of a mirrorless K-mount camera. That is quite a substantial proportion of the 44mm image circle of an FF lens.

It is not only the rear lens element that would habe to be fitted inside the protruding tube. Several lens elements with lens fittings and focus mechanism would have to be fitted inside which will limit the image circle to less tham 30 mm.

Did you really mean "image circle" in that statement?
Not "rear element diameter"?

I ment to say that I the projection of the image circle may use 25mm of the 30mm rear element.

Ideally a rear element very close to the sensor would have to cover the whole image circle so the the light hit the sensor in a straight angle. I believe this is what Nikon has planned with the new Z mount.

Are Nikon intending to have a rear element for their ultra-wide lenses of 44mm diameter, which is the FF image circle diameter? (Or 1.7 inches in old money?)

I'm not saying thst Nikon will use 44mm rear element on every lens they design, but they do not want the new mount to limit lens design for now and the future.

Wouldn't it be nice if Ricoh/Pentax had the resources that Nikon has, to try to be technically pretty-well future proof?

I wonder what the total design and development cost for the new mount has been for Nikon? (Compared with the resources available for Pentax development).

It might not only be used for wide angle lenses, normal an tele lenses can benefit from that too.

Ricoh/Pentax appears to have at most sufficient resources to develop 3 lenses a year. And lately they haven't achieved that.

As far as I can tell, lenses for Q-mount are on hold. (Or terminated for ever?)

Lenses for 645 appear to be in the doldrums.

So the rest is split between K-mount APS-C and K-mount FF, with the emphasis being on FF recently.

If there is another APS-C flagship, I suspect that Pentax will want a lens or two to announce at the same time. And there are 6 FF lenses on the roadmap, plus potentially an FF 1.4x Rear Converter.

I believe that, whether or not Pentax introduce a mirrorless camera over the next couple of years, every new lens for a few years will have to be fully compatible with the current Pentax SLRs, unless there is simply no choice. And so far, for longer lenses, there is a choice - don't attempt large apertures on such lenses.

Or perhaps an alternative is "only attempt long large aperture lenses for APS-C". Would that be easier to achieve? Lens design problems appear to scale up rapidly with increasing sensor size.

I suspect this is a case of "if Pentax wants to get to where Nikon are going, they mustn't start from where they are"!

I would like to see evidence for that!

Yes it will be interesting on how the lens formula will look on Nikon Z lenses. Especially the 58/0.95.

Yes, that lens fascinates me! (Manual focus, too).

 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
koseng Forum Member • Posts: 58
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax

Use adapter with APS-C sensor. BUT add a speedbooster adapter to gather more light and mimic the depth of field and angle of view of a full frame camera.

Then you have both a full frame and a crop frame camera in one body.

Roland Karlsson Forum Pro • Posts: 28,329
Re: Stripped to the bones MILC version of K-1?
1

Alex Sarbu wrote:

Roland Karlsson wrote:

Greyser wrote:

Let's admit that K-01 was not really a flop.

It was. It takes just fine pictures, but did not sell well. Until you lowered the price so much it probably sold with a loss.

That's debatable.

They had plans for at least a lens dedicated to the K-01 - they canceled those plans, likely because how the camera was received. From this regard, this was a flop.

Yet they also made a new batch - the blue edition - for the Asian markets. Even after the price reduction, it was somewhat worth it.

I have the blue one. It is cute and sweet. Actually nice to use. If you accept its shortcomings.

Overall, I consider it a failure as a product (less so as a photographic tool). It's why I believe that just making a mirrorless K-mount isn't enough, there must be something to differentiate it, to make it attractive. Unfortunately, I don't see what it could be.

If DSLR is what they want to make as main branch and not dabble with a MILC system, then they could make special tools that are mirrorless.

One of my favorite one would be a full spectrum camera with replaceable filter pack in the "mirror" box. So - you can easily make it a color camera or an IR camera.

Another one could be a technical camera, e.g used for microscopy and astronomy. Without any Bayer filter.

-- hide signature --

/Roland
Kalpanika X3F tools:
https://github.com/kalpanika/x3f

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp2 Quattro Sony RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax K-1 +14 more
Dale108
Dale108 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,803
Re: Mirrorless FF K1 using K mount?
3

Hi Barry:

Very interesting writeup on the options available.  I for one would go for a FF K1 mirrorless about the size of the K01; if it had good AF, viewfinder and handling then it could be a winner.  Likely Ricoh do not want to invest i a brand new mount like the Nikon Z.

Dale

Barry Pearson wrote:

I thought I'd sketch some of the options for hypothetical future mirrorless Pentax cameras.

Option 1: Don't do it!

(I don't want to start a rumour. I have no evidence that Ricoh/Pentax have any intention of releasing a mirrorless system camera).

Option 2: Mirrorless K-mount cameras

Pentax doesn't have to follow the examples of Sony, Nikon, etc.

Staying with K-mount doesn't necessarily prevent new lens designs taking advantage of having no mirror to avoid.

Option 3: New mount for mirrorless cameras

This could be done without alienating people with a large investment in K-mount lenses, while still enabling new lens designs to take advantage of having no mirror to avoid.

 Dale108's gear list:Dale108's gear list
Olympus TG-5 Nikon Coolpix P1000 Pentax K-1 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9
Skip py Contributing Member • Posts: 852
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax
4

Hi Barry

A bit late, but like Roland I'd rather like something between options 1 and 2 :

keep the same K-mount WR body but replace the "mirror box" by a "filter box" and the pentaprism by a nice EVF like Nikon's (optional zooming and AF assistance would be great too sometimes) !

That would make a difference on an almost saturated market, following a long Pentax tradition :

1°) Outdoor photographers may be pleased to have small rear filters at hand "inside" our well protected body (cheaper, safer, and always avalaible). Add a switch to select the one(s) to use, like different ND filters to choose from, and a polarizer if it could fit in ? (You'll still have to bring your GND filters and adapter for some shots)

2°) Replacing the default "filter box" by another more specialized one, Pentax could even open this camera to scientific or institutional professionals interested for example by UV and IR (full spectrum as default, with visible, UV and IR filters selected inbody).

Today, when your camera have been converted for an IR spectrum ... that's it : you can't change that to try another spectrum of the same subject ! Dramatic effects could be achieved this way : have a look at Kolari Vision or LifePixel examples if you're not convinced.

https://kolarivision.com/infrared-conversions-blog/

https://www.lifepixel.com/galleries

If you choose a Full spectrum body conversion (ranging all the way from UV to IR), then you need a special filter for all your lenses, and swap filters on each lens when you want to take a normal shot (visible spectrum), an UV one, an IR one (850/720/665/590nm) : why not put it in our empty "mirror box" ? Take it into account when positionning the sensor and the K-mount (little change in optical path).

3°) Astrophotography should be another market, as special conversions are also offered at a price, to adjust sensor's signal acquisition ?

Nowadays, I can't justify to buy a new camera and add conversion prices just for a try and bring all these filters in my bag. If I can buy a new camera with everything in place without problems with the official warranty ... and add later on (when I get the cash) a special box or a special filter, that's a completely different point of view.

Working with KalariVision, LifePixel or another well established professional, could help to sell even more Pentax lenses, if these are good enought for each spectrums (no IR hot spot for example) ! Well, even flares of the Pentax DA 15mm are interesting in IR pictures with a converted K01 (almost none in visible spectrum with K-3).

Barry Pearson wrote:

I thought I'd sketch some of the options for hypothetical future mirrorless Pentax cameras.

Regards, Fred

PS:

1. If Pentax ever goes this way one day, don't forget that inbody (and adjustable) color profiles for each spectrum should be a big plus too for IR photographers (don't know yet for UV), to feel how dramactic the results could be after post processing in B&W or false colors ! Exporting and sharing profiles with another body (backup or complementary one) would be even more appreciated.

2. If it sells, Pentax could generalize and offer for each model (FF & APS-C) a DSLR and a MILC version, sharing most of the same components and firmware upgrades (LV improvements to be expected).

3. A standard inbody magnetic frame around the rear screen and an adapted high quality optical magnifier would also be great, for both MILC and DSLR, as it helps handling of long lenses (like the 150-450) while providing enhanced details of the frame in LV.

 Skip py's gear list:Skip py's gear list
Pentax K-3
Fogel70
Fogel70 Senior Member • Posts: 1,302
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax
1

Barry Pearson wrote:

Fogel70 wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

Fogel70 wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

Fogel70 wrote:

.... There are many points of making a new mount as a short register distance mount have to be designed differently to best support short register distance lenses. A larger mount would be better as short register distance lenses have large rear lens elements. K-mount is not large enough for this.

See my post above:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61554148

I believe a lens with rear elements of about 30mm diameter could fit within the body of a mirrorless K-mount camera. That is quite a substantial proportion of the 44mm image circle of an FF lens.

It is not only the rear lens element that would habe to be fitted inside the protruding tube. Several lens elements with lens fittings and focus mechanism would have to be fitted inside which will limit the image circle to less tham 30 mm.

Did you really mean "image circle" in that statement?
Not "rear element diameter"?

I ment to say that I the projection of the image circle may use 25mm of the 30mm rear element.

Ideally a rear element very close to the sensor would have to cover the whole image circle so the the light hit the sensor in a straight angle. I believe this is what Nikon has planned with the new Z mount.

Are Nikon intending to have a rear element for their ultra-wide lenses of 44mm diameter, which is the FF image circle diameter? (Or 1.7 inches in old money?)

I'm not saying thst Nikon will use 44mm rear element on every lens they design, but they do not want the new mount to limit lens design for now and the future.

Wouldn't it be nice if Ricoh/Pentax had the resources that Nikon has, to try to be technically pretty-well future proof?

I wonder what the total design and development cost for the new mount has been for Nikon? (Compared with the resources available for Pentax development).

A new mirrorless system probably take about the same resources as designing a new DSLR, and require less work than it took to design K1.

Ricoh has lots of experience of mirrorless after having developed two mirrorless systems. And about everything included on a mirrorless cameras is included in today's DSLR. Most of the components for mirrorless are standard off the shelf parts that they can use.

So if they combine the experience from Q and K1, they could they already have most of what they need. I'm sure they already made an advanced case study on this

It might not only be used for wide angle lenses, normal an tele lenses can benefit from that too.

Ricoh/Pentax appears to have at most sufficient resources to develop 3 lenses a year. And lately they haven't achieved that.

Yes, lenses are the major problem, which is why it will take years before we will see a new mirrorless system from Ricoh

As far as I can tell, lenses for Q-mount are on hold. (Or terminated for ever?)

Lenses for 645 appear to be in the doldrums.

So the rest is split between K-mount APS-C and K-mount FF, with the emphasis being on FF recently.

If there is another APS-C flagship, I suspect that Pentax will want a lens or two to announce at the same time. And there are 6 FF lenses on the roadmap, plus potentially an FF 1.4x Rear Converter.

I don't think we will see much new APS-C lenses the next 5 years. Maybe a few refreshments of existing lenses and DA* lenses redesigned as D FA*.

I believe that, whether or not Pentax introduce a mirrorless camera over the next couple of years, every new lens for a few years will have to be fully compatible with the current Pentax SLRs, unless there is simply no choice. And so far, for longer lenses, there is a choice - don't attempt large apertures on such lenses.

Yes, just as I said earlier, if Ricoh release a mirrorless camera based on K-mount, all lenses designed for it must be fully compatible with both mirrorless and DSLR.

So this thing with protruding rear lens will not work as it no longer will be a fully compatible K-mount lens.

Designing lenses takes time and and it is expensive to set up manufacturing on lenses. So once you start manufacturing a lens you want to know that you can keep producing it for 10 years or longer, at least the optical formula. So lenses are not something you can experiment in the same way as you can on cameras.

But I doubt that Pentax will release a camera like this until they can make a mirrorless that can fully replace DSLR. As this camera basically only attract intrest of existing K-mount users.

One possible solution is that they FI release the replacement of K70 as two versions, one as DSLR and one as mirrorless where both are identical except for OVF/EVF.

That way not much have to be wasted if mirrorless would flop again.

Or perhaps an alternative is "only attempt long large aperture lenses for APS-C". Would that be easier to achieve? Lens design problems appear to scale up rapidly with increasing sensor size.

I suspect this is a case of "if Pentax wants to get to where Nikon are going, they mustn't start from where they are"!

I would like to see evidence for that!

Yes it will be interesting on how the lens formula will look on Nikon Z lenses. Especially the 58/0.95.

Yes, that lens fascinates me! (Manual focus, too).

 Fogel70's gear list:Fogel70's gear list
Samsung GX-10 Pentax K-7 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony a7 Pentax K-3 II +17 more
Barry Pearson
OP Barry Pearson Veteran Member • Posts: 8,723
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax

I'm overwhelmed by your post! It needs a lot of thought.

Instead of responding immediately, I've bookmarked it for continued examination.

I've followed the links you provided. I had my K-7 converted to IR, (with only limited success, mostly because of my lack of skills). I'm expecting to have my K-3 converted too, and this time take it more seriously.

Thanks for such a thought-provoking response!

Skip py wrote:

Hi Barry

A bit late, but like Roland I'd rather like something between options 1 and 2 :

keep the same K-mount WR body but replace the "mirror box" by a "filter box" and the pentaprism by a nice EVF like Nikon's (optional zooming and AF assistance would be great too sometimes) !

That would make a difference on an almost saturated market, following a long Pentax tradition :

1°) Outdoor photographers may be pleased to have small rear filters at hand "inside" our well protected body (cheaper, safer, and always avalaible). Add a switch to select the one(s) to use, like different ND filters to choose from, and a polarizer if it could fit in ? (You'll still have to bring your GND filters and adapter for some shots)

2°) Replacing the default "filter box" by another more specialized one, Pentax could even open this camera to scientific or institutional professionals interested for example by UV and IR (full spectrum as default, with visible, UV and IR filters selected inbody).

Today, when your camera have been converted for an IR spectrum ... that's it : you can't change that to try another spectrum of the same subject ! Dramatic effects could be achieved this way : have a look at Kolari Vision or LifePixel examples if you're not convinced.

https://kolarivision.com/infrared-conversions-blog/

https://www.lifepixel.com/galleries

If you choose a Full spectrum body conversion (ranging all the way from UV to IR), then you need a special filter for all your lenses, and swap filters on each lens when you want to take a normal shot (visible spectrum), an UV one, an IR one (850/720/665/590nm) : why not put it in our empty "mirror box" ? Take it into account when positionning the sensor and the K-mount (little change in optical path).

3°) Astrophotography should be another market, as special conversions are also offered at a price, to adjust sensor's signal acquisition ?

Nowadays, I can't justify to buy a new camera and add conversion prices just for a try and bring all these filters in my bag. If I can buy a new camera with everything in place without problems with the official warranty ... and add later on (when I get the cash) a special box or a special filter, that's a completely different point of view.

Working with KalariVision, LifePixel or another well established professional, could help to sell even more Pentax lenses, if these are good enought for each spectrums (no IR hot spot for example) ! Well, even flares of the Pentax DA 15mm are interesting in IR pictures with a converted K01 (almost none in visible spectrum with K-3).

Regards, Fred

PS:

1. If Pentax ever goes this way one day, don't forget that inbody (and adjustable) color profiles for each spectrum should be a big plus too for IR photographers (don't know yet for UV), to feel how dramactic the results could be after post processing in B&W or false colors ! Exporting and sharing profiles with another body (backup or complementary one) would be even more appreciated.

2. If it sells, Pentax could generalize and offer for each model (FF & APS-C) a DSLR and a MILC version, sharing most of the same components and firmware upgrades (LV improvements to be expected).

3. A standard inbody magnetic frame around the rear screen and an adapted high quality optical magnifier would also be great, for both MILC and DSLR, as it helps handling of long lenses (like the 150-450) while providing enhanced details of the frame in LV.

 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
Skip py Contributing Member • Posts: 852
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax
1

Sorry for the long post! It's laborious for me to post in english, so when I do it, I try to be be as clear as possible but it's not as easy as I'd like. Feel free to ask for clarifications : I'll do my best.

Just in case you didn't noticed, you should take care of the AF focusing issues with IR photography. That's why I opted for K01 conversion : no need for AF adjustment.

It's time consuming to recognize how different subjects and textures will respond in IR : colored hairs and tinted fabrics can surprise you if you're using the optical viewfinder!

Another trick if you don't mind. It's easier to use liveview with an optical magnifier: you can use it comfortably on sunny days with optimum constrat and details.

Regards, Fred

PS:

Other useful links for IR photography

https://kolarivision.com/articles/problem-with-ir/

https://kolarivision.com/articles/lens-hotspot-list/

I should test my other lenses some day, but my DA 15mm is always on the K01.

 Skip py's gear list:Skip py's gear list
Pentax K-3
Barry Pearson
OP Barry Pearson Veteran Member • Posts: 8,723
Re: Some mirrorless options for Pentax

Don't apologise!

You said some (lots of!) interesting and useful things, and it is always good be be clear.

Skip py wrote:

Sorry for the long post! It's laborious for me to post in english, so when I do it, I try to be be as clear as possible but it's not as easy as I'd like. Feel free to ask for clarifications : I'll do my best.

Just in case you didn't noticed, you should take care of the AF focusing issues with IR photography. That's why I opted for K01 conversion : no need for AF adjustment.

It's time consuming to recognize how different subjects and textures will respond in IR : colored hairs and tinted fabrics can surprise you if you're using the optical viewfinder!

Another trick if you don't mind. It's easier to use liveview with an optical magnifier: you can use it comfortably on sunny days with optimum constrat and details.

Regards, Fred

PS:

Other useful links for IR photography

https://kolarivision.com/articles/problem-with-ir/

https://kolarivision.com/articles/lens-hotspot-list/

Thanks for those. The Pentax IR Hotspot information is interesting, although it doesn't cover all my lenses so I'll have to find out for myself.

I have a record of the links you have provided, and I'll be using those sites.

I should test my other lenses some day, but my DA 15mm is always on the K01.

Once again, thanks for all of that.

 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
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads