Pentax K-01 images -- what do you think?

<p>http://www.photo.net/equipment/pentax/k-01/preview/</p>

<blockquote>

<p><strong>No hotshoe </strong>and no VF might to make it harder to use than the K5...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I was bummed when I read that comment, then I looked at the first photo Hin posted again...</p>

<p>There is a hot shoe. I've held the camera. And, by now we can all see it in the images.</p>

<p>Without a view finder I don't think that I will get one. I never have any luck using a screen to focus, plus not being pressed against your face the movements of the camera are greater. The movements would be amplified with larger lenses.</p>

<p>I think it would make a nice second camera for a K-5/7/20 user who might want to travel lighter sometimes but still use their K mount lenses. For landscape photography using the LCD isn't bad IMO and putting it on a tripod would solve those shake issues introduced by holding it at arm's length.<br>

That being said I'd prefer a viewfinder of some sort. Maybe the next revision will have one...<br>

It would probably be tough to shoot something fast paced like sports with it, so the SLR with a viewfinder would still need to fill that role.<br>

I just ordered a K-5 so I'm at least a year out from buying another camera body but when I do this could get some serious consideration.</p>

 

<p>Anyone know if the maximum flash sync speed stay in 1/180 sec, I can't find the information quickly.</p>

<p>I am very glad to see the preview by Josh and with a lot of valuable first-hand information such as the focus peaking feature similar to that in the Ricoh GXR Leica M module. While many, myself included, would prefer the option of an actual view-finder, the addition of focus peaking is a welcome feature. I hope there is a demo of how it works in the field. Not having the tilt-able screen is a minus for me. I greatly admire at my Sony on the focus peaking and with manual focus assist that can magnify the view on the LCD to 4.8x and 9.5x times magnification. I sure hope that Pentax won't disappoint in that regard. </p>

<p>The two videos are worth seeing in</p>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-k-01-officially-announced.html">http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-k-01-officially-announced.html</a></li>

</ul>

<p>Marc is a fan of Pentax 6x7, I am glad I view the video. The impressions from the 1st video may be difficult for Pentaxians to follow as the product may not appeal to others. But who care if this brick actually works and according to video, the sensor may be better than the one in K-5 with the new M processing engine -- can't wait for some real photos.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I don't know how much the 'K-5 sensor technology' relates to AF capability, but I am also a bit concerned about live view AF performance, though Pentax had improved it somewhat for the K-5 (vs. K-7) so they've had yet more time to work on it. Personally I don't need it to be 'superb' because frankly my expectations for Pentax AF have never been that high -- I would expect it to be very accurate, hopefully it will be reasonably hunt-resistant. Perhaps encouraging is that Sony has used 'K-5 sensor technology' in a few NEX models, and I haven't heard people calling that insufficient--though of course Sony wasn't burdened with making it work with an AF lens system designed in the late 1980's.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My concern is not about AF, but about the LiveView per se - K-7 and K-x are laggish compared to my E-PL2 and there is an annoying image flicker when you zoom in. The E-PL2 has a lower resolution screen, but it looks better than the high-res one I have on the K-7. I may have missed something about the K-5, but I don't expect they made many improvements in this area.<br>

The MFT sensor, for example, is designed for quick readout - I don't know if the K-5 sensor is and if it is anything like any sensor in a NEX camera.<br>

The fact that Sony knows how to make a better LiveView is also not surprising given that they lead in EVF technology and have all the incentives to produce something better than an OVF. But Pentax has yet to produce an EVF, so you see why I am concerned about the "K-5 sensor and LCD technology".</p>

<p>What's interesting to me is how even a heralded designer like Marc Newson couldn't get around basic camera functions to produce something more compelling. Newson is considered one of the best industrial designers, right up there with Jonathan Ive, and it's impressive Pentax made the call.</p>

<p>But this camera looks rather unremarkable. Vaguely brings memories of the Pentax SF-10 which I consider one of the least attractive Pentax SLRs. The Olympus PEN series looks way more enticing.</p>

<p>ME</p>

<p>Josh, Thanks for the update on the hotshoe. I couldn't quite tell from my netbook what the top of the unit looked liked, so I assumed the hotshoe was an omission; Usually they're pretty obvious.</p>

<p>This should be an interesting camera if it can compete with the x100. I'm excited to see that this MILC can handle K-mount lenses... something that some of us that would be highly unlikely.</p>

<p>Here's one for you camera mechanics and optics experts out there: for a given lens, does the distance between the lens mount and the sensor need to be constant across different cameras, or is there room to vary this and still maintain compatibility with existing lenses? And the sensor to back of camera distance? I looked carefully at the Marc Newsom video (he's a bit of a local hero, Australian born and bred) and the mount to back distance of the K01 looks to be same as that of my K10D, which is about a third fatter than my ME Super. </p>

 

<p>Peter, the distance between the mount and the sensor (or film) is called "registration distance" and is constant for each mount. The Pentax K mount (and the M42 mount) have a registration distance of 45.46mm. If you mount Pentax lenses on a camera with a different registration distance they either won't focus to infinity or focus past it (in which case you won't be able to focus on objects close by).</p>

<p>The thickness of DSLR cameras is partly due to the need for a rear screen behind the sensor, as well as the sensor electronics that live behind it. In the film days you just had the film (which is very thin), a metal plate behind it to keep it flat against (that could also be thin) and the door; this took up less space than the back of a DSLR.</p>

<p>I think the design is very beautiful in a modern sort or way, but I am concerned with the ergonomics. First, the exposure compensation button is in location that will make it difficult to hold down with your pointing finger and turn the control dial with your thumb while maintaining a tight grip with the right hand. The EC button should have been moved further forward and to the left on the top of the body when viewing the camera from behind. A possible location could be just north of the control dial. The red button can then occupy the previous location of the EC button. This would make the arrangement of buttons around the control dial more symmetrical - (green is to the left, red is to the right and EC is north of the control dial). </p>

<p>The second potential problem is that I hope there is enough room around the grip so that my fingertips do not run out of room as my long fingers wrap around the grip. I am hopeful this will be a non-issue.</p>

<p>I do hope that Pentax brings out the K-02 quickly with an added viewfinder. With the body being so large (in volume) there should be lots of space for a high quality EVF. </p>

<p>Great job Marc and Pentax!</p>

 

<p>I know this is NOT a fair comparison but it is something people do consider. I see a relevant thread with early impressions on this<a href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-01-forum/174006-latest-photos-k-01-pentax-singapore-user-group.html"> PF thread with Singapore Pentax clubsnap members</a></p>

<p>Source from Camera Size comparison: <a href="http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,34">http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,34</a></p>

<p><strong>Front View</strong><br>

<a href="http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,34"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7033/6815338323_3bd78a74ba_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="406" /></a></p>

<p><strong>Top View</strong><br>

<a href="http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,34"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7002/6815338317_0b3f7fb7e5_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="359" /></a></p>

<p><strong>Back View</strong><br>

<a href="http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,34"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7016/6815338309_29e0975688_z.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="408" /></a></p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Hin wrote:<br>

I know this is NOT a fair comparison</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Of course it is! Two mirrorless cameras with APS-C sensors and without a viewfinder. It's a perfectly acceptable comparison.</p>

<p>One should also compare the weight of the two: <strong>560g</strong> for the K-01 and <strong>269g</strong> for the NEX-5n. I've read many comments online from people that don't seem to understand that if they buy the K-01 and mount a kit lens on it, they'll have to hold 785g (1lb 12oz) out in front of them to compose and take a shot. Now imagine doing that for a whole afternoon of picture taking. And god forbid you decide to mount a fast zoom or telephoto lens...</p>

<p>I think that the K-01 was a brillant move by Pentax. Why not make the body since I see a lot of photos being posted using other mirrorless cameras and pentax lenses. The body is a bit fatter, but what Hin's comparison photos don't show is the adapters on the front of the Sony (and I presume other mirrorless cameras) to fit the K-mount lenses. I think that evens things up a bit. If I ever need or decided I want a back up/walk around camera for the K-5, this would be it (if the K20D goes down that is). </p>

<p>If Pentax had designed a new mount (and was consequently able to make the K-01 much thinner), bear in mind that in order to use K-mount lenses with autofocus you'd need a big honkin' monster of an adapter, similar to Sony's E-mount to A-mount adapters. They come in your choice of expensive or crazy expensive:</p>

<p>http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&partNumber=LAEA1</p>

<p>http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921666375279</p>

<p>The LA-EA2 adapter weighs 200g; putting that on a NEX-5N brings the total weight pretty close to that of the K-01, and both adapters add a significant amount of thickness to the camera.</p>

<p>That said, I really do hope that Pentax offers an EVF of some kind -- either built-in in a subsequent K-0_ model, or as an accessory. Built-in would be my preference.</p>

<p>All these years I've been asking for a smaller and lighter Pentax and I've been chided by the "big hands" crowd. Now Pentax makes what I wanted and those same folks are saying it's too big and too heavy. Oy. :p</p>

<p>What about Pentax releasing an EVF as a hotshoe-mounted accessory? It could be added like an old Voitlander OVF and be compatible with this and later K-0x models.</p>

<p>Shoe-mounted EVF would be great (if it doesn't cost a fortune), but we'd have to wait for the K-02 because (I assume) there's no accessory port on the K-01 for an EVF, nor accessory contacts in the hotshoe.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>They come in your choice of expensive or crazy expensive:</p>

</blockquote>

<p>$200 and $400, you mean? :)</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>bear in mind that in order to use K-mount lenses with autofocus you'd need a big honkin' monster of an adapter</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, but only in order to use K-mount lenses. This aspect would be irrelevant for new customers.</p>

<p>Sure, but let's be real here... you know as well as I do that if they had come out with a new mount (resulting in a thinner camera), the Pentax fans would be screeching and hyperventilating about the lack of native K-mount compatibility and about the camera being too small for their hands. And then they'd probably complain that the new lenses weren't small <em>enough</em>.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>R.T. wrote:<br>

Sure, but let's be real here... you know as well as I do that if they had come out with a new mount (resulting in a thinner camera), the Pentax fans would be screeching and hyperventilating about the lack of native K-mount compatibility and about the camera being too small for their hands. And then they'd probably complain that the new lenses weren't small <em>enough</em>.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>So instead they've released a camera that's too large to be a mirrorless without an EVF, only a bit smaller than a K-5, probably the same general size as the K-r replacement (both of which have VFs), and with no size advantage with native lenses. Not to mention (and I can't stress this enough) that it's too heavy to shoot at arms length for extended periods of time with any lens other than the 40mm XS pancake.</p>

<p>Pentax should have released a mirrorless for those people who want a mirrorless and its advantages. Instead, they've released a mirrorless that nobody who wants a mirrorless could possible want.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>R.T. wrote:<br>

If Pentax had designed a new mount (and was consequently able to make the K-01 much thinner), bear in mind that in order to use K-mount lenses with autofocus you'd need a big honkin' monster of an adapter, similar to Sony's E-mount to A-mount adapters.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Indeed, you would, and I'd have been happy to pay $200 for an adapter that gave me auto-aperture close down (and AF with SDM lenses)—it's not that large, by the way. The large adapter is the one that gives you phase-detect AF, which I wouldn't buy, but some people might want for certain purposes. The first adapter adds some size to the lens, but not to the camera body, and you are nowhere near breaking even when comparing size and weight to something like the K-01. I've shot my FA 77 Ltd with an adapter on the Samsung NX10 and it's a much smaller, lighter package than shooting it on the K10D or K-x, or K-01 for that matter, and I have an EVF to boot.</p>

<p>In fact, releasing such an adapter is what Pentax should have done together with a proper mirrorless. People with big hands can continue to purchase K-5s or K-rs (and their successors); people who want smaller cameras would purchase the mirrorless.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>R.T. wrote:<br>

All these years I've been asking for a smaller and lighter Pentax and I've been chided by the "big hands" crowd. Now Pentax makes what I wanted and those same folks are saying it's too big and too heavy. Oy. :p</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The <em>same</em> folks? Are you sure? Cos I think it's different folks; the ones complaining are the ones that wanted a truly smaller camera, not one that's 10% smaller.</p>

<p><strong><a href="http://j.mp/w3Ircw">Click her</a><a href="http://j.mp/w3Ircw">e</a> to see the K-01 compared to the K-r.</strong> Yes, it's smaller, but it's not a huge difference, and what's worse, <em>it's only 38g lighter</em>...but without a viewfinder. I don't see it being worth the compromise, and I'd be happy for you to tell me why you'd prefer a K-01 for $750 (body only) to a K-r for $610.</p>

<p><strong><a href="http://j.mp/ybsY3y">Click here</a> to see the K-01 compared to the K-5.</strong> There still isn't a huge size advantage, though now there's a real weight advantage with the K-01 weighing 25% less than the K-5...again, without a viewfinder. So I ask you now: Would you purchase a K-01 for $750, or rather pay $280 more ($1,030) for a K-5?</p>

<p>I'm not persecuting you, R.T., it's just that I want to understand why you think the K-01 was a good idea :-)</p>

<p>As I mentioned previously, I'm disappointed that it doesn't have an EVF, and I do wish it was a bit lighter... but overall I think it's a great concept. I've never been one to buy the first of a new product line, whether it's cameras or computers or cars... so I'll wait and hope for the K-02 to be a little lighter, a little more compact, and have an EVF. Oh, and offer it in an all-black version. :-)</p>

<p>"Why would you prefer a K-01 over a K-r" is a perfectly valid question, and while I'm not necessarily saying that I <em>would</em> buy a K-01 over a K-r (see above), keep in mind that you're talking to someone who was pretty much ready to walk away from Pentax completely, due to bad experiences with quality control and customer service. The main reason I'm willing to once again <em>consider </em>spending money on Pentax equipment is because I'm hopeful that Pentax under Ricoh management will have a better attitude when it comes to quality control and "service after the sale."</p>

<p>Unrelated, but I was looking at pictures of the Ricoh GXR last night... is it just me, or does the K-01 bear a slight resemblance? It's too bad that camerasize.com doesn't have the GXR/A12-module combo; it would be cool to see them side by side.</p>