[eddie1960]

Back on topic, I admire Pentax for not simply being the first to produce a mirrorless that uses full size DSLR lenses, but for breaking new ground in camera design. It may take the conservative amongst us time to come round to it, but that is the sign of a true progressive product. Technically, I need a viewfinder for my photography, so find myself waiting for the next mirrorless from Pentax, which will have EVF hopefully built in (and FF) .

In the meantime, well done Pentax, you lead the way in camera design yet again. It's a beautiful creature, simply gorgeous. A future design classic for sure.

SHHH!!! if you can't be negative about the design and all the stuff it isn't you may get kicked off the forum

[monochrome]

SHHH!!! if you can't be negative about the design and all the stuff it isn't you may get kicked off the forum

Nah. Adam wouldn't do that. But there are a few posters here who will chase you to hell and back contradicting every resonsable post you make.

[trublubiker]

Hah hah hah!!

Try this method to hold the K-01 and let me know if you think it will work.

I'm convinced.

Lucky you if you can focus on a LCD screen at 6".

Me, it's about 20", and then my arms are too far away from my body to be useful braces.

And I actually like the look of the camera (except the yellow variant) and think it's conceptually a winner except for the missing eye level viewfinder.

[monochrome]

Lucky you if you can focus on a LCD screen at 6".

Me, it's about 20" and then my arms are too far away from my body to be useful braces.

And I actually like the look of the camera (except the yellow variant) and thing it's conceptually a winner except for the missing eye level viewfinder.

Well I'm going to find out if it will work. I just see too many positives to let the ELVF issue win - and I like the design.

And it will force me to rationalize all the lenses on the shelf I don't list in my Equipment Hopefully there will be a lot of new buyers for legacy glass soon.

[Clicker]

For the estimated price, i'm going to get one...as soon as i get the push off the ledge as i just got for the Q

The way i'm looking at it is i won't have to go hunt for adapters and i still love the Pentax prime lenses.

[Docrwm]

I was reading this review online and had a deja vu experience.

"Despite this, the XXX will still cause some dismay amongst diehard XXX-series fans, in part because it's the successor to such a highly-regarded camera, but mainly because it is so conceptually different in target and operation. We're sure many will bemoan the loss of the buttons and dials and look aghast on the way they've been replaced by - the horror! - a touchscreen. Others, though, will look at the more compact body, enhanced video mode and considerably reduced list price, and add the XXX to their wishlists."


Eerie!

[unfocused]

Several posters have said the market wants a digital Spotmatic/K1000. Agreed. Pentax provided one in the *istDS... small, lightweight, gorgeous pentaprism viewfinder, no clutter, great handling. For those reasons I still prefer using it to my K-7 and K-r. All it needs is an updated sensor. It could have become the modern, timeless classic.

The DS is only 25g heavier than the weird and far less useful K-01, and slightly bigger. This is not to say that the K-01 is basically a bad idea. I'm sure it's a move in the right direction but the execution is disappointing. Having to take pics with arms outstretched is poor design. If an eye-level viewfinder is out of the question (which I don't believe) at the very least the rear display should be hinged (if not fully articulated) to allow the photographer to work at waist-level. Making it look like a dSLR when it isn't, is the ultimate stylistic nonsense.

Someone else has reminded us that the rangefinders of the 1970s/1980s set the standard. I still have my Yashica Electro-35 GTN and GX, Konica Auto S3 and Minolta Hi-matic E, all with superb f1.7 or 1.8 lenses. Museum pieces now but a joy to use. Maybe Marc Wotsisname should have taken a long hard look at what worked before.

[johnmflores]

I was reading this review online and had a deja vu experience.

"Despite this, the XXX will still cause some dismay amongst diehard XXX-series fans, in part because it's the successor to such a highly-regarded camera, but mainly because it is so conceptually different in target and operation. We're sure many will bemoan the loss of the buttons and dials and look aghast on the way they've been replaced by - the horror! - a touchscreen. Others, though, will look at the more compact body, enhanced video mode and considerably reduced list price, and add the XXX to their wishlists."


Eerie!

That's the Panny GF2 compared to the GF1, isn't it?

[revdocjim]

I haven't read all 13 pages so forgive me if I sound redundant. For starters I'm glad Pentax has joined the mirrorless market. And if you look at the first mirrorless on the market, the G-1, it wasn't very small either and while it did have an EVF it wasn't a very good one. But that started the revolution and now everybody is doing it. I sincerely hope Pentax can continue to refine their mirrorless cameras over time. The tough part is that the market has matured very rapidly and the stakes are already pretty high. The things I like about this camera are the aps-c sized sensor and mount compatibility. Unfortunately it is that second feature that results in the rather bulky/thick body design. I think it might be more attractive if they made the body thinner and just let the mount protrude a bit in the front. Also I think the lack of an EVF will work against Pentax here and hope they include one in future models. As for the design, well... to each his own I guess. Like someone else said, the first thing I thought of when I saw it are those rugged cameras that construction crews and surveyors often use. Perhaps that will appeal to some. It's a gutsy move to brag about having some famous designer on your team when the looks are so unusual. I think there will be a pretty sharp division of opinions here. For the time being I am happy as can be with my NEX5 and feel that it really fits my needs in three ways. First as an extremely portable backup to my A77 when coupled with the LA-EA2 adapter, secondly as a digital back for my old manual focus lenses of various mounts, and thirdly as a nice portable pocket camera. Sorry if I sound like I'm pushing another brand. My intention is just to point out the wide diversity of functions for a well made mirrorless.
Finally on a very positive note I absolutely love that pancake lens and hope they make more. Sony/Minolta users are very jealous!

[jeff knight]

Surprisingly the K-01 looks better and better every time I see it. The designer could have gone nuts. He didn't.

Did notice that interface was much, much simpler than usual Pentax slr. Made for dumber mass-use unfortunately. Goodby to the past I guess.

[robr7]

So I kind of like it. I do.

Like the design. Honest.
Like that it uses "K" lenses.
Like that it uses the same high end sensor in the K5.
Like the price point.

I'm able to get over no WR (price), maybe if it was just a bit thinner - but I guess the already small for a DSLR K5/7 bodies spoiled us, so the only thing I'll actually knock it on is it doesn't have a tilting rear screen. I think the design and ergonomics would've benefitted quite a bit with one.

Interested how the new processor affects PQ and video. If it scores well there (especially w/ video) it may be a nice, though indulgent, 2nd camera. (I lent my K7 out and I'm suspecting I won't see it back soon - oh well, anything to help spread the faith.)

Hope the line matures quickly. Like it to eventually bridge more of the P&S features - if it comes out with auto-focus during video capture, easy choice.

[kadajawi]

My first digital camera, a Canon PowerShot A60 had an optical viewfinder. It was tiny and would show the wrong area, i.e. what you see is not what you get, it's not even level. I ended up using the display all the time.

Several posters have said the market wants a digital Spotmatic/K1000. Agreed. Pentax provided one in the *istDS... small, lightweight, gorgeous pentaprism viewfinder, no clutter, great handling. For those reasons I still prefer using it to my K-7 and K-r. All it needs is an updated sensor. It could have become the modern, timeless classic.

The DS is only 25g heavier than the weird and far less useful K-01, and slightly bigger. This is not to say that the K-01 is basically a bad idea. I'm sure it's a move in the right direction but the execution is disappointing. Having to take pics with arms outstretched is poor design. If an eye-level viewfinder is out of the question (which I don't believe) at the very least the rear display should be hinged (if not fully articulated) to allow the photographer to work at waist-level. Making it look like a dSLR when it isn't, is the ultimate stylistic nonsense.

Someone else has reminded us that the rangefinders of the 1970s/1980s set the standard. I still have my Yashica Electro-35 GTN and GX, Konica Auto S3 and Minolta Hi-matic E, all with superb f1.7 or 1.8 lenses. Museum pieces now but a joy to use. Maybe Marc Wotsisname should have taken a long hard look at what worked before.

Funny you mention the DS. That's my camera. The pentaprism viewfinder is... okayish. Of course most other cameras have even worse ones, but even with the split prism screen that I use manually focusing can be guesswork only... when it is bright enough to focus manually the AF also doesn't have a problem.

Handling wise it is ok too, although the command dial is broken (only turns to the left. Turn it to the right and it will still think you are turning it right). But I wish it had an aperture ring (ok, my lenses have) and an exposure dial. That would make it perfect, together with a 6-8 MP version of the K-5 sensor.

A hinged or fully articulated screen increases the thickness of the camera, and the K-01 is just not meant for us. The next one might be. Most if not all mirrorless manufacturers offer both a camera with and without EVF (Samsung NX10 vs NX100, Sony NEX-3/5/C3 vs. NEX-7, Olympus and Panasonic too. Remember the first 2 NEXes only had a screen, and they were very successful. That the UI is dumbed down should tell you who it is for. There is always room for a beginner/fashion audience and a high end one, and I think it shouldn't be to hard to turn the K-01 into a higher end model (add dials and viewfinder, give it a more pro like interface (like K-5 perhaps) and done).

The advantage of a fat body vs. a long mount is that it should be much easier to hold/gripf

[revdocjim]

I spoke with the local Pentax expert at a favorite camera store in Tokyo today. He wasn't too happy about this new camera either. I found his reasoning interesting. While I've been thinking the mount compatibility was a strength, that was his first complaint. He wants a mirrorless that can accept all sorts of adapters so he can enjoy old lenses of various mounts. In other words, he wants an affordable digital back. And he would love for it to be a Pentax. But obviously this one isn't going to be it for him.

[konraDarnok]

I spoke with the local Pentax expert at a favorite camera store in Tokyo today. He wasn't too happy about this new camera either. I found his reasoning interesting. While I've been thinking the mount compatibility was a strength, that was his first complaint. He wants a mirrorless that can accept all sorts of adapters so he can enjoy old lenses of various mounts. In other words, he wants an affordable digital back. And he would love for it to be a Pentax. But obviously this one isn't going to be it for him.

The entire micro 4/3 market and the Sony E-mount has that niche cornered. It would have been foolish for Pentax to create yet another option that will be used to adapt old glass. I think this is why you don't see Canon, NIkon, or Pentax entering that market -- they make their money off lenses.

Meanwhile the Q and the Nikon 1 are in a class of their own.

[JimJohnson]

he wants an affordable digital back. And he would love for it to be a Pentax.

Actually, when the trend started moving from film to digital, I kept hoping for a digital back for my Super Program [I still REALLY like that body]. After all, the back is designed to be easily swapped out in the fiield. Alas, the only 'digital' enhancement released by Pentax was a back that exposed a date/time stamp on the film. That might be fine for home snapshoots or forensic type documentation shots, but I doubt Pentax sold many to advanced amatuers.

As pointed out by others, I don't want a pricey add-on viewfinder (optical or electronic). It defeats most of the purpose of a smaller mirrorless camera. That viewfinder needs to be built in.

I have owned two 'good' point & shoot cameras. My first one had both LCD and optical viewfinders. I liked that camera and held on to it despite its low resolution and seriously long lag time simply because of the optical viewfinder. I refused to sell it before I got my Pentax dSLR. The replacement point & shoot was LCD only, and I ended up fabricating my own velcro stick on viewfinder for bright scenes. I tried the funky stick on hoods for the LCD. I found out that the problem wasn't the LCD, but my eyes. Unless you can shield your own eyes from ambient light, your pupils will close down and it is very difficult to see the LCD. So it was my ugly little homemade viewfinder or carry around a head cloth like a late 19th century large frame camera photographer. The viewfinder is a lot more acceptible on a busy urban sidewalk or high school sporting event.

I am SO glad my wife purchased the K-r for me just before it was discontineued. Otherwise I would be abandoning all my existing Pentax equipment and becoming yet another NiCanon photographer so I could get a viewfinder.