joshroot Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <p>Pentax K-01 mirrorless was announced today (4am my time *yawn*). Info here if you haven't seen it:</p> <p>http://www.photo.net/equipment/pentax/k-01/preview/</p> <p>It uses K-mount lenses. This is a huge advantage in that it instantly gives the K-01 the biggest non-adapter lens list of any mirrorless out there, and I think a lot of budget minded people and existing pentax users are going to find that cool. But it also limits the size of the camera to being bigger than other mirrorless systems. Pentax has embraced that and given the K-01 some interesting styling via Marc Newsom, whom I'm told is a famous industrial designer.</p> <p>I don't see this as being a bad move for Pentax. The chances of them outdoing Nikon or Sony or m4/3 at the same game is pretty small. They needed to take a different path than the current "create a new body and lens mount to go with it". The way I saw it, joining the m4/3 group (highly unlikely) or doing something like this were the only two real choices for them.</p> <p>So I like it. I think those who want small or super small cameras already have plenty of options in the mirrorless world (Hi Pentax Q!). So I don't mind that the K-01 is a bit bigger. Plus, for anyone who has a set of the Pentax Limited Primes, the overall kit size is still pretty compact. I love the APS-C size sensor for, what should be, great high ISO performance relative to other mirrorless systems with smaller sensors. The fancy designer? Don't mind it and if it brings a new group of people into more serious photography, more power to them. Lack of an EVF, that's a legitimate gripe perhaps depending on what lenses you are planning on using. Older bigger K-mount lenses might have been easier to handle with an eye to the VF. But I can also see why they left it off. More and more people do not see any use for a VF. Particularly the type of people that are moving from p&s cameras up into a mirrorless system.</p> <p>What's your take?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waltflanagan Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <p>I'll start off by saying this is the ugliest camera I have ever seen. I don't know who the "famous" designer is and after seeing this I don't really care.</p> <p>I'm more curious as to who Pentax thinks the target market is. Lack of EVF and contrast based AF will make it less appealing to the enthusiast crowd. Dpreview shows that it is basically the same width and depth as the K5 DSLR. You just save a little height. For entry level consumers I'm not sure why this is any better than a mirrorless alternative.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted February 2, 2012 Author Share Posted February 2, 2012 <blockquote> <p>I'll start off by saying this is the ugliest camera I have ever seen. I don't know who the "famous" designer is and after seeing this I don't really care.</p> </blockquote> <p>I didn't know the designer either and his name brings nothing to the table for me either. I don't personally find the camera ugly, but it isn't a stretch to see that some people will. It does feel better in the hands than you probably expect from initial impressions.</p> <blockquote> <p>Lack of EVF and contrast based AF will make it less appealing to the enthusiast crowd.</p> </blockquote> <p>While I don't have any technical specs on it, the Pentax people confirmed to me this morning that the K-01 will have AF during movie focusing. So your comment regarding AF may not be accurate. The VF issue may or may not be an issue with the overall market, even if it is an issue with the PN type crowd of more serious photographers. Although lack of a VF hasnt' hurt other mirrorless systems sales. But then again, those systems have other features that may be more important to photographers and overcome the missing VF in users' minds.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerry thirsty Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Yeah, I don't get it either. Maybe it's a Japan-centric concept? The 40mm would make sense on a full-frame, but on a 1.5X? Maybe there are people out there who like a 60mm equivalent, but it's neither normal nor tele- enough for my prime preferences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Howard Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <p>I like it. I'll have to get my hands on one to play with before buying, though. I can see this in my bag with a 15, 31, and 55-300 as a fairly small portable kit. I am getting very used to the idea of no viewfinder, especially after talking to my good friend who is a pro shooting Sony mirrorless. Watching him work, he has a free flowing routine, and, as he states, he will never look into a viewfinder again. If the AF on this is decent, I think it will be a winner. Remember, this is the introductory product for a new line, Pentax needed to do something completely different. Keeping the K lens line makes perfect sense, they already have a tiny new mirrorless system. The limited series of lenses was made for this camera. I could have done without the "retro" styling and the pentaprism hump...but lets see what the next in line brings.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leslie_cheung Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <p>I think the pricing should be more prominent. I missed it the first a couple times I glimpsed through it. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will_daniel1 Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <p>I am starting to get the message that composing a photo by placing your eye at a viewfinder will someday be history. Composing by looking at the tiny monitor on the back of a camera seems very retro when you consider that the best photos were at one time composed on the ground glass of a view camera, albeit upside down. It's not that this old dog can't be taught new tricks, but I can't yet get wrapped around any camera that doesn't have some kind of viewfinder. I'm sure I'll come around on that point if I live long enough -- I probably won't have a choice. </p> <p>I was a Pentax sales rep when we introduced that silly looking 40mm pancake lens. Most of us on the sales force had a laugh when we first saw it, but it sure did sell well over the years. I still don't like it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted February 2, 2012 Author Share Posted February 2, 2012 <p>The only thing I don't like about the 40mm lens is that it is a 61mm effective focal length. I just don't care for that particular field of view, but that's just me. I would have preferred a 40mm field of view if they wanted to do something a little unique. While I don't have any info on how it performs real-world. It is a tiny and cool lens physically.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will_daniel1 Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 When we launched the 40mm lens, we also introduced an accessory belt clip for the Pentax ME. The idea behind the lens was to make the ME into a "pocket" camera, or one that could be worn on the belt for instant access -- a street shooter's delight. You had to have a big pocket, but consumers got the idea. There was some consumer resistance to it as a "normal" lens because of both the focal length and the speed. Everybody was accustomed to 50mm and everybody wanted F1.7 or faster, or so we thought. The thing that surprises me most about that lens is its value today as a collectible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waltflanagan Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <blockquote> <p>I don't personally find the camera ugly, but it isn't a stretch to see that some people will. </p> </blockquote> <p>Aesthetic things are personal opinions. I think the Honda Element is hideous but the fact that I see so many on the road means that many don't agree with me.</p> <blockquote> <p>the Pentax people confirmed to me this morning that the K-01 will have AF during movie focusing. So your comment regarding AF may not be accurate.</p> </blockquote> <p>My comment was that the AF system is contrast based, not a phase detect system like a traditional SLR. From your preview</p> <blockquote> <p><strong>Type: TTL Contrast Detection AF</strong></p> </blockquote> <p>Phase detect AF is generally faster and better at tracking subjects in continuous AF mode.<strong> </strong></p> <p>If I had a ton of Pentax lenses I would buy a traditional Pentax DSLR, not this mirrorless camera that is pretty much the same size as a DSLR with most likely worse AF performance and no viewfinder.<strong><br /></strong></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted February 2, 2012 Author Share Posted February 2, 2012 <blockquote> <p>My comment was that the AF system is contrast based, not a phase detect system like a traditional SLR.</p> </blockquote> <p>Gotcha, I misunderstood your comment.</p> <p>However, I do not believe that many of the mirrorless compact systems have a phase detection system. So that critique of the K-01 really applies to much of the market segment.</p> <p>EDIT: Editing myself here, I forgot that the Nikon's do have a hybrid contrast/phase AF system.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waltflanagan Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <blockquote> <p>Composing by looking at the tiny monitor on the back of a camera seems very retro when you consider that the best photos were at one time composed on the ground glass of a view camera, albeit upside down. It's not that this old dog can't be taught new tricks, but I can't yet get wrapped around any camera that doesn't have some kind of viewfinder. I'm sure I'll come around on that point if I live long enough -- I probably won't have a choice.</p> </blockquote> <p>The benefits of an eye level viewfinder are it blocks outside light and it ads stability by bracing against your face. Comparing the K-01 to a large format view camera is apples and oranges. With the view camera you're on a tripod 99% of the time. That's far more stable than an SLR handheld braced against your face. When I shoot landscapes with my SLR on a tripod I shoot it like a view camera. I switch to live view and zoom in to check the exact focus. Many view camera shooters have a dark cloth and put their head underneath while composing and focusing to block the outside light.</p> <p>If you're shooting hand held using the rear LCD of a camera you have to hold the camera at least a foot away from your eye. With a large lens it becomes difficult to hold it steady. With a viewfinder against your eye you add stability. My Panasonic point and shoot has a 24-300mm lens but it is difficult to shoot at 300mm. I'm often stuck my Hoodman Loupe on the back and used it as a finder against my eye. Works quite well for extra stability although a little awkward.</p> <p>http://www.hoodmanusa.com/products.asp?dept=1017</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waltflanagan Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <blockquote> <p>However, I do not believe that many of the mirrorless compact systems have a phase detection system. So that critique of the K-01 really applies to much of the market segment.</p> </blockquote> <p>I think people are willing to accept compromises in performance in exchange for something else like reduced size, lower price, styling, ability to communicate (cell phone camera) I just don't get the advantage of the K-01.</p> <blockquote> <p>EDIT: Editing myself here, I forgot that the Nikon's do have a hybrid contrast/phase AF system.</p> </blockquote> <p>I just bought a Nikon V1 this week. There are plenty of things wrong with it and it is worse than many of its mirrorless competitors in many areas but its AF, burst rate, and EVF are excellent.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laur1 Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <blockquote> <p>Although lack of a VF hasnt' hurt other mirrorless systems sales. But then again, those systems have other features that may be more important to photographers and overcome the missing VF in users' minds.</p> </blockquote> <p>The important point though is that other mirrorless systems can take an EVF as an add-on. The K-01 doesn't have any accessory port AFAICT.</p> <p>My take: I have no idea whether this concept will fly and last, but at least they got it out of their system and maybe they can focus on something exciting next. The rumored lens roadmap is a step in the right direction.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parv Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 K-01 could fail for all I care due to lack of both a decent viewfinder and possibly slower focus than a SLR. And, it's missing a second wheel. Nice to see it got "focus peaking" feature, which of course demands tests against Sony Nex and recent translucent mirror cameras with the same lens. Also am glad to see grab-able width of the camera. Yellow color scheme is hideous. OTOH, it is overall more appealing to me than Pentax Q, Nikon 1, micro 4/3, and similar cameras. Then again as a very possibly non-buyer that would not matter (to any of the manufacturers of above cameras) ... unless darn things go sub-$350 as a replacement of point-and-shoot camera (in role of a secondary, tertiary camera; pocket-ability is no goal of mine till near future). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exposed1 Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <p>From just the photos, I like it. Now to see what the insides can do. I have VF-2 for my Olympus e-pl2 and it works great, but I like the screen on back a bit more, just wish it could be seen better in bright sun. I hear loads from some saying they must have the viewfinder on a camera but so far, I am liking the screen better and I have been shooting 35mm Nikons and Hasselblad for 35 years. The Olympus is my second camera with no viewfinder. Go figure....</p> <p>Randy</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will_daniel1 Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Aw c'mon Walt. You know that I wasn't trying to compare an LCD screen on a digital camera to the ground glass on a view camera (apples to oranges, as you said). I was merely calling attention to the similarity in composing methods with the new method being so "retro" to the old. Surely you got that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_tuthill Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Look at it this way: the K01 already has the best lens lineup of any mirrorless camera, and it can only get better. Mirrorless cameras are a fad, partly because many photographers like the arm-held P&S style. That said, I can't believe they paid a designer for this! Maybe he is colorblind. http://4.s.img-dpreview.com/files/news/4846894009/K-01_Yellow_3QView.jpg?v=1322 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_rubenstein Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <p>The K-01 is nothing more than a castrated DSLR. It's no smaller or lighter, just cheaper. Cameras like the NEX permits using almost any other lens with a adaptor. M4/3 lets you do the same thing and use smaller lighter native lenses, because of the smaller image circle. This thing lets you use the same lenses you already have (no one who doesn't already have Pentax mount lenses are going to buy this thing) on a camera without a viewfinder. Pentax would have done better to just paint one of their DSLRs yellow.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_earussi1 Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <p>Without a viewfinder it's DOA for me.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laur1 Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 <blockquote> <p>Look at it this way: the K01 already has the best lens lineup of any mirrorless camera</p> </blockquote> <p>I don't think so. It is also a useless camera with any long lenses - you cannot handhold it and focus a long lens without a viewfinder. Especially given the size and weight of long SLR lenses. Not that Pentax has many long lenses, but maybe you were thinking third party. And once you get into regular focal lengths, it offers nothing special. The Limited lenses were special by DSLR standards for being small, but they are just average sized in the mirrorless world.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
massimo_foti Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 <p>Lack of viewfinder is a show-stopper for me.<br> I am really curious to see how lens designed for phase detect AF are going to perform on a contrast based AF system.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_skomial Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 <p>I have pile of Pentax-K mount manual focus lenses from 17mm to 300. I was resisting getting a Pentax DSLR for them. Possibly this could b ethe digital body for them? if manual focusing on it works well ?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laur1 Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 <blockquote> <p>I am really curious to see how lens designed for phase detect AF are going to perform on a contrast based AF system.</p> </blockquote> <p>Probably better than they work on DSLRs in LiveView. Which was decent to begin with. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcuknz Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 <p>Sorry Pentax but you were late arriving in the digital world and you lost me after decades of K's and earlier models from around the sixties. Now you don't have an EVF and a flexible LCD so you will not tempt me back from Panasonic with this offering ... pity becuase I retain my Pentax M42 lenses though the bodies went quite awhile ago. On the other hand using legacy lenses is really for the birds :-)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now