Keeping the faith: Pentax K-1 video overview

Not like Pentax. They don't even consider about it. First of all, Canon and Nikon are major camera company while Pentax is Minor camera company that people don't even know about them. That's totally different condition.

Huh?

I'd like to see some evidence that Canon and Nikon are involving Sigma into their camera development.

Alex; Didn't Nikon even have a lawsuit against Sigma once?

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/04/02/sigma-qa-part-i-ceo-kazuto-yamaki-explains-why-so-few-pentax-mount-lenses
Pentax is the only company with mechanical parts for controlling aperture and Sigma have to invest and develop more time for Pentax lenses like special orders. Pentax never share any infos for them also. That's brutal while Canon and Nikon at least provide some infos. This is what I heard directly from both Canon and Nikon staffs from their company.

Yeah... right.
Except that Nikon is also using mechanical linkage for aperture control (except in their latest lenses). And so does Sony, for their SLTs.
As they're explaining in the article you're citing, it's actually about demand. Otherwise Sigma is technically able to make Pentax K lenses, as proven by countless such products.

Not like Pentax. They require special parts for Pentax not Nikon.

Pentax K require custom-made parts, and so does Nikon and Sony SLT. There's nothing special about them, other than that.

Then that doesn't explain why sigma having trouble with Pentax only just because of special parts. Like the site said, Pentax is the only brand require special parts while others are easy to make.

That's a lie. K-mount lenses are not more difficult to make than e.g. Nikon ones; the problem is the volume.
This is explained in the interview - did you actually read past "special parts"? Did you read the detailed explanation from the editor notes?
"The problem for Pentaxians is that there just aren't enough of them, so demand for Pentax-mount lenses is small to the point that it's economically difficult to produce them, or at least to do so in a way that would keep Pentax users happy"

Not lie. Look how long does it take to make Pentax mount lenses.

Definitely a lie. There are too many cheap K-mount lenses (including Sigma) to make it a ridiculous lie. Besides, aperture levers are aperture levers, there's nothing to make only the Pentax ones utterly more difficult.
Your insistence in ignoring the explanation forum the article is highly suspect, by the way.

Nope. That doesn't explain why Sigma still not releasing new lenses for Pentax. You are ignoring this fact.

No Im not. I met Sigma staffs from Photo plus 2015 expo about this already. Not just economical but also because of the aperture mechanism. They have to reverse engineer but that part is quite critical so they said.

Yes you are. But it's pointless to continue since no force of this world could make you read that article, so I'll end the here.

Although I started my photography with Pentax (K1000, ME Super and Super-A), I converted to Canon when Pentax were slow to implement AF. Since then, I've been trying various mirrorless systems. I also have the 645Z for some stuff, but I left Pentax a long time ago and haven't really looked at their 35mm/APS-C stuff much.

I am lucky in that I can afford to buy a lot of gear without needing to sell any of it. I think I'll give the K-1 a miss though as I can't start building another system, unless it is compulsively good, of course. Then I'll reconsider.

Count with me
Dfa 15-30
Dfa 24-70
Dfa 28-105
Dfa* 70-200
Dfa 150-450
....
Fa 31
Fa 43
Fa77
Dfa 50
Dfa 100
Fa 35
....
All those lenses are ff and capable of matching the k1 sensor.

From old to new: Takumar, Super Takumar, K Series, M Series, A Series (these have auto aperture on K-1), F Series, FA Series, DA Series (Crop typically), D FA (some of these are FA type but optics tuned for Digital)
HD is latest coating replacing SMC
Some of the series have a * designation, i.e. A* 85/1.4 or FA*200/4 Macro - These are what Pentax would deem top of the line optically. There are also different sub types within each series, notably the FA Limited or DA Limited, these will have a certain character, i.e. with the FA Limited's the design brief was to return an analog type rendering, the DA Limited's would be about small size and good performance from the widest aperture while keeping up to date with rendering fashions.

That would require an entire new lens line. While not impossible, I wouldn't hold my breath.

Why would it require lenses any different than what you already get for the 645z?

I could be wrong on this 4 legged friends. The idea is to keep the LCD center to the lens' axis, regardless of which direction one turn the screen. Helpful , and thoughtful, when doing pana, liked with nodal ninja head.

It might take a while for this feature to grow on new user.

As DPR has already mentioned in another article, Pentax actually developed and announced a FF DSLR before Canon, Nikon or anyone else back in 2000, and even showed a working prototype. But apparently the Philips 6MP sensor ended up being problematic, so the camera never made it to production.

So maybe that's what DPR is referring to when they say refer it it being back in the spotlight. You can see the article, including pictures of the MZ-D prototype here:

http://www.dpreview.com/opinion/4721880615/the-long-difficult-road-to-pentax-full-frame

I feel so mislead.

These feels ..

.. cannot handle the feels.

"Oh, you mean it's a video containing an overview of the K1."
---
And that's exactly what i had understood from the title.

"I thought it was going to be an overview of the K1's video capabilities."
---
I hadn't thought that.

"Misleading title!"
---
Didn't think so.