[eddie1960]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Amazon.co.jp? OLYMPUS ????????????? OM-D E-M5 ?????? ???? 1605??? 144??????????????? 5???????? ?? ?? OM-D E-M5 LKIT SLV: ??????
111 258 YEN = 1450 USD...

So long name - OM-D E-M5

16MP
5 axis image stabilization
ISO range: 200-25,600
4 fps
Shutter speed: 60-1/4000 seconds
1.44M EVF
3 in, OLED touch screen with 610k dots resolution
No built-in flash
Full HD video recording
29 minutes maximum video recording time
Dimensions: 122mm x 89mm x 43mm
Weight: 369 grams (body only)

rather expensive....IMO I don't see anything special...

So lower top shutter even on the top model (how does this compete with what the k5 replacement will be aside from being tiny in comparison.

It is pretty (at least to those of us who liked OMs and MXs) but nothing about it says to me it's worth investing that much in for what will be lower performance still wise than a k5 and video wise probably no better than the k5 replacement (or the K01 for that matter) and maybe less due to smaller sensor size
Still i'd be inclined to take it over a nex 7 (tried a nex again on the weekend and still can't like it)
there is such a thing as too small
the K5 replacement may well be smaller as well who knows
I will however likely end up with a K01 as my secondary the value is too high even without EVF since i have several dslr for the OVF anyway.

[Winder]

Amazon.co.jp? OLYMPUS ????????????? OM-D E-M5 ?????? ???? 1605??? 144??????????????? 5???????? ?? ?? OM-D E-M5 LKIT SLV: ??????
111 258 YEN = 1450 USD...

So long name - OM-D E-M5

16MP
5 axis image stabilization
ISO range: 200-25,600
4 fps
Shutter speed: 60-1/4000 seconds
1.44M EVF
3 in, OLED touch screen with 610k dots resolution
No built-in flash
Full HD video recording
29 minutes maximum video recording time
Dimensions: 122mm x 89mm x 43mm
Weight: 369 grams (body only)

rather expensive....IMO I don't see anything special...

Fully weather sealed and very compact with the best IBIS on the market. AF that is faster and more accurate than anything Pentax makes. I don't think the price is bad for the quality. Until I see how the sensor performance compares though I probably would not buy it.

[Winder]

So lower top shutter even on the top model (how does this compete with what the k5 replacement will be aside from being tiny in comparison.

It is pretty (at least to those of us who liked OMs and MXs) but nothing about it says to me it's worth investing that much in for what will be lower performance still wise than a k5 and video wise probably no better than the k5 replacement (or the K01 for that matter) and maybe less due to smaller sensor size
Still i'd be inclined to take it over a nex 7 (tried a nex again on the weekend and still can't like it)
there is such a thing as too small
the K5 replacement may well be smaller as well who knows
I will however likely end up with a K01 as my secondary the value is too high even without EVF since i have several dslr for the OVF anyway.

The K-5 is almost too small. I keep wanting to put a grip on it, but the reason it is my carry around is because of the small size. It is a catch 22.

[Raffwal]

I think people are making pretty far fetched conclusions and comparisons of the merits of Pentax K-01 and Olympus OM-D. All based on just specs. Is there one single picture sample from either of those two? And AFAIK only very few sample pictures from the Fuji.

[robgo2]

I'm afraid all the talk is mainly about how it looks, though.

Even if this is true, there is an old adage in the marketing and public relations business: Any publicity is better than no publicity. Thus, if people are intrigued by the K-01's styling, at least they are being exposed to it and, thus, are thinking about it at some level. It's a safe bet that some people who eventually buy a K-01 might not have, if it were just another look-alike camera. Purists may not like it, but style matters.

Rob

[ogl]

Fully weather sealed and very compact with the best IBIS on the market. AF that is faster and more accurate than anything Pentax makes. I don't think the price is bad for the quality. Until I see how the sensor performance compares though I probably would not buy it.

Do you know weather sealed m4/3 lenses?

I can't wait anything special from 16 MP sensor with crop 2. I doubt in IQ.


Let's examine
16MP - Nothing special...I don't think it's good for crop 2.
5 axis image stabilization - OK.
ISO range: 200-25,600 Nothing special
4 fps Yestreday
Shutter speed: 60-1/4000 seconds Low-end
1.44M EVF Middle level
3 in, OLED touch screen with 610k dots resolution Nothing special
No built-in flash Really strange. But they want smaller size
Full HD video recording ??? Nothing special

[redpigeons]

Amazon.co.jp? OLYMPUS ????????????? OM-D E-M5 ?????? ???? 1605??? 144??????????????? 5???????? ?? ?? OM-D E-M5 LKIT SLV: ??????
111 258 YEN = 1450 USD...

So long name - OM-D E-M5

16MP
5 axis image stabilization
ISO range: 200-25,600
4 fps
Shutter speed: 60-1/4000 seconds
1.44M EVF
3 in, OLED touch screen with 610k dots resolution
No built-in flash
Full HD video recording
29 minutes maximum video recording time
Dimensions: 122mm x 89mm x 43mm
Weight: 369 grams (body only)

rather expensive....IMO I don't see anything special...

well both the fuji and the Olympus are not equal to the K-01 , the first two are the top of the line for their brands , the K-01 is not the Pentax flagship model . still waiting to see whats next. by all means keep the cool design , but at the moment personally I am not looking for a second camera I am looking for a main one, wonder what will be the next step for pentax

[Winder]

Do you know weather sealed m4/3 lenses?

I can't wait anything special from 16 MP sensor with crop 2. I doubt in IQ.


Let's examine
16MP - Nothing special...I don't think it's good for crop 2.
5 axis image stabilization - OK.
ISO range: 200-25,600 Nothing special
4 fps Yestreday
Shutter speed: 60-1/4000 seconds Low-end
1.44M EVF Middle level
3 in, OLED touch screen with 610k dots resolution Nothing special
No built-in flash Really strange. But they want smaller size
Full HD video recording ??? Nothing special

There have been several images in National Geographic taken with 4/3 sensor and one of their regular togs is a 4/3 user. Before you start knocking the IQ realize that it meets the needs of more than 90% of the photographers. Try the AF on an E-P3 with 45mm f/1.8. Makes Pentax look slow and clunky. Fast and accurate AF is a big deal for a lot of people.

I'm not in the market for the new Olympus, but it is going to be a very capable camera, and they are going to sell a bunch of them.

[ogl]

There have been several images in National Geographic taken with 4/3 sensor and one of their regular togs is a 4/3 user. Before you start knocking the IQ realize that it meets the needs of more than 90% of the photographers. Try the AF on an E-P3 with 45mm f/1.8. Makes Pentax look slow and clunky. Fast and accurate AF is a big deal for a lot of people.
I'm not in the market for the new Olympus, but it is going to be a very capable camera, and they are going to sell a bunch of them.

Buy AF and have a look at mediocre pictures with size not above 3-4 MP at monitor.
I'm perfectionist-autist - like to see 100% photos at monitor. Sorry for my strange habit.

No need big size for magazines. Any photo camera in good hands could give good results to print. Even P&S.

As for me, 100% picture's sharpness, details, colours, the work of lens are the important....The rest are not very important.
If I can afford, I would buy M9. But I'm amateur and have family. I don't need to spend too much money for hobby.


I dislike 45/1.8 as optical device - colour and bokeh...That's why nothing to try.
I dislike E-P3 design - too small and too uncomfortable for my hands. That's why nothing to try.

K-5 and K200D are enough for me for AF speed.

[johnmflores]

Does the fact that there are millions of lenses on eBay matter more/less than the fact that I can get M43 and Nikon 1 lenses at Target? If i'm just starting out as a photographer, unless I'm extremely price sensitive, I'm not buying used if at all possible. Therefore millions of lenses that I can't fondle locally don't exist as far as I'm concerned. Pentax doesn't have that kind of game on the ground, which means that logic is a bit of wishful thinking IMHO. And that assumes that you're going to buy anything beyond the kit zooms, which I think is also a doubtful proposition; for the P&S upgrader, not an emerging photographer, a big sensor and a high ratio zoom are likely all they require.

My statement was comparing the fundamental design decision Pentax had to make - design an APS-C mirrorless camera around the K-mount OR design an APS-C mirrorless around a new mount (with K-adapter). Had Pentax done the latter, it would made for a smaller camera body but only an initially small selection of new lenses for the new mount. From a marketing perspective then, Pentax is no different than Sony (new mount, not many lenses), Samsung (new mount, not many lenses), Fuji (new mount, not many lenses), Nikon 1 (new mount, not many lenses) and their own Q (new mount, not many lenses). Not only that, but that puts them way behind Olympus and Panasonic (new mount, rapidly growing selection of lenses). In the biz, that's what's called Product Differentiation, Unique Selling Proposition, and a whole bunch of other names used on Powerpoint slides

You are right that many people buy a kit zoom and never go beyond that. But Nikon and Canon have shown that touting the potential of buying any lens for any application under the sun as a powerful marketing tool. How many people have you met that chose Canon and Nikon and parroted that strength back to you and don't even know what a prime is. The strategy works, and Pentax was wise to follow it.

Does it make rational sense? No, but marketing is not about rational decision making, otherwise all ads would be little more than a bulleted list of product specifications. Marketing, at the end of the day, is about pressing irrational and emotional buttons that lead to a sale, very often in a market with a lot of product parity.

But insulting is the word I'm gonna stick with. I do get insulted whenever a company I do business with releases a crap product and tries to tell me how great it is and expects me, or any of their other potential customers, to be stupid enough to believe it. Not being in the target group is one thing (although the designer that they paid and who's involvement was announced before any photographic aspect of the camera, who's not a photographer to my knowledge, seems to think he's designed a tool for semi-professionals), my problem and contention is the target consumer group doesn't exist. I can't imagine being a vaguely informed consumer, not super interested in "serious" photography (which even by the internal logic of this thread moves me outside the target box), and having a saleman trying to convince me to buy this over a GF3 or a NEX3 with a straight face. There simply are no vast untapped crowds of P&S upgraders looking for a much larger P&S on the basis of compatibility with 30 year old lenses and a cool design; a few sure, but a few people loved the Edsel. Certainly not enough to put those of us who've already put money in at the back of the line in the design considerations for Pentax's first serious MILC, to wait so long to do it, or to try and convince us that this is good enough.

So it is in all likelihood, 'moving on'.

You are painting the mirrorless market with a very broad brush here precisely at the time when Pentax is moving away from broad brush mass market strategies. The GF3 and NEX3 are that the small spectrum of the mirrorless world and are more competitors for the Q, where size is the determining factor. Move away from that and you have larger cameras like the Panasonic GH2, GX1, the Olympus E-P3 and the Sony NEX-7. These are more natural competitors for the K-01. If oddball cameras like the GH2 can find their niche due to it's Unique Selling Proposition - it's no smaller than a small dSLR but it kills for video - then I find no reason that the K-01 can't find its own niche if marketed properly. Is it going to be a home run? Don't know, but it's got a chance to be a solid single, and 3 solid singles (Q, K-01, K-5) also drives a run home.

[eddie1960]

There have been several images in National Geographic taken with 4/3 sensor and one of their regular togs is a 4/3 user. Before you start knocking the IQ realize that it meets the needs of more than 90% of the photographers. Try the AF on an E-P3 with 45mm f/1.8. Makes Pentax look slow and clunky. Fast and accurate AF is a big deal for a lot of people.

I'm not in the market for the new Olympus, but it is going to be a very capable camera, and they are going to sell a bunch of them.

It still doesn't address his point that mostly it offers nothing special, while offering limitations at what no looks to be a close to $1500 price body only. I'm not sure they will sell a ton of them, but they will sell. what they sell a ton of is entry level (same as everyone else.)
It will sell i agree, but for the same price i think it will be vastly outperformed in almost all categories by the k5 replacement (possible exception being AF since we don't know how good the new AF will be yet)

[chaza01]

A good, balanced review/preview:
Pentax K-01 - hands on preview (review) | Expert Reviews

[pingflood]

Maybe it's me but one of the things I do before making a purchase is ask myself, "what else could I buy with this money?" it's just a gut check

Maybe it is just you.

If I went shopping for, say, sports cars, and looked at Nissan and BMW, I might consider the GT-R and the M3. I wouldn't start comparing the GT-R with the X6 SUV just because they're close in price....

[pingflood]

It still doesn't address his point that mostly it offers nothing special, while offering limitations at what no looks to be a close to $1500 price body only. I'm not sure they will sell a ton of them, but they will sell. what they sell a ton of is entry level (same as everyone else.)
It will sell i agree, but for the same price i think it will be vastly outperformed in almost all categories by the k5 replacement (possible exception being AF since we don't know how good the new AF will be yet)

While I don't disagree with you that all other things equal a 4/3 sensor is at a disadvantage to an APS-C one, hardly any camera today "vastly outperforms" another camera, if we are talking things beyond basic point-and-shoots. Sure, a D3s outperforms a D300, but in almost all cases by so little that it would make no difference to the vast, vast majority of photographers. And face it, few of us have such needs that we "have" to have the ultimate in performance.

With cameras being as good as they are today, in the majority of cases you ought to be looking at what provides you with the best shooting experience. For some, it's a big, heavy solid beast; for others, a small, nimble compact rig; for yet others a camera that is pretty, or unusually well built. What matters is that you enjoy using it. Of course, if you are doing things that place very high demand on e.g. autofocus you can have a case for wanting the "ultimate performance", but let's face it, few of us are in that boat.

Let's be happy that just about any camera will be just fine for us, and pick the one we like to use the best based on attributes other than DXOmark scores and pixel peeping ISO 25600 tests...

[eddie1960]

While I don't disagree with you that all other things equal a 4/3 sensor is at a disadvantage to an APS-C one, hardly any camera today "vastly outperforms" another camera, if we are talking things beyond basic point-and-shoots. Sure, a D3s outperforms a D300, but in almost all cases by so little that it would make no difference to the vast, vast majority of photographers. And face it, few of us have such needs that we "have" to have the ultimate in performance.

With cameras being as good as they are today, in the majority of cases you ought to be looking at what provides you with the best shooting experience. For some, it's a big, heavy solid beast; for others, a small, nimble compact rig; for yet others a camera that is pretty, or unusually well built. What matters is that you enjoy using it. Of course, if you are doing things that place very high demand on e.g. autofocus you can have a case for wanting the "ultimate performance", but let's face it, few of us are in that boat.

Let's be happy that just about any camera will be just fine for us, and pick the one we like to use the best based on attributes other than DXOmark scores and pixel peeping ISO 25600 tests...

Well for me I shoot in low light frequently so K-01 has an advantage most definitely. I agree though that for a high percentage of use all ilc cameras (k-01 included) are more than capable.
For a guy who grew up shooting OVF (and i'l be 52 soon) I'm not likely to give it up on a primary though. and if it''s a secondary EVF/OVF is nice but not a must have since my primary has it anyway.
I also find my ds and k7 border as small as i am willing to use. the om-d may be usable as will the fuji but the nex3/5 (and less so the 7) and the entry olys and panas are just too damn small for me. K-01 probably sits right on the edge of what i want to hold. Ne ultra thin on a nex7 is it's biggest stumbling block for me otherwise they have addressed a lot of the ergonomics