GR with a K mount...
Posted 20/08/2013 - 10:07
Link
I think it would ruin a perfectly good street camera by making it bulky.
It's not the width, it's the depth of the lenses that cause the problem.
It's not the width, it's the depth of the lenses that cause the problem.
Best regards, John
Posted 20/08/2013 - 11:35
Link
Ok I meant depth!0
Not thinking of it as a GR per se but as a Nex competitor?
New lens lone or maybe screw with Ltd's to start?
Not thinking of it as a GR per se but as a Nex competitor?
New lens lone or maybe screw with Ltd's to start?
Cheers Jules...
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
Posted 20/08/2013 - 11:39 - Helpful Comment
Link
It's possible, but the point I've made elsewhere is that you still end up needing a camera bag because the lenses are quite long, especially lenses for K mount. The result is a camera almost as bulky, but with a thin, fiddly body.
Functionally, I don't see the point, except that people like new bright shiny cameras. And manufacturers need to sell new concepts to keep expanding.
Functionally, I don't see the point, except that people like new bright shiny cameras. And manufacturers need to sell new concepts to keep expanding.
Best regards, John
Posted 20/08/2013 - 12:15
Link
i agree with you John,I'm just postulating on how Ricoh can enter more markets and expand the brand a bit? Now personally I don't like any mirrorless with anything other than a pancake type lens on it, like you I find that they just become unwieldy and fiddly but thats not to say they wouldn't be other peoples cup of tea? My mate has a Fuji X-E1 and that new 55-200 Lens, permanently bayonetted to it, and to me it's just plain stupid but others love it, rave about it in fact. Me I'd rather have an APSC, DSLR as small as you can make it but with super functionallity. Oh wait I've got one!
The GR as is appeals to me on a lot of levels but adapting it may give Ricoh a way in to what seems to be a very trendy market...
The GR as is appeals to me on a lot of levels but adapting it may give Ricoh a way in to what seems to be a very trendy market...
Cheers Jules...
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
Posted 20/08/2013 - 12:28
Link
Is that not a K-01?
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber
Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff
Algi
Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff
Algi
Posted 20/08/2013 - 12:37
Link
Algernon wrote:
Is that not a K-01?
my thoughts exactly
Is that not a K-01?
you don't have to be mad to post here
but it does help
but it does help
Posted 20/08/2013 - 15:53
Link
I was meaning instead of K-01 and GXR...
Cheers Jules...
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
Posted 20/08/2013 - 16:32 - Helpful Comment
Link
most of that size difference is because it's got a K mount, the NEX has a mirrorless specific lens system so the flange to film distance is much shorter, allowing the body to be thiner.
if a mount could be devised which allowed K mount lenses via an adaptor with full functionallity (auto metering and focus) then Pentax could conceivably do the same thing, but whether it would sell well enough to be worth the R&D effort is another matter.
if a mount could be devised which allowed K mount lenses via an adaptor with full functionallity (auto metering and focus) then Pentax could conceivably do the same thing, but whether it would sell well enough to be worth the R&D effort is another matter.
you don't have to be mad to post here
but it does help
but it does help
Posted 20/08/2013 - 16:41
Link
I did mention a new Lens line in my original post and that was the reason why, it may not be possible to provide SR, K mount and possibly Screwdrive, to run Ltd Lenses in an acceptably elegant chassis? I don't really think (Hoya/Pentax) tried. (Sorry K-01 Fans:blush Ricoh said they have big plans, I'd like to see them compete as much as possible and become the genuine No3 in the Camera Market, that means beating up Nikon who also don't really do mirrorless. It's just another way of gaining traction.
Not to mention the FF word!
Not to mention the FF word!
Cheers Jules...
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
Posted 20/08/2013 - 17:29
Link
Mongoose wrote:
if a mount could be devised which allowed K mount lenses via an adaptor with full functionallity (auto metering and focus) then Pentax could conceivably do the same thing, but whether it would sell well enough to be worth the R&D effort is another matter.
Basically what Canon have done with their "M" series camera although I don't think it's selling that well.
if a mount could be devised which allowed K mount lenses via an adaptor with full functionallity (auto metering and focus) then Pentax could conceivably do the same thing, but whether it would sell well enough to be worth the R&D effort is another matter.
Posted 20/08/2013 - 17:40
Link
Mike-P wrote:
Well there's no harm in Beating up Olympus, while Nikon's on the floor screaming!
Mongoose wrote:
if a mount could be devised which allowed K mount lenses via an adaptor with full functionallity (auto metering and focus) then Pentax could conceivably do the same thing, but whether it would sell well enough to be worth the R&D effort is another matter.
Basically what Canon have done with their "M" series camera although I don't think it's selling that well.if a mount could be devised which allowed K mount lenses via an adaptor with full functionallity (auto metering and focus) then Pentax could conceivably do the same thing, but whether it would sell well enough to be worth the R&D effort is another matter.
Cheers Jules...
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
Posted 21/08/2013 - 11:59
Link
To be honest, I have never understood why Hoya/Pentax never stood up the Auto 110 Brand again, Ricoh could AF all those basic designs and have a whole system, There must be a reason why not, maybe they Never joined M4/3?
Just thinking out loud...
Just thinking out loud...
Cheers Jules...
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
Posted 21/08/2013 - 12:11
Link
But they did. The first try out was a design one, the I-10, presumably to see if the retro look appealed.
The full version is the Pentax Q, with all its tiny interchangeable lenses. It has to be different in shape to accommodate the screen and sensor assemblies, but the ethos of it is the same as the Auto 110.
Except of course it's a whole lot better.
The full version is the Pentax Q, with all its tiny interchangeable lenses. It has to be different in shape to accommodate the screen and sensor assemblies, but the ethos of it is the same as the Auto 110.
Except of course it's a whole lot better.
Best regards, John
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
2342 posts
16 years
Storbritannia
Be slightly wider but not impossible.
Clip on finder.
Any chance you think?
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com