What do you think of the looks of the K-01?

pcarfan · 02-01-2012, 05:49 PM

Originally posted by jsherman999

... I just can't call it ugly. What I find ugly and frankly unnecessary is the Nikon V1. It contains some neat tech, but it looks like a P&S-style prototype body containing that tech, is a middling offering in general, and seems very hard to use as a photographic tool. Every time I push the cart past the V1 display in Target I stop to handle one, and leave even less enamored of it each time. It's almost an expensive fail, IMO, it's saving graces being the VF and the new AF system.

This is much like a NEX 5N that will autofocus K-mount lenses. It may yet have an external VF available, perhaps a good one. It's CDAF may be very good. It looks better than the NEX bodies, has the excellent K-5 sensor, will probably cost less than the K-5, and autofocuses K-mount lenses.

I'd love to see a wide-angle prime for this, I'm hoping it has a good VF on the way, I'm hoping the price is right and I'm hoping the AF isn't terrible. I guess you could say I have some hope, which isn't something the 'Q' brought me.

(and let's not overlook the fact that this is a 'yes' vote for K-mount from Ricoh.)
.

Pretty much my exact thoughts....I will call it a more masculine design and is definitely growing on me by the minute.

abieleck · 02-01-2012, 06:00 PM

I am not a huge fan of the looks of this camera so far, seems stuck between retro and mid 90's 35mm P&S. I really don't like the yellow, looks like a childs toy. Plus what's the point of low profile pancake lenses if they are going on something that looks like it will glow in the dark. I think it smart to get a big name designer on board, that will only add to the buzz and perhaps draw in another demographic with just the signature on the bottom....that said I don't care for much of the design I have seen thus far from Marc Newson, not really my style.

I love what Fuji has done with the x100 and X Pro 1 in terms of style and design, they just look slick. They have made them a trendy(in a classic way) and fashionable accessory while keeping the functionality. I was hoping this new class from Pentax would be similar, maybe even with aperture rings on the new lenses.

Not super stoked about this new body yet, but looking forward to seeing more images and the specs.

**Jetfin** · 02-01-2012, 06:11 PM

It looks fun. But, I'm biased. Anything with a k-mount would look good to me. I hope it has a solid well-made feel to back-up its chunky appearance. WR and EVF would be big pluses.

johnmflores · 02-01-2012, 06:52 PM

Nothing a Super Takumar 50/1.4 mounted to it can't fix

Docrwm · 02-01-2012, 06:56 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

Nothing a Super Takumar 50/1.4 mounted to it can't fix

Ah, but that could even fix a Yugo!

Docrwm · 02-01-2012, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by selar

I hope its someone's fevered imagination of what a K-01 looks like rather than the real thing.

Been said elsewhere but I guess it needs repeating - Adam has said that those are actual pictures of the K-01. My guess is that he's had either a) the official Pentax-Ricoh pictures awaiting the lifting of the embargo on them and/or b) an actual K-01 awaiting tomorrow's release time so he can post one of the first, if not the first, review of the K-01.

Smolk · 02-01-2012, 07:15 PM

I don't like the language used in the poll, "redheaded stepchild freak"

JHD · 02-01-2012, 07:16 PM

Pentax mirrorless? Too little too late.

Rupert · 02-01-2012, 09:39 PM - **1 Like**

Seriously, it looks like something on the sale rack at K-Mart or Staples. While the retro look of the Fuji's are red hot and so are the features, this is in the wrong direction for my taste. Looks matter....we can deny it all we want, but no one sets out to marry an ugly woman...unless she is one hell of a cook. This ugly duckling had better be a gourmet chef....and as sexy as they come in the bedroom....and may I suggest a very dark bedroom for this one!

Regards!

stevebrot · 02-01-2012, 09:52 PM

The styling reminds me of various mid-century low-end viewfinder film cameras. Hopefully the performance is not to the same standard as the look...

Steve

stevebrot · 02-01-2012, 09:53 PM

Originally posted by Rupert

...and may I suggest a very dark bedroom for this one!

The sentiment is a little crude, but I am with you on this one...

Steve

hcarvalhoalves · 02-01-2012, 10:05 PM

I'm okay with the design. The real problem is that it just doesn't look familiar, so many photographers won't "connect" with it, and simply call it fail.

It's a kind of mistake to have a designer redesign almost from the ground up an object that had it's design iterated so many times and for so long. It's the same mistake that happens with architects: they thrown all the popular wisdom about how people have been living for thousands of years, and just build a weird house that leaks water in the name of aestethic. There are some good points the design (I like the some of the button layout), but some other things are too unusual (the mode dial position, and the "hump" it adds to the camera body).

A K1000-like design would suit this better, specially now that retro is the new fad - and with a point, since old cameras ergonomics were pretty good.

isobar · 02-01-2012, 10:25 PM

I love it. Reminds me of my old K-1000. Probably the best 35mm camera ever made

TOUGEFC · 02-01-2012, 10:31 PM

Looks ok, but I wouldnt brag about.

Oh and first thing I would do is remove the "Mark Newson" logo!
Honestly, who wants that written on their camera!

Rupert · 02-01-2012, 10:34 PM

Well, we all have different tastes...to me it just looks too ugly to handle. No optical viewfinder? I hope that is not so......that's like a woman with no boobs.....you can live with it, but you won't necessarily like it.
Regards!

View Poll Results: What do you think of the looks of the K-01?
Awesome! Sign me up for an SLR w/o a mirrorbox because it's smaller!	30	16.30%
Awesome! Sign me up for a canary yellow one!	17	9.24%
Eh? I can live with it. Let's see what the features are first before I buy one	84	45.65%
Damn, that's fugly...I'm not buying that redheaded stepchild freak	53	28.80%
Voters: 184. You may not vote on this poll

02-01-2012, 05:49 PM	#16
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978	Originally posted by jsherman999 ... I just can't call it ugly. What I find ugly and frankly unnecessary is the Nikon V1. It contains some neat tech, but it looks like a P&S-style prototype body containing that tech, is a middling offering in general, and seems very hard to use as a photographic tool. Every time I push the cart past the V1 display in Target I stop to handle one, and leave even less enamored of it each time. It's almost an expensive fail, IMO, it's saving graces being the VF and the new AF system. This is much like a NEX 5N that will autofocus K-mount lenses. It may yet have an external VF available, perhaps a good one. It's CDAF may be very good. It looks better than the NEX bodies, has the excellent K-5 sensor, will probably cost less than the K-5, and autofocuses K-mount lenses. I'd love to see a wide-angle prime for this, I'm hoping it has a good VF on the way, I'm hoping the price is right and I'm hoping the AF isn't terrible. I guess you could say I have some hope, which isn't something the 'Q' brought me. (and let's not overlook the fact that this is a 'yes' vote for K-mount from Ricoh.) . Pretty much my exact thoughts....I will call it a more masculine design and is definitely growing on me by the minute.

02-01-2012, 06:00 PM	#17
abieleck Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Portland, Oregon Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 799	I am not a huge fan of the looks of this camera so far, seems stuck between retro and mid 90's 35mm P&S. I really don't like the yellow, looks like a childs toy. Plus what's the point of low profile pancake lenses if they are going on something that looks like it will glow in the dark. I think it smart to get a big name designer on board, that will only add to the buzz and perhaps draw in another demographic with just the signature on the bottom....that said I don't care for much of the design I have seen thus far from Marc Newson, not really my style. I love what Fuji has done with the x100 and X Pro 1 in terms of style and design, they just look slick. They have made them a trendy(in a classic way) and fashionable accessory while keeping the functionality. I was hoping this new class from Pentax would be similar, maybe even with aperture rings on the new lenses. Not super stoked about this new body yet, but looking forward to seeing more images and the specs.

02-01-2012, 06:11 PM	#18
Jetfin Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Pacific NW Posts: 23	It looks fun. But, I'm biased. Anything with a k-mount would look good to me. I hope it has a solid well-made feel to back-up its chunky appearance. WR and EVF would be big pluses.

02-01-2012, 06:52 PM	#19
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Nothing a Super Takumar 50/1.4 mounted to it can't fix

02-01-2012, 06:56 PM	#20
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by johnmflores Nothing a Super Takumar 50/1.4 mounted to it can't fix Ah, but that could even fix a Yugo!

02-01-2012, 06:58 PM	#21
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by selar I hope its someone's fevered imagination of what a K-01 looks like rather than the real thing. Been said elsewhere but I guess it needs repeating - Adam has said that those are actual pictures of the K-01. My guess is that he's had either a) the official Pentax-Ricoh pictures awaiting the lifting of the embargo on them and/or b) an actual K-01 awaiting tomorrow's release time so he can post one of the first, if not the first, review of the K-01.

02-01-2012, 07:15 PM	#22
Smolk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Eerbeek Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,857	I don't like the language used in the poll, "redheaded stepchild freak"

02-01-2012, 07:16 PM	#23
JHD Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 1,406	Pentax mirrorless? Too little too late.

02-01-2012, 09:39 PM - 1 Like	#24
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Seriously, it looks like something on the sale rack at K-Mart or Staples. While the retro look of the Fuji's are red hot and so are the features, this is in the wrong direction for my taste. Looks matter....we can deny it all we want, but no one sets out to marry an ugly woman...unless she is one hell of a cook. This ugly duckling had better be a gourmet chef....and as sexy as they come in the bedroom....and may I suggest a very dark bedroom for this one! Regards!

02-01-2012, 09:52 PM	#25
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	The styling reminds me of various mid-century low-end viewfinder film cameras. Hopefully the performance is not to the same standard as the look... Steve

02-01-2012, 09:53 PM	#26
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by Rupert ...and may I suggest a very dark bedroom for this one! The sentiment is a little crude, but I am with you on this one... Steve

02-01-2012, 10:05 PM	#27
hcarvalhoalves Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: São Paulo, Brazil Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,019	I'm okay with the design. The real problem is that it just doesn't look familiar, so many photographers won't "connect" with it, and simply call it fail. It's a kind of mistake to have a designer redesign almost from the ground up an object that had it's design iterated so many times and for so long. It's the same mistake that happens with architects: they thrown all the popular wisdom about how people have been living for thousands of years, and just build a weird house that leaks water in the name of aestethic. There are some good points the design (I like the some of the button layout), but some other things are too unusual (the mode dial position, and the "hump" it adds to the camera body). A K1000-like design would suit this better, specially now that retro is the new fad - and with a point, since old cameras ergonomics were pretty good.

02-01-2012, 10:25 PM	#28
isobar New Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Alabama Posts: 7	I love it. Reminds me of my old K-1000. Probably the best 35mm camera ever made

02-01-2012, 10:31 PM	#29
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Looks ok, but I wouldnt brag about. Oh and first thing I would do is remove the "Mark Newson" logo! Honestly, who wants that written on their camera!

02-01-2012, 10:34 PM	#30
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Well, we all have different tastes...to me it just looks too ugly to handle. No optical viewfinder? I hope that is not so......that's like a woman with no boobs.....you can live with it, but you won't necessarily like it. Regards!