Pentax mirrorless SLR

That's right ... We look THROUGH a DSLR, in exactly the same manner as the earlier film equivalents , but we look AT an EVF screen. This, coupled with the lag and less amount of physical feedback, produces an altogether different experience of the photography. It's not what I would enjoy, despite additional electronic aids.

But this should not really be about minor features like WiFi, focus peaking etc ... It's not really even about Pentax or Sony, because many of these things are equally possible on aDSLR or a mirrorless body. Those like Richard and Jon who are keen on the current Sony options are attracted to the various combination of features they offer. I think this is confusing the mirrorless our DSLR debate, which is really about the physically and response of a mechanical device and the human operators physical relationship worth it ... For many of us this will remain a central element of high quality, dynamic shooting, irrespective of what particular electronic features are implemented in any specific camera body.

I guess you haven't seen the Pentax 1.4 rear converter.

I'll include a link for you here

This is an adapter that mounts between a lens and a camera, and it maintains the weather proofing nature of both. As far as I know it doesn't wobble. Change the mount on the end of it and bingo, you've now mounted a different lens to a Pentax camera. Think outside the square.

I see this discussion has now split into two threads, one here and one to rubbish comments here elsewhere. Nice.


Spot on mate. I welcome a mirrorless discussion, but that really limits the conversation to lens mount type, and the lack of a mirror box, which is only there to provide the optical view finder, and some focussing comments as I believe DSLR's use a different focus method to mirrorless.

Mirrorless uses on sensor focus points, and feature both contrast and now phase detection options, just like a DSLR. And they spread these right across the entire sensor, not lumped in the middle. This allows for tracking right across the image for instance.

A DSLR in live view mode is a mirrorless camera in essence. Porting this info to the EVF is required because there is no optical option anymore. You loose what Optical is good at unfortunately, but you gain where optical is poor, so there are tradeoff's to be made either way. Hence my hope for a hybrid solution to provide the best of both worlds.

Anything else that comes up, wifi, faster shooting speeds, electronic shutters, better video codecs, FF etc really isn't limited or related to mirrorless per se, it's just that we're seeing this tech deployed in those form factor bodies much earlier and quicker than DSLR's.

Hmmm.

Hmmm!!!!! ....... Get your quotes right!!!!!!

--

Ha! Ha! That's a TC and Ephotozine seem to have the graphs mixed up anyway They show the lens being better with the TC, besides at £350 it's worth more than your camera (or mine).

According to Lens Rentals all adapters are rubbish......

"I won't bore you with another 20 graphs that look pretty much like these. We tried
Leica to NEX and Leica to Micro 4/3 adapters, Canon to NEX, etc. We tried different
lenses on one adapter. It didn't really matter. None of them would be acceptable
for testing. Not one.

I'll point out that we carry only name-brand, fairly expensive adapters, not eBay $29 adapters. "


Sony can't even keep the light out

On the same site they explain that the thickness of glass over the sensor is taken into account in the lens design..... so lenses aren't fully usable system to system.
Micro 4/3 have 4mm of glass over the sensor Leica have 1mm

--

Some people in this thread have displayed what can only be described as veiled hostility. Seems a strange attitude to adopt really and I can't quite compute what has gotten their backs up so. But no matter.

I'll make a point of ensuring I use the tags correctly from now on, Alergnon. It was a straightforward mistake.

Anyway, back on track. I think it's probably not constructive to focus on nitpicking the shortcomings of the current crop of higher end mirrorless cameras. As has been noted, they're still a relatively immature technology but one that is rapidly progressing. Indeed, the likes of the A7 is the first of its kind and which I only referenced in the original post to serve as an example of where I'd like Pentax to go with any mirrorless camera they might introduce, be it full frame or not. I didn't intend for the thread to degenerate into a detailed analysis of other brands' offerings.

As has also been noted, mirrorless will not suit the needs or preferences of all and I think it's a case of chaqun a son gout. I've enjoyed reading many of the contributions thus far and I look forward to reading more. Many thanks in advance and all that.

Thanks for starting this post... good debate thus far... have little or no understanding (and am happy to stay that way) on the techie front in all of this... just wanted to add my pov on the evf/ovf front... as Nigel and John have alluded to, much as I like the idea of mirrorless (same quality, more compact), for me, an optical viewfinder is crucial... both mechanically and philosophically...

The whole point of a camera for me is to help connect me to where I am, not remove me from it... I have a K01, and much as I love it, composing something on a screen (however small) simply doesn't do it in the same way as seeing and connecting with something physically and directly (the difference, as Nigel says, between looking through vs looking at)... which is why, after a few unsuccessful attempts, I don't use the k01 for landscapes...

If Pentax can make a mirrorless machine (no idea how) with a proper ovf I'd be interested, but not, I suspect, until then...

Best

My take would be that if your DSLR has live view then they already have. Hence I'd be keen on a hybrid viewfinder, that allow's the user to swap between optical and EVF as required.

I believe the Fuji FinePix X100 has had a go at this.
Typically when I link to something non Pentax the post gets deleted, so you may want to google that to see an idea of what form this could take, should Pentax look to implement it.

Alternatively, brainwave time, why not have two viewfinders? One for optical and one for EVF, when the device was in use with the mirror locked up. Seems ridiculously simple really, especially when you consider that EVF's don't have to be placed in the centre like an optical viewfinder does.

A hybrid viewfinder would be possible on a DSLR, but there would be no way to have a traditional SLR optical viewfinder without the mirror box. You could go down the X100 route as you say but then you wouldn't be looking through the actual lens. Your average rangefinder user would of course say that this isn't too much of an issue.

Someone said earlier in the thread that asking a DSLR owner whether they'd go mirrorless is akin to asking a car enthusiast if they'd like a faster horse. I'm unsure whether that's a wholly accurate analogy though. Probably, it's more akin to asking a classic car enthusiast what they think of modern high performance cars where more and more is being done via wire and controlled by a computer. I do understand that at a certain point, unless the manufacturer is careful, the sense of connection to the car will be lost and it will be like playing a computer game. There's a balance to be struck though.

Going back to cameras, the goal is for the camera to not get in the way of creating the photo, and even to enhance the process and the experience for the user, and I see no reason why this cannot be achieved with a mirrorless camera. It depends upon the user's own sensibilities, I suppose. A main prioroty for me is to have a smaller camera and something like the K series only mirrorless is what I'm looking for, but there's nothing that really fits the bill in the market just now. There's a definite trend for mirrorless cameras aimed at more serious photographers and it will be interesting to see how this develops and in particular how Pentax address this if at all.

Don't forget the Q-S1, which can deliver amazingly good quality from its small sensor.

As for larger mirrorless, by the time we add a lens they are not that compact any more, and looking at the K-S1 I personally don't see any need for anything smaller or lighter than that. It's hardly more than a modestly sized bridge camera, much smaller than the old Fuji 9500, but a fully fledged DSLR.

I'd propose a dslr with an evf as well. Yes, two viewfinders on the one body. Use Optical when you want to and flip up the mirror and use the EVF when you want to, such as in dim lighting where you can't actually see much through the optical viewfinder, or in video mode.

Just an idea along my best of both worlds line of thinking. And not mirrorless, just you chose when to use the mirror and when not to.

Hybrid is the elegant solution, but two would be the next best. Optical in the middle, EVF to one side.

The S1 is heading in the right direction sizewise. I'd personally like it a little smaller yet as it would mean being able to fit it, with a prime lens attached, into a jacket pocket or small bag. One thing I like about Pentax is the range of small K mount primes available. I know if you're using a larger zoom lens you ideally need something a little weightier at the end of it to balance it out, but I prefer a small prime lens. I also agree with you that once you attach a massive great prime to a small camera you're left with something that's possibly even larger than an DSLR, or at least a Pentax one. Here's a Sony A7R with the 55mm prime compared to a Nikon D800 with 35mm prime. Yes, that's a prime that's attached to the Sony, not a zoom. Getting the size of the camera down is largely negated if the size of the lenses remain relatively large.




I'm sure that Pentax could probably get the size of the S1 down a little more were they to put their minds to it. Stick some controls on it similar to the T1 and I'd have something approaching what I'm looking for in a camera.

I'd be more than happy with a small DSLR, just that I suspect a mirrorless system camera will be in the offing for Pentax and I'd like it to be a more a small K3 than a small S1, if that makes sense. An S1 with a hybrid viewfinder and aimed at the enthusiast would be preferable still, but I doubt they'll go down that route.

Interesting perspective about the sizes of cameras such as The Pentax K3's, S1's, and even K01's...

But consider this. The S1 is almost as small as they can get with a PK dslr. Sure they could make a mirrorless, but at a bit of a cost.

One has to remember the distance between the lens mount and the sensor; which is considerable. There is literally no way around that one if keeping the existing PK. But also consider this math... There is a way to use that existing cropped sensor distance and also manage to fit in a full frame sensor.

One of the best items that Pentax has going for it is in keeping the PK mount, and even expanding upon that mount in the future with use of full frame glass. Which is exactly the reasoning that Pentax is remaining with PK over all of these years. Unfortunately, where it would be a nice wish... We'll never see PK in a Sony sized camera

The Sony 7S has a fully electronic shutter option.

Just a reminder that other marques are off topic on PU....