[pathdoc]

Judging a camera or a lens by its aesthetics is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

Every other Pentax lens series right back to the Takumars is no problem, but I could never explain why I felt leery about the F's. God only knows why, when I own and occasionally quite happily use an FA lens which surely has to be far worse in build quality terms than any of them. Perhaps because they were the first-generation AF lenses? *shrugs* At least I admitted my suspicions were without firm basis.

The only thing they can't do that the FAs can is set the Program line using MTF.

What is this MTF thing anyway? From reading the K-5 manual, it seems to tell the camera to favour the aperture (or set thereof) that gives the best IQ for that lens, but beyond that?

[THoog]

The F series are fine lenses. Much better than most of the FAs. The only thing they can't do that the FAs can is set the Program line using MTF.

Jatrax should be along soon - I think he is gradually collecting every single F. I'd say there are more lemons in the FAs (just plastic consumer-grade lenses, really) than Fs.

[THoog]

I hold a K-01 with my arms in, elbows at my side, left palm under the body and it makes all the difference in the world.

I tried to show this stance / grip throughout 2012 but I couldn't make any headway.

Yep, palm underneath for anything but really small primes. (DA40 here is just for demonstration purposes)

Four ways to hold the K-01:


But for "street shooting", you gotta go gangsta style!

[monochrome]

^^ Anything but arms-out works. The key is to get the LCD about six inches away from your face, even if you have to look down a couple inches.

[pathdoc]

Put an EVF with a "pentaprism" on that, alter the shape a little bit, and you have the digital successor to the old ME. Now that I've seen shots of it in someone's hands to put it in context, I'm impressed. But like the ME, this thing really isn't built to put great hulking pieces of glass on the front. The 40XS was possibly going too far IMO (except maybe as a kit-lens equivalent to its Limited cousin), but this looks like the perfect travel companion to the DA Limited primes. I'm finally starting to see what Pentax were trying to do here and I approve, even if they didn't get it quite right.

Stuff a full-frame version of this inside an MX-type skin, with an EVF (even a basic one) and a popup flash in the pentaprism, and it will sell like hotcakes.

[JPT]

Put an EVF with a "pentaprism" on that, alter the shape a little bit, and you have the digital successor to the old ME. Now that I've seen shots of it in someone's hands to put it in context, I'm impressed. But like the ME, this thing really isn't built to put great hulking pieces of glass on the front. The 40XS was possibly going too far IMO (except maybe as a kit-lens equivalent to its Limited cousin), but this looks like the perfect travel companion to the DA Limited primes. I'm finally starting to see what Pentax were trying to do here and I approve, even if they didn't get it quite right.

Stuff a full-frame version of this inside an MX-type skin, with an EVF (even a basic one) and a popup flash in the pentaprism, and it will sell like hotcakes.

It's a really nice travel camera. I have the DA21 on it by default, the DA40 and the FA77 in my bag. That's an awful lot of potential for not a lot of weight or space. The camera is comfortable to hold because none of those lenses are front heavy, and autofocus seems well optimised for them.

The nice things that you can't see from the images are the metal build quality, which is second only to the K-5/K-3 cameras, and the battery life, which is better than any other mirrorless, and maybe better than the K-50.

I personally prefer shooting on the screen sometimes, and if you like viewfinders, you only have every other K-mount camera ever made to choose from!

[Scorpio71GR]

In order to call something a flop I feel it would something that never sold and no one ever used. Pentax never really fell into this Category. The ME-F was just ahead of the technology I think. I knew people who had SF-1s and liked them. I bought their manual focus lenses from them. There have been cameras along the way that really didn't work out. However if you do not take chances and try something new once in awhile you get stuck in a rut and in the past.
I am not sure how you can call a camera that has a dedicated thread in the forums with new pictures daily a flop. I have shown my Cannonikkon friends my K-01 and some have been impressed with it. The fact you can carry an ASP-C camera in you jacket is pretty neat. I constantly am impressed with the images I get with it. Usually I have my long lens on my K3 and my K-01 in my pocket for quick shots. I have had way more people ask me about my camera while using the K-01 then my K3. Yup I like funny little yellow box.

[Jean Poitiers]

Just joining in ... according to my favorite salesperson at my B&M camera store, he cannot ever remember selling a KS-1.

PS - I have a ME-F and love lil'guy ... still "looking" for a working AF lens ... that does not cost an arm and leg.

[Kerrowdown]

The biggest Pentax flop.

A not fully tightly locked Benbo tripod springs to mind...

[G and T]

What do you think? What is the biggest Pentax flop in their history?

Marketing, what else could have possibly been worse?

Glenn

[LoneWolf]

Marketing, what else could have possibly been worse?
Glenn

Totally agree.!!!!!

You have to ask yourself how many sales have Canon, Nikon etc. actually lost on their mid range sales by not having an in built feature to turn anti-aliasing on and off, weather resistant bodies, Pentax's backward compatibility of lenses** and lens stabilisation built into their cameras. Too many great characteristics very poorly marketed by Pentax. So poorly in fact that they seem almost original when they appear in other manufacturer's models, giving the impression that Pentax is playing catch-up in features for which they are ahead.

Other problem areas have to be the way their autofocus appears to have been playing catch-up all those years as does their video features and, more recently, giving the K-S2 "only" a 20 million pixel sensor when many of its mid range rivals have 24 million pixels. "Heavier" bodies than some of their rivals could also come into this category. The fact that Pentax's approach still produces cameras that out perform most buyers capabilities and needs is lost on a buying (and selling) buying public that "need" the latest, preferably from the comfort of a 'big" company regardless of its financial stability: peer pressure / comfort?

Problems all down to poor marketing.

**Pentax needs to capture a large part of first time system camera buyers market and that for existing Canikon owners for whom backward compatibly is of far less importance than an adapter that allows them to use all the features on their existing lenses. That means lighter, preferably K mount if possible) bodies with a smaller 4/3 sensor and smaller and lighter lenses to match, a decent electronic viewfinder electronic shutter for higher speeds, superb video capabilities, etc.. For the more mature photographers a full frame camera in the range is a must. Perhaps think Sony here but with an EVF like Leica's 4.7 million pixels (for lighter weight) win a weather resistant, not too heavy body. The SLR may still have a lot of life in it, especially for sports photographers and those taking pictures of fast moving objects (like children and grand children?) and those (like me) who still feel more comfortable with it

[pathdoc]

That means lighter, preferably K mount if possible) bodies with a smaller 4/3 sensor and smaller and lighter lenses to match

This is what the next-generation Pentax Q ought to be - shipped with a KAF3 adapter to maintain compatibility with all Pentax lenses, but also able to take just about everything else, including Olympus and Panasonic micro 4/3 lenses. And while it might seem odd to potentially hand a competitor a whole lot of lens sales on a platter, note that film-era Ricoh, when it moved away from the M42 mount, chose the K mount for its XR-1, thus enabling use of all Pentax lenses then in existence as well as the Rikenons (and naturally all the Takumars too, given the existence of the M42/K adapter). It at least meant customers could buy the body with confidence that high-quality lenses would be available for it (and Chinon did the same thing). Pentax could then develop its own micro four-thirds line at leisure, taking advantage of established focal-length ranges in Panasonic and Olympus lineups to fill in gaps and cover ranges the competitors did not, and win customers back that way (if they weren't already using their K-mount lenses straight out of the box).

[LaurenOE]

KS-1 is by far the biggest "Pentax" flop, followed by the "Ricoh" Theta.
Flop, being an actual camera, made it to production, had an advertising campaign, that didn't sell and not a prototype.

Ricoh, with their GXR was a HUGE flop.