Pentax LX in Mirrorless

[flektogon]

If you want only the external controls like the knobs for shutter speed and ISO/exposure compensation, I believe these were more appropriate for analog (mechanical or electronic) cameras, not even for film cameras with digital electronics such as most 90s SLRs.

Its how Fuji digital cameras looks. Just saying.

And Nikon Zfc. I know and don't like this design philosophy. Let's put the old style knobs but for increased functionality we also have to add these e-dials...

Zfc is a one heck of a camera!! So is the Olympus Pen-F. And the Pentax KP! But yes, you need to be at lest in your seventies to appreciate this kind of cameras .

 

[iso rivolta]

If you want only the external controls like the knobs for shutter speed and ISO/exposure compensation, I believe these were more appropriate for analog (mechanical or electronic) cameras, not even for film cameras with digital electronics such as most 90s SLRs.

Its how Fuji digital cameras looks. Just saying.

And Nikon Zfc. I know and don't like this design philosophy. Let's put the old style knobs but for increased functionality we also have to add these e-dials...

Zfc is a one heck of a camera!! So is the Olympus Pen-F. And the Pentax KP! But yes, you need to be at lest in your seventies to appreciate this kind of cameras .

Now you are conflating cameras looking sort of vintage, like the Pentax KP on one side (which I like), with a camera that has the old style dial interface, Nikon Zfc. And Zfc has a big ergonomic problem over Fuji cameras: even with those marked dials, it still needs a PSAM selector (and an e-dial and a small LCD display), because the lenses don't have aperture rings.

On the surface I agree that all of them do look nice.

 

[GossCTP]

If you want only the external controls like the knobs for shutter speed and ISO/exposure compensation, I believe these were more appropriate for analog (mechanical or electronic) cameras, not even for film cameras with digital electronics such as most 90s SLRs.

Its how Fuji digital cameras looks. Just saying.

And Nikon Zfc. I know and don't like this design philosophy. Let's put the old style knobs but for increased functionality we also have to add these e-dials...

My preference is for either the real vintage object or the modern one and form should follow function.

I think this is a bit too narrow minded. If it is OK for the real vintage object it might be OK for a digital camera, and many think it is, and buy Fuji.

If you think image control of aperture and exposure time is THE MOSR IMPORTANT thing, then this user interface is brilliant.

If it's OK for the vintage object it might be OK for the modern one, but ideally has to be done in a way that uses the same principle of functioning, not only the form. Otherwise, the form better change to adapt to the new way of working (function).

The old dials had preset positions because they used analogue discrete positions, either mechanical or electrical contacts. In the time of the analogue stepless shutter ('70s - mid '80s), you could use aperture priority for a fine grained exposure, while the shutter speed could be reserved for special requirements.

With digital control, 1/3 of a stop was deemed fine enough but then the dial should either have too many positions to be practical or needs a sub e-dial. The solution was to get rid of the marked knob and use an e-dial and a display. I believe this is also better ergonomically with regards to hand holding while changing parameters.

I agree that it could be nice to have a setting that is visible before switching on the device but it's not my preference for a digital camera. I respect other people views on this and I agree that for some people the classic interface might be the most important thing, but I often suspect it's just for the vintage look.

The OP asked for our opinions, that is mine: I don't like a digital camera with retro dials, either DSLR or mirrorless.

Regarding aperture control, I prefer to use an e-dial but to have the backup of a mechanical aperture ring if possible, so I like Pentax A lenses and the original FA lenses.

I have a Fuji X-H1, and I have to say that for most stuff, whole stops is just fine for shutter speed. I find 1/3 stops to be excessive and have used 1/2 stops on my Pentax cameras for years. It may not please the ETTR crowd, but if the metering is accurate, the difference is just not enough mess with 50% more values.

 

[zakaria]

 

[Kirnbichler]

I did, but the ergonomics don't come close. And there are some infuriating software restrictions.

For instance, the prefix of file names can be changed for three instead of four characters, there is no automatic date-based folder creation, and for "non-cpu" lenses, the focal length that gas to be entered can't be chosen freely but only from a rather restricted list.

Besides that: Excellent cameras, excellent lenses … and not a fixation on creating the umpteenth new prime between 21 and 77mm, and no rehash of old lenses with new coating (and completely useless aperture rings) …

And due to the very short flange distance, it is possible to adapt nearly every other lens, some even with full electronic support (as with Canon's EF mount or Sony's E mount).

The only mounts that are physically impossible to adapt are Canon RF and L alliance, as it seems).

For K mount, there is at the moment no electronical support, but that might change, as it already did with adapters to the E mount.

For old manual lenses, that obviously is quite irrelevant.

 

[Rod Herdman]

I love the Fuji X-T styling and a Pentax equivalent would interest me, but I have no desire for mirrorless as I would still prefer OVF. The only advantage of EVF for me is when shooting in dim light the scene is brighter in the viewfinder.

My ideal dSLR is in my signature but I know this will never happen.

edit; also I would be happy if it was still APS-C, FF would be an indulgence for me

--
All I want is a digital back for my trusty K1000 . . .

 

[Roland Karlsson]

I have 2 of nikon z cameras zfc z6ii. I still don't like the AF system of z system even with the z6ii.

I sometimes blame myself for being in the mirrorless camp. It's the folks system go mirrorless ok sir!!

According to a video here at DPR, the verdict was the Z9 has fantastic af, but the other cameras not so much. If true, that is a reason to be skeptical about jumping to that ship.

 

[hikerdoc]

I have 2 of nikon z cameras zfc z6ii. I still don't like the AF system of z system even with the z6ii.

I sometimes blame myself for being in the mirrorless camp. It's the folks system go mirrorless ok sir!!

According to a video here at DPR, the verdict was the Z9 has fantastic af, but the other cameras not so much. If true, that is a reason to be skeptical about jumping to that ship.

It is probably mainly related to tracking performance and/or implementation in the Z6/7 series, and the unstated expectations (we all overestimate our abilities!) that the capabilities would cover for lapses in technique. For those accustomed to the D5, D500, D850 level of AF it was a big question. It sounds like the Z9 now exceeds performance of those cameras and hopefully this will follow to subsequent updates and releases. It also depends on the level of tracking performance you are accustomed to with whatever system you migrate from and the ease with which you grow familiar with a new system. I wouldn’t switch to greener grass quite yet, but vaporware like Z7-III or Z8 may intrigue you, or K1-III may be all you ever dreamed of!

 

[flektogon]

And what about the latest Canon EOS R7? Still cheaper than the K3/III and definitely more advanced, especially for the nature photographers.

--
Regards,
Peter

 

[Roland Karlsson]

And what about the latest Canon EOS R7? Still cheaper than the K3/III and definitely more advanced, especially for the nature photographers.

It is APS-C and not out yet.

 

[hikerdoc]

And what about the latest Canon EOS R7? Still cheaper than the K3/III and definitely more advanced, especially for the nature photographers.

It appears we are rapidly reaching a point where cross technology spec comparisons become irrelevant. To oversimplify things: If you want OVF and the visceral satisfaction it gives, the choices are narrowing, and any areas of superiority with virtually any parameter on the spec sheets are disappearing. But, the key desired experience/feature, OVF, is included. If the insistence is on spec sheet superiority and video, etc, etc. , be done with it, narrow the search to the various MILC options and accept the EVF. I am convinced many Pentax users who have not yet added an MILC to their gear will do so in near future while they continue to enjoy their DSLRs even with limited AF point coverage and heavy for size.

 

[RBIV]

And what about the latest Canon EOS R7? Still cheaper than the K3/III and definitely more advanced, especially for the nature photographers.

It appears we are rapidly reaching a point where cross technology spec comparisons become irrelevant. To oversimplify things: If you want OVF and the visceral satisfaction it gives, the choices are narrowing, and any areas of superiority with virtually any parameter on the spec sheets are disappearing. But, the key desired experience/feature, OVF, is included. If the insistence is on spec sheet superiority and video, etc, etc. , be done with it, narrow the search to the various MILC options and accept the EVF. I am convinced many Pentax users who have not yet added an MILC to their gear will do so in near future while they continue to enjoy their DSLRs even with limited AF point coverage and heavy for size.

I think you've hit a key there.

OVF DSLRs are going to be a different experience. Much like Leica M models are. People will like them or not. But the Spec Sheet isn't really relevant -- to neither the purchase decision, nor the final result.

 

[johnami]

Yes, but it's too late.....

 

[Roland Karlsson]

And what about the latest Canon EOS R7? Still cheaper than the K3/III and definitely more advanced, especially for the nature photographers.

It appears we are rapidly reaching a point where cross technology spec comparisons become irrelevant. To oversimplify things: If you want OVF and the visceral satisfaction it gives, the choices are narrowing, and any areas of superiority with virtually any parameter on the spec sheets are disappearing. But, the key desired experience/feature, OVF, is included. If the insistence is on spec sheet superiority and video, etc, etc. , be done with it, narrow the search to the various MILC options and accept the EVF. I am convinced many Pentax users who have not yet added an MILC to their gear will do so in near future while they continue to enjoy their DSLRs even with limited AF point coverage and heavy for size.

I think you've hit a key there.

OVF DSLRs are going to be a different experience. Much like Leica M models are. People will like them or not. But the Spec Sheet isn't really relevant -- to neither the purchase decision, nor the final result.

For me it is like this.

• I seriously prefer an OVF when it comes to view finder.
• I have lots of FF lenses for Pentax.
• I think my K-1 is a bit long in the tooth regarding AF
• I think Pentax is super slow releasing both lenses and camera bodies.
• I would seriously trust more an AF that focus on the sensor.
• I am confused.

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

 

[squareEye]

How about losing the back LCD by moving it to the top and making a retro-style waist-level DSLR like this accessory did.

PENTAX FF-1 Waist Level Finder WLF for LX

then you have the built-in hood, choice of digital or optical focus magnification and retro styling all at once.
squareEye

 

[JeremieB]

And what about the latest Canon EOS R7? Still cheaper than the K3/III and definitely more advanced, especially for the nature photographers.

It appears we are rapidly reaching a point where cross technology spec comparisons become irrelevant. To oversimplify things: If you want OVF and the visceral satisfaction it gives, the choices are narrowing, and any areas of superiority with virtually any parameter on the spec sheets are disappearing. But, the key desired experience/feature, OVF, is included. If the insistence is on spec sheet superiority and video, etc, etc. , be done with it, narrow the search to the various MILC options and accept the EVF. I am convinced many Pentax users who have not yet added an MILC to their gear will do so in near future while they continue to enjoy their DSLRs even with limited AF point coverage and heavy for size.

I think you've hit a key there.

OVF DSLRs are going to be a different experience. Much like Leica M models are. People will like them or not. But the Spec Sheet isn't really relevant -- to neither the purchase decision, nor the final result.

For me it is like this.

• I seriously prefer an OVF when it comes to view finder.
• I have lots of FF lenses for Pentax.
• I think my K-1 is a bit long in the tooth regarding AF
• I think Pentax is super slow releasing both lenses and camera bodies.
• I would seriously trust more an AF that focus on the sensor.
• I am confused.

Make it a role player game:

1 - I really need better AF --> goto 2; I don't care that much --> goto 5; I really really need better better AF --> goto 8

2 - I really want to stay Pentax --> goto 3; I don't care that much about Pentax --> goto 6; I don't care that much about anything these times --> goto 5

3 - I'm ok with APSC --> goto 4; I want to stay FF --> goto 5; I'm not sure --> goto 5

4 - Buy a K3III

5 - Wait for [x days/months/years] then --> goto 1

6 - I want an OVF --> goto 7; I don't care about OVF --> goto 8; I think I don't care much about photography at this point --> goto 5; Surprise me --> goto 7.1

7 - Buy an old Canon/Nikon/Other DSLR

7.1 - Buy a medium format camera, an underwater camera, a Ricoh Theta, or a pinhole "lens", then --> goto 5

8 - Go MILC

You can flip a coin at each step if unsure (and throw a dice at step 5).

 

[Roland Karlsson]

And what about the latest Canon EOS R7? Still cheaper than the K3/III and definitely more advanced, especially for the nature photographers.

It appears we are rapidly reaching a point where cross technology spec comparisons become irrelevant. To oversimplify things: If you want OVF and the visceral satisfaction it gives, the choices are narrowing, and any areas of superiority with virtually any parameter on the spec sheets are disappearing. But, the key desired experience/feature, OVF, is included. If the insistence is on spec sheet superiority and video, etc, etc. , be done with it, narrow the search to the various MILC options and accept the EVF. I am convinced many Pentax users who have not yet added an MILC to their gear will do so in near future while they continue to enjoy their DSLRs even with limited AF point coverage and heavy for size.

I think you've hit a key there.

OVF DSLRs are going to be a different experience. Much like Leica M models are. People will like them or not. But the Spec Sheet isn't really relevant -- to neither the purchase decision, nor the final result.

For me it is like this.

• I seriously prefer an OVF when it comes to view finder.
• I have lots of FF lenses for Pentax.
• I think my K-1 is a bit long in the tooth regarding AF
• I think Pentax is super slow releasing both lenses and camera bodies.
• I would seriously trust more an AF that focus on the sensor.
• I am confused.

Make it a role player game:

1 - I really need better AF --> goto 2; I don't care that much --> goto 5; I really really need better better AF --> goto 8

2 - I really want to stay Pentax --> goto 3; I don't care that much about Pentax --> goto 6; I don't care that much about anything these times --> goto 5

3 - I'm ok with APSC --> goto 4; I want to stay FF --> goto 5; I'm not sure --> goto 5

4 - Buy a K3III

5 - Wait for [x days/months/years] then --> goto 1

6 - I want an OVF --> goto 7; I don't care about OVF --> goto 8; I think I don't care much about photography at this point --> goto 5; Surprise me --> goto 7.1

7 - Buy an old Canon/Nikon/Other DSLR

7.1 - Buy a medium format camera, an underwater camera, a Ricoh Theta, or a pinhole "lens", then --> goto 5

8 - Go MILC

You can flip a coin at each step if unsure (and throw a dice at step 5).

Fun!

9. I am still confused --> goto 1;

 

[kamerakiri]

And what about the latest Canon EOS R7? Still cheaper than the K3/III and definitely more advanced, especially for the nature photographers.

It appears we are rapidly reaching a point where cross technology spec comparisons become irrelevant. To oversimplify things: If you want OVF and the visceral satisfaction it gives, the choices are narrowing, and any areas of superiority with virtually any parameter on the spec sheets are disappearing. But, the key desired experience/feature, OVF, is included. If the insistence is on spec sheet superiority and video, etc, etc. , be done with it, narrow the search to the various MILC options and accept the EVF. I am convinced many Pentax users who have not yet added an MILC to their gear will do so in near future while they continue to enjoy their DSLRs even with limited AF point coverage and heavy for size.

I think you've hit a key there.

OVF DSLRs are going to be a different experience. Much like Leica M models are. People will like them or not. But the Spec Sheet isn't really relevant -- to neither the purchase decision, nor the final result.

For me it is like this.

• I seriously prefer an OVF when it comes to view finder.
• I have lots of FF lenses for Pentax.
• I think my K-1 is a bit long in the tooth regarding AF
• I think Pentax is super slow releasing both lenses and camera bodies.
• I would seriously trust more an AF that focus on the sensor.
• I am confused.

Make it a role player game:

1 - I really need better AF --> goto 2; I don't care that much --> goto 5; I really really need better better AF --> goto 8

2 - I really want to stay Pentax --> goto 3; I don't care that much about Pentax --> goto 6; I don't care that much about anything these times --> goto 5

3 - I'm ok with APSC --> goto 4; I want to stay FF --> goto 5; I'm not sure --> goto 5

4 - Buy a K3III

5 - Wait for [x days/months/years] then --> goto 1

6 - I want an OVF --> goto 7; I don't care about OVF --> goto 8; I think I don't care much about photography at this point --> goto 5; Surprise me --> goto 7.1

7 - Buy an old Canon/Nikon/Other DSLR

7.1 - Buy a medium format camera, an underwater camera, a Ricoh Theta, or a pinhole "lens", then --> goto 5

8 - Go MILC

You can flip a coin at each step if unsure (and throw a dice at step 5).

Ha,ha... Really enjoyed this.