Pentax Reportedly Considering Micro 4/3 Style Camera

[bmattock]

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...ws_289300.html

Pentax is investigating the possibility of launching a Micro Four Thirds-style camera, to compete against the likes of Olympus and Panasonic.

Whilst I am a fan of Pentax, I think this pile-on by various manufacturers is too little, too late. Samsung will have their competing style of small-camera, large sensor camera, Sigma has the DP1 and DP2, and now Sony (reported yesterday) and Pentax want in? I don't think the market for this type of camera is that big.

But that's just a guess. We'll see.

[rover]

There was a Nikon rumor yesterday too. APS-C sized P&S.

Rumors are rumors, but cameras with larger sensors are a good thing.

[ruby.monkey]

Didn't Samsung show a preview of such a camera a few months back? I wonder if this will be related?

[rover]

The NX has been floating around as a tease by Samsung for almost a year now.

[ruby.monkey]

Originally Posted by rover

The NX has been floating around as a tease by Samsung for almost a year now.

That's the bunny. Thank you. I remember it being the cover girl on a copy of Amateur Photographer, but said copy is at home, at the bottom of the reading pile in the... er... smallest room, and I couldn't recall the issue date.

[dazedgonebye]

Originally Posted by bmattock

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...ws_289300.html



Whilst I am a fan of Pentax, I think this pile-on by various manufacturers is too little, too late. Samsung will have their competing style of small-camera, large sensor camera, Sigma has the DP1 and DP2, and now Sony (reported yesterday) and Pentax want in? I don't think the market for this type of camera is that big.

But that's just a guess. We'll see.

I looked in my crystal ball yesterday. Through the clouds I think I saw a future where the current entry level dslr market is taken over by the no-mirror large sensor digital camera.
A little further in the future and we see...

[nightfly]

The more the merrier.

One of them will hit the sweet spot. Having been burned by digital p&s cameras a couple of times now, I'd love to see the competition produce something that would work for me. The current field is almost there but not quite.

I think the real reason is that both point and shoots and DSLRs are reaching their market saturation points and these guys need to sell more cameras. I bet every major manufacturer will have something in the 4/3 or APS C market by next year. The sensors are there.

The bad news for Leica is that these things will undermine any market for the X1 if they come in under a grand which they pretty much have to. Who's going to spend 2 grand on an X1 with all these options?

[Gary E]

If they're thinking of making a P-Mount micro 4/3rds DRF to put their 43mm/1.9 LTM lens on well bring it on...

[.ken]

Ricoh needs to put a larger sensor on the GRD... then we'll talk! ;-)

[M4streetshooter]

Originally Posted by .ken

Ricoh needs to put a larger sensor on the GRD... then we'll talk! ;-)

And that would be the end of the conversation.

Man, that would be a fine camera...

[shadowfox]

Originally Posted by M4streetshooter

And that would be the end of the conversation.

Man, that would be a fine camera...

Yep, I'd like to see a 28/1.9 lens on something the same size and shape as the GR-1 and has a m4/3rd sensor in it.

[Kin Lau]

That Sony is interested in a m4/3 style camera isn't surprising. I'd just think that it would come out of the video division rather than the photography division. Have you wondered why no Sony DSLR has video yet?

Canon will be releasing/unveiling something Sep 29, and many think it'll be their large sensor (aps-c or even ff35 sized), interchangeable mount video camera.

If m4/3 became a standard for compact size digicams, that would be great. Perhaps they could standardize the format of the removeable digital VF's, so that you can pick and choose your body, lens, VF. The range of lenses available for m4/3 would definitely use a few more options.

[kuzano]

Originally Posted by bmattock

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...ws_289300.html



Whilst I am a fan of Pentax, I think this pile-on by various manufacturers is too little, too late. Samsung will have their competing style of small-camera, large sensor camera, Sigma has the DP1 and DP2, and now Sony (reported yesterday) and Pentax want in? I don't think the market for this type of camera is that big.

But that's just a guess. We'll see.

Since the Samsung DSLR cameras are in fact, Pentax built, It seems reasonable to presume that a mirrorless camera from pentax will be the final development of the Samsung NX. I would imagine that a Pentax mirrorless camera will surface near the same time as the Samsung NX. (If the NX ever makes it to the gate).

[bmattock]

Originally Posted by kuzano

Since the Samsung DSLR cameras are in fact, Pentax built, It seems reasonable to presume that a mirrorless camera from pentax will be the final development of the Samsung NX. I would imagine that a Pentax mirrorless camera will surface near the same time as the Samsung NX. (If the NX ever makes it to the gate).

It could be. However, Samsung did not partake of the most recent iterations of the Pentax dSLR cameras. I believe that they announced at the time that they wished to put future dSLR cameras on hold whilst they worked on the upcoming NX. However, there are rumours of a Samsung-badged K7, to be called the GX30. I do not think they have a Samsung rebop of the K2000 (Km) do they?

I would not be terribly surprised to find that the Samsung/Pentax tie-up yields a product going the other way, from Samsung to Pentax. We'll see, eh?

[count_zero]

I don't understand what the fascination is with full frame sensors. The smaller the sensor the larger the depth of field. What they really need to focus on is making smaller sensors with less noise. You have to figure that HDTV is 1600x1080 and no one complains that the resolution is too small. So the benifit of having a larger sensor for more resolution is pointless imho. The only benifit large sensors have over small is simply less noise. I want lighter cheaper lenses, more depth of field, and less noise at high ISO.

[FrankS]

Originally Posted by count_zero

I don't understand what the fascination is with full frame sensors. The smaller the sensor the larger the depth of field. What they really need to focus on is making smaller sensors with less noise. You have to figure that HDTV is 1600x1080 and no one complains that the resolution is too small. So the benifit of having a larger sensor for more resolution is pointless imho. The only benifit large sensors have over small is simply less noise. I want lighter cheaper lenses, more depth of field, and less noise at high ISO.

That's the issue right there. Selective focus is a powerful creative option that small sensor cameras don't allow.

[Mephiloco]

All these other companies joining the ranks of the m4/3 crowd means cheaper cameras. I'd like a EP-1, but at it's price point I can't merit that much money for a first generation camera which is lacking a few things I'd like.

Also, I think once one of these companies realizes the possible allure of a camera that accepts legacy lenses we'll get some manual focus friendly features. Until then, I'd love to be able to replace my dslr with a smaller body/lens combo. My Canon+17-50/2.8 is just too big to use as a 'walk around' kit.

[sevres_babylone]

FrankS: That's the issue right there. Selective focus is a powerful creative option that small sensor cameras don't allow.

Large depth of field in low light situations is a powerful creative option that larger sensor cameras don't allow. I love by Ricoh for this reason.

Don't get me wrong, I'm positively schizoid, alternating between fast lenses on my R-D1 and the Ricoh, but I'm glad Ricoh has continued to develop small sensor cameras.

I also would be happy if Ricoh did join the micro-4/3-style fray; I like their interface very much, they have a good history with small lenses, and it would be another interesting option. But I would like to see that as an alternative to, not a replacement for, small sensor cameras.

[aizan]

can we just...not talk about dof?

[ruben]

Originally Posted by bmattock

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...ws_289300.html



Whilst I am a fan of Pentax, I think this pile-on by various manufacturers is too little, too late. Samsung will have their competing style of small-camera, large sensor camera, Sigma has the DP1 and DP2, and now Sony (reported yesterday) and Pentax want in? I don't think the market for this type of camera is that big.

But that's just a guess. We'll see.

Dear Bill, kindly let me disagree through and thrugh.

a) Sigma DPs' are on a clearcut inferior level than m4/3, and demanding the same price from the users is a sort of insult to autism, whose next step is evaporation. No future.

b) Much of the same will apply to Samsung's prospective big sensor small camrera , unless they can have the same mount as the m4/3.

c) On what basis can you or me estimate the world market prospects for m4/3 ?

As for me, my own limitations on real global market info do not apply to Sony or Pentax, which address this questions with professionals and real data. If they are showing interest, this is a small heavy fact, which would demmand strong factual argumentation to counter.

d) If you are on the side of guessing I will salute you from the side of feeling. My feeling is that the m3/4 format, son of the initial mother 3/4m is so good, from the basics, that it will continue to evolve technically for a long long time, and broaden its market to magnitudes we do not ever dream today.

The question a good market scouter would ask himself is not what camera people want today -as today is too late- but which one they will want tomorrow. This talent is the like of answering a question that has not yet been asked.

Cheers,
Ruben

[bmattock]

Originally Posted by ruben

The question a good market scouter would ask himself is not what camera people want today -as today is too late- but which one they will want tomorrow. This talent is the like of answering a question that has not yet been asked.

As I said, I am just guessing. However, I still attempt to use logic in my reasoning, even if I am guessing.

One must first attempt to answer the question - what market does the micro four-thirds camera appeal to?

First of all, in the digital market, there are three types of buyers. Casual, enthusiast, and professional.

The casual photographer uses point-n-shoot cameras, and they are generally not that interested in image quality. Yes, they want 'good' images, but they're easily swayed by marketing gimmicks such as high megapixel counts, anti-shake, big zoom, face detection, and so on. They have options at every price point, manufacturers are scrambling to differentiate themselves in some meaningful way from one another, and the market is indeed saturated - sales have been declining along with the global recession.

The enthusiast uses higher-end point-and-shoot cameras with manual controls and good lenses, as well as dSLR cameras. The more esoteric of the enthusiasts use digital rangefinder cameras and the like, but they are a minority - a subset within a subset.

The professional uses dSLR cameras pretty much exclusively. There are always exceptions, but for the most part, they're hauling around Canon or Nikon digital SLR bodies and big expensive lenses. They have a lot invested in their equipment and they are not likely to dump what they're using unless it just doesn't work for them. The annual sales of dSLR cameras have not plateaued, according to the latest sales figures I'm privy to. They continue to rise, even with increasing competition and a bad economy.

The way I see it, four-thirds and micro four-thirds is aimed at the enthusiast market. This is a small market segment already. And they are not selling into a market that has held off buying digital cameras - this group has digital cameras already and regularly buys the latest greatest.

So the market for micro four-thirds is meant to cut into the enthusiast's purchases of point-and-shoot cameras and to some extent, dSLR cameras.

This means that a camera manufacturer selling the micro four-thirds (or other small-camera/big-sensor cameras) must try to avoid cannibalizing their own sales of high-end point-and-shoot cameras, if they intend to continue them.

Canon has had such a camera with the G9/G10/G11. The micro four-thirds camera aims directly at the people who would otherwise be interested in that camera. So I would imagine that Canon would not be interested in m4/3 unless they intended to drop the G series.

That's just one example. Overall, I feel the market for m4/3 is somewhat limited, and there are only so many pieces of the pie to go around, unless the entire market for p-n-s higher-end cameras is going to go away.

I also consider what I can see with my eyes. I go to the local Best Buy, and I do not see any m4/3 cameras. I don't see any at the local camera store. I don't see any being sold at retail at all. That tells me that the average consumer is not the market.

We often make the mistake, because we associate with other enthusiasts, of assuming that we are the market, or that we are 'big'. We're not the market, and we're not big. We're a tiny little drop in the bucket - an odd lot of quirky enthusiasts who represent diddly-squat in terms of sales to manufacturers.

I like the m4/3 concept, and I'd like to see it continue to grow and see new products introduced - I'm not against it at all. I do think that the market for m4/3 type products is limited and will saturate fairly quickly. Nikon has never made a decent competitor to the G10, for example, because Canon has it sewn up, and the niche itself isn't worth enough money to Nikon for them to seriously go after it.

As to the Sigma DP1 and DP2, regardless of what you might think of their capabilities, they are of the genre 'small camera / big sensor' and so I included them in my off-the-cuff analysis.

[Kin Lau]

Originally Posted by bmattock

The enthusiast uses higher-end point-and-shoot cameras with manual controls and good lenses, as well as dSLR cameras. The more esoteric of the enthusiasts use digital rangefinder cameras and the like, but they are a minority - a subset within a subset.

The professional uses dSLR cameras pretty much exclusively. There are always exceptions, but for the most part, they're hauling around Canon or Nikon digital SLR bodies and big expensive lenses. They have a lot invested in their equipment and they are not likely to dump what they're using unless it just doesn't work for them. The annual sales of dSLR cameras have not plateaued, according to the latest sales figures I'm privy to. They continue to rise, even with increasing competition and a bad economy.

The way I see it, four-thirds and micro four-thirds is aimed at the enthusiast market.

I would suggest the m4/3 will appeal to both the enthusiast _and_ the pro market. The enthusiast for the reasons stated. Many pro's aren't just sticking with med fmt or pro dslrs, they also carry a P&S, especially the higher rates models like the G10 or LX3. The cost of a G10 or LX3 is not far from the cost of m4/3. Many photogs whol already have a DSLR system are also interested in m4/3 as a backup or a carry-around when they don't want to slug the big iron around, the video features don't hurt either. I have about 7 DSLR's in the family right now, but if the price creeps down on a m4/3 body to the G10 or LX3 range, then I'd get one for sure.

As for the regular 4/3 system, I think that's just going to fade into the background. Given that you can now buy a used full-frame 35mm DSLR for the same price as the top of the line 4/3 body... I think it's days are numbered.

[ruben]

Dear Bill,

I don't think that the definition "big sensor/small camera" is broad enough to encompass the m4/3. Thus for exjample the system lems exchangeability, is part and parcel of he package which Sigma's DPs are not, nor any of the Canons you mentioned. The G10 with its toy viewfinder is no match for the Panasonic G1. And the G1 manual focusing for legacy lenses puts to shame the bigger boys too.

Nevertheless I am interested in your opinion about a broad question. Why the market that was able to absorb so many slrs and AF slrs will not be able to absorb a similar amount of m4/3 ?

I am not stating nor insinuating nothing here, but my feeling is that the high prices of dslrs, with the tax of being bigger and heaier than their mechanical ancestors, AND the speedy advance by which the industry has been evolving, has kept a lot of "enthusiasts" on the fringes. So much of the folks have been playing with the minipocket flat undercameras, but what next ?

On the other end, my feeling is that many folks must start being tyred of carrying digital speed graphics and may converge into th em3/4 too.

Unfortunately both Panasonic and Olympus seem to be going backwards from their start m3/4 models. Panasonic by diminishing its G1 size by 35% and the camera performance by much more, while Olympus, I am highly suspictious will mock themselves with a tunel viewfinder ten times less able than the one on the G1.

But if instead of these stupidities, another company could offer an m3/4 with further extended capabilities, then the desertion from dslrs will start being fast.

Lastly I strongly disrecommend the new Panasonic GF: smaller size at higher price and half capabilities is no for intelligent people.

Once Olympus disclose the measure of their gap between its new model and the G1, then we may have some rest.

Cheers,
Ruben

[ruben]

Originally Posted by ruben

Dear Bill,


Nevertheless I am interested in your opinion about a broad question. Why the market that was able to absorb so many slrs and AF slrs will not be able to absorb a similar amount of m4/3 ?

......

Cheers,
Ruben

Hi Bill,

Since you are being challenged from many corners now, I will come with this latter.

Cheers and good luck at Pamplona !
Ruben

[bmattock]

Ruben,

With regard to the price disparity, I have three dSLR cameras. None cost more than $400 USD each for the body - new - and one only cost $249 USD new. I don't think m4/3 is going to sway my choices based on low price - they cost nearly three times each what I paid for my dSLR cameras, which are much more capable (at the moment).

With regard to why I don't think the m4/3 will carve out a similar niche as the dSLR, it's because the niche has to come from somewhere. If people buy a m4/3, they're going to buy it instead of a top-end digicam like the G10 or a low-end dSLR like the entry-level Olympus, Nikon, Canon, Pentax, etc. They're eating their own sales, and I don't think it will go on for very long.

I am not comparing the superiority of the m4/3 - I agree it's a very capable standard and cameras are quite nice. I'm saying there isn't much room for a lot of m4/3 or m4/3-like cameras in this niche. Just an opinion.