The K-3 is already pretty small to be honest. Its very close in size to the KS-2 which was only a hair bigger than the Canon SL1 which still holds the crown of smallest aps-c DSLR. Due to the sensor/board construction I don't know how they could make it all that much thinner to be honest. When you consider there is a sensor, an SR mechanism, a circuit board directly behind, and then the LCD which also has a protective layer over it. If I take my K-3 and set it next to my MZ-s and line up the mounts the K-3 is about a half inch thicker than the MZ-S. So the sensor and all the related stuff plus the rear screen is fitting in a space 1/2 inch thick. I think the two bodies are pretty close in size compared in my hand. The mz-s is actually a little wider, but not nearly as tall as the K-3 because the k-3 has a huge pentaprism. I use a grip with the k-3 though so that makes it feel a lot larger and heavier. I would love to find a grip for my mz-s though it does feel rather nice and small in the hand by itself with a prime.
The MX I have is about the smallest K-mount camera I own (the ME might be about the same) but it also packs a lot less into the camera compared to say an MZ-S. On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:06 AM, P. J. Alling <[email protected]> wrote: > It's described as a DSLR, so it's probably not mirrorless. > > It's probably not Full Frame. The K-1 is less than a year old, and the > current APS-C flagship the K-3[II] was introduced in 2014, and refreshed in > 2015. In DSLR product cycles it's Methuselah. > > So it's most likely a new Flagship APS-C DSLR. > > What I'd like to see is a slimmer camera. Leica has just released the M10 > which packs it's electronics into a package about the same size as an M-7, > (as an aside, notice how after dropping model numbers and having their user > base and the commentariat supply them with unofficial ones, Leica brought > them back). > > What I'm hoping is that RIcoh has decided to use the same improvements in > technology to build an APS-C DSLR in roughly the same footprint of an LX. > If they do that and manage to keep the same specifications as the K-3 half > the arguments for a mirrorless camera lose a lot of their weight, (see what > i did there, I'm so clever), which speaking of the size and weight > advantages of mirrorless has anyone actually compared a K-3II to a Panasonic > GH5? The only specification that some might take as an advantage is the > GH5's weight, > > http://camerasize.com/compare/#698,619 > > Finally I'd like to see a little less convergence. It's nice to have a DSLR > that can be used to make videos, however Pentax cameras have been going > backwards in actually producing good video while larding up the UI with easy > video access. Why not do the opposite, give us the option to use SR sensor > shift on videos, and put up with the noise on the built in microphone, > (anybody serious is going to use an external mic anyway), and do away with > that silly red video record button and replace it with something useful, > like say a joystick to pick AF sensors just like a lot of other serious > still cameras have done, plus actually offer an official replaceable VF > screen that's actually good for manual focus? > > Then again Ricoh may just decide that no one's interested in a flagship > APS-C camera anymore and just build entry/mid level APS-C bodies based on > the convergence of the K-50 and K-S2 from now on. Personally I wouldn't be > surprised, though it would sadden me. > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
