Adorama, first glimpse of the Pentax Full Frame with tilty-swivel screen, due out spring next year!
http://www.adorama.com/alc/8328/article/...ame-dslr?k
They sure have made a "lunar landing module" of the LCD rear screen.
Pentax look to have pulled out all the stops with design of this FF DLSR!
The question remains as to the sensor's MP counts.
Like the K3II no sign of on board flash!
It surely looks quite compact. Whether it'll appeal to users beyond their existing user-base - especially with just a handful of full format lenses - is another question.
IMHO they are too late in betting on the wrong horse. Given their expertise in miniaturization they should have done the Sony thing (A7x).
It looks like a somewhat taller K-3:
http://cameratimes.org/pentax-full-frame...omparison/
I don't think it's too late nor that DSLRs are "the wrong horse". We have an example of a company which weren't late, and bet on the supposedly "right horse": Samsung 
Ricoh/Pentax might be just in time, entering the FF segment as DSLRs are still going strong and with a small, but significant user base to build on. That, IMO, is their best option right now - and what would allow them further expansion, including to a large sensor MILC system.
As for expertise in miniaturization, I'd say their skills are different of that of an electronic giant like Sony. They might not be able to miniaturize electronics as much, and they might not be willing to compromise too much.
Quote:It looks like a somewhat taller K-3:
http://cameratimes.org/pentax-full-frame...omparison/
I don't think it's too late nor that DSLRs are "the wrong horse". We have an example of a company which weren't late, and bet on the supposedly "right horse": Samsung
Ricoh/Pentax might be just in time, entering the FF segment as DSLRs are still going strong and with a small, but significant user base to build on. That, IMO, is their best option right now - and what would allow them further expansion, including to a large sensor MILC system.
As for expertise in miniaturization, I'd say their skills are different of that of an electronic giant like Sony. They might not be able to miniaturize electronics as much, and they might not be willing to compromise too much.
Samsung did EVERYTHING wrong. And they even tried it with DSLRs before going mirrorless ...
12-04-2015, 10:53 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-04-2015, 11:02 AM by Brightcolours.)
Quote:Samsung did EVERYTHING wrong. And they even tried it with DSLRs before going mirrorless ...
Yeah, they went APS-C mirrorless. And offered some good optics. And tried to bring a real usable sportsshooting mirrorless, the NX1, apparently too late and not realizing they do not have the name, nor the line up, and that FF still is some kind of holy grail for many.
Mirrorless is still not gaining big market share (for varied reasons), and that small pie gets divided up by many companies (Sony, Canon, Nikon, Samsung, Fuji, Olympus, Leica, Panasonic, forgetting Pentax Q since it is rather silly). Thinking Pentax should try to introduce another mirrorless line with new lens line up, seems a bit naive?
At least with a FF DSLR they have a certain client base to build upon for the foreseeable future. A new mirrorless adventure will suck up too much financial resources, at Pentax' current state.
What he said ^^
With an emphasis on the last paragraph. There isn't much choice IMO, Pentax/Ricoh has to grow using the existing user base; after that, more options will become available. The alternative? Risk everything in the hope that a MILC-centered strategy might bring them, after many years of heavy losses, to where they are today.
The Samsung case, but also e.g. Olympus who barely managed to get into black show that going MILC does not guarantee success. Pentax continual survival (despite Hoya) shows that staying DSLR can work.
Quote:Mirrorless is still not gaining big market share (for varied reasons)
Depends on how you measure it. I understood mirrorless unit sales were roughly holding steady, compared to an ongoing decline in DSLR numbers. So of the interchangeable lens share, they are growing in proportion.
As for Pentax... Didn't they do that mirrorless with DSLR mount in the past? I have to wonder, if you put aside size optimisations, could they do something with that going forward? It may make more sense for a higher end FF mirrorless.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
Quote:Depends on how you measure it. I understood mirrorless unit sales were roughly holding steady, compared to an ongoing decline in DSLR numbers. So of the interchangeable lens share, they are growing in proportion.
As for Pentax... Didn't they do that mirrorless with DSLR mount in the past? I have to wonder, if you put aside size optimisations, could they do something with that going forward? It may make more sense for a higher end FF mirrorless.
What is the point of doing something "mirrorless" without making the camera compact through removing the mirrorbox? I do not get why a mirror itself is something evil or bad. Removing the mirrorbox, making a short flange distance possible and making a thinner body possible, that has its reasons.
Looking at the CIPA website, the DSLR decline slowed down. 8,203,656 SLR units were made, from January to October, compared to 2,727,004 MILCs (I don't think they're counting Samsung and Leica, though).
|
