Nice if you have a lot of Pentax lenses, but no camera for alt shooters (not usable with RF lenses, Contax/Leica/OM lenses can only be mounted with expensive Leitax mounts).
douglasf13 wrote:
Strange. Lenses built for PDAF are very slow on a CDAF system. Using K mount is a strange choice.
Yes, strange. Using lenses designed for a mirror-reflex system on a mirrorless system fails to capitalize on some of the advantages a mirrorless system gives. Crate an adapter to make full use of K-lenses, by all means, but create a new mount that captures all the advantages of the mirrorless form factor.
this would make more sense as a Nikon/Canon full-frame small-as-possible body with EVF. I doubt the user base of K mount is big enough to sell very many of these.
Lotusm50 wrote:
Yes, strange. Using lenses designed for a mirror-reflex system on a mirrorless system fails to capitalize on some of the advantages a mirrorless system gives. Crate an adapter to make full use of K-lenses, by all means, but create a new mount that captures all the advantages of the mirrorless form factor.
I don't think they can win this one. If they made a new mount camera,
people would be complaining about K lenses not being usable...
I think if the camera is modern, has some great features, like amazing MF,
it could be successful. The problem is Pentax s@cks in marketing department,
many people have no idea they make a nice range of small Limited lenses.
But that could be actually better than the new Fuji IMO.
With a small set of Limited glass, let's say 15, 43 and 77, it could be
a good small system.
But it won't matter, Pentax is dead, there is no doubt about it.
It's too late for anything.
Sorry if that sounds harsh for Pentax fans, but it's true.
They had a chance when they could promote their great cameras with
Limited lenses - that was a compact system way before people went crazy
with mirrorless. It was/is a really good system.
For me it was a discovery and I liked my Limited lenses a lot.
But NOBODY knew they existed, Pentax did nothing to promote it.
Now they have their PMA booth empty and a meeting room
next to the restrooms...
snowboarder wrote:
Sorry if that sounds harsh for Pentax fans, but it's true.
They had a chance when they could promote their great cameras with
Limited lenses - that was a compact system way before people went crazy
with mirrorless. It was/is a really good system.
For me it was a discovery and I liked my Limited lenses a lot.
But NOBODY knew they existed, Pentax did nothing to promote it.
Now they have their PMA booth empty and a meeting room
next to the restrooms...
Andrew,
I'm curious as to whether you've hung on to your Pentax limited lenses or whether you've replaced them all.
I'm toying with the idea of getting a K mount to NEX adapter to use my 31 and 77 limiteds on my NEX 7 should it ever arrive.
Jeff Kott wrote:
Andrew,
I'm curious as to whether you've hung on to your Pentax limited lenses or whether you've replaced them all.
I'm toying with the idea of getting a K mount to NEX adapter to use my 31 and 77 limiteds on my NEX 7 should it ever arrive.
Jeff
I don't have them anymore. They are good, but NEX allowed me to use
much better glass like Leica R 28 or Contax 35 f1.4.
So although I do like Limited lenses, I sold them.
My favorite one was 43 Limited. I think it's the best of all.
I like Zeiss 35 f2 more than 31 Limited. Contax 35 is an entirely different animal
77 is close to 43 look, but between Leica 60 R and Zeiss 100MP, it was
just too crowded for me. I try to keep lenses I actually shoot with
I think if Pentax only had something like 24 f2 matching the quality of 43 and 77,
I could possibly pick up the mirrorles new whatever it is.
With 24, 43 and 77 it would be a nice small setup.
Another option would be to use Zeiss ZK glass, the problem is I can not
find 21 ZK anywhere. I do have 18 ZK though...
Whatever this camera will be, it will probably be limited to K mount glass,
so it will never become popular...
snowboarder wrote:
I don't have them anymore. They are good, but NEX allowed me to use
much better glass like Leica R 28 or Contax 35 f1.4.
So although I do like Limited lenses, I sold them.
My favorite one was 43 Limited. I think it's the best of all.
I like Zeiss 35 f2 more than 31 Limited. Contax 35 is an entirely different animal
77 is close to 43 look, but between Leica 60 R and Zeiss 100MP, it was
just too crowded for me. I try to keep lenses I actually shoot with
I think if Pentax only had something like 24 f2 matching the quality of 43 and 77,
I could possibly pick up the mirrorles new whatever it is.
With 24, 43 and 77 it would be a nice small setup.
Another option would be to use Zeiss ZK glass, the problem is I can not
find 21 ZK anywhere. I do have 18 ZK though...
Whatever this camera will be, it will probably be limited to K mount glass,
so it will never become popular...
It's good to know your thinking. I think I'll get the Pentax adapter and try the lenses out because my 28/2 is M mount and the 31/1.8 may be better in the corners on my much awaited NEX 7. Also, I need to test the 77/1.8 against my CV 75/2.5 to see which has a nicer portrait rendering.
douglasf13 wrote:
Strange. Lenses built for PDAF are very slow on a CDAF system. Using K mount is a strange choice.
How do you know? After all, if you want to use lenses built for PDAF on a CDAF body you need to use an adapter and the adapter may compromise AF performance.
A friend of mine has a very extensive Nikon system and he recently bought the J1 and the FT-1 adapter. He recently mounted the 70-200/2.8 VR AF-S and 1.4 TC on the J1 via the FT-1 adapter. As it is in Hebrew let me translate one sentence: AF-S - Check. As fast as the D700. Stabilizer also works great and the pictures were taken handheld.
I think there must be some mistaken information in the rumor details. I don't think it will be the K-mount as we know it today.
Also Pentax is far from dead! What a nonsensical remark to make.
On Pentax lenses, they are some of the best! They often come in at budget prices yet compare favorably with many/most semi-pro grade lenses costing several times as much! Of modern consumer-class lenses in general Pentax wins in a lot of categories!
The few of their pro lenses I've tried ROCK!!! pretty hard as well!
Yakim Peled wrote:
How do you know? After all, if you want to use lenses built for PDAF on a CDAF body you need to use an adapter and the adapter may compromise AF performance.
It really is the lens design that matters actually. CDAF requires very low mass focus groups to work with any speed at all compared to a PDAF system. That's how m43 is getting very fast CDAF, they've specifically designed the lenses for it. If you take a lens with a heavy focus group meant for PDAF and throw it on a CDAF system it is dog slow no matter what you do. CDAF requires difference measurements which means large momentum changes while PDAF does not. So unless you go out of your way to design a low mass focus group with a servo meant for difference measurements CDAF doesn't work well at all. This is why 4/3 lenses adapted to m43 have very poor AF performance and why Sony didn't even bother trying to do CDAF with their DSLR lenses - they designed an adapter that incorporated PDAF into it instead.
Ken
P.S. The J1 system is a hybrid PDAF/CDAF system which is why DSLR lenses work well on it. Of course Pentax may be able to do the same thing!
