[alexeyga]

How about a K-01 + DA21 + DA35 + DA70 = 749+509+509+509 = $2276

So now you're a stupid who paid $1270 more so you look cool at that cafe in Paris.
Plus you don't have real manual focus. Well done.

A funny message from another stupid in North America where looks are everything!!! Even at 1270$ I'll take looks over the camera that belongs to my kid's room. That being said, you should compare oranges to oranges. Plastic-fantastic DAL35 F2.4 VS XF 35 F1.4???? Come one!!! B.t.w, how much Nikon's 35/1.4 runs for? 1500$? And yes, technically DA70/2.4 should be there instead of the FA77/1.8 as an equivalent of the XF60/2.4, but hey DA21/3.2 isn't quite up to levels of the XF18/2 either!!!

[alexeyga]

Plus that you don't have SR which also applies to EVERY SINGLE lens you mount on the K-01.

You're forgetting that the Fuji probably does less FPS and it has worse video capabilities... Do you honestly think that the target audience really gives a sh#t???

I really love that argument about years and years of k-mount lenses, yet in the classifieds sections these "years and years" come down to a handful of models that are actually useful in real life, not to mention that you need a decent amount of luck to find anything clean enough and nevermind the fact that it's most likely waaay overpriced. The other day I was shopping for a MF 300/4 and all M and A 300/4 were running for a solid 200$ more than Nikon's AF 300/4 goes on good days. Gotta love the math...

[Urkeldaedalus]

That being said, one should not forget that these two are targeting very different audiences, Fuji is a niche-product for these who want Leica, but cant quite afford one. K-01 however is a mainstream piece of plastic... epic fail design-wise nonetheless.

Actually the K-01 is made of high quality materials -- I believe aluminum? I agree that it is something of a design fail that it makes it look like it's plastic.

K-01 + DA21 + FA31 + FA77 = 749$+509$+989$+784$=3031$ (REF. B&H USA)

VS

X-Pro1 + XF18 + XF35 + XF60 = 1699$+599$+599$+649$=3546$ (REF. B&H USA

In the case of owners of Pentax lenses like me, that's actually

X-Pro1 + XF18 + XF35 + XF60 = 1699$+599$+599$+649$=3546$

vs.

K-01 = $750

For that money difference, I think I could get over not looking cool in Paris.

[alexeyga]

Actually the K-01 is made of high quality materials -- I believe aluminum? I agree that it is something of a design fail that it makes it look like it's plastic.



In the case of owners of Pentax lenses like me, that's actually

X-Pro1 + XF18 + XF35 + XF60 = 1699$+599$+599$+649$=3546$

vs.

K-01 = $750

For that money difference, I think I could get over not looking cool in Paris.

As far as I'm concerned, it could me made of ET's poop with titanal in it, I still feel like catching the dude that drew it and keep smacking him on the head with something heavy until he answers the a very simple queston: "WTF WERE YOU THINKING ABOUT WHILE DESIGNING THAT THING AND WERE YOU THINKING AT ALL????" That camera-looking thingy is an awesome project for a somebody (who's face is full of zipps) graduating in Industrial Design... But for a product from a company with how many, 50???? years of history, it's nothing but moomba-yoomba's vomit.... sorry for the lack of better words. And yes, for the current Pentax glass owners it's a great deal, I'm not one of them anymore and oranges vs oranges speaking, neither is anybody who'll be getting the X-Pro1...

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Olympus, Panasonic and Sony? Not so much.

They might not know that Olympus has a history in SLRs and that Sony purchased Minolta. They might not even know that Minolta used to make cameras. But they do know about the Pen, Lumix, and NEX cameras.

The Pentax name does have brand recognition though - people may be surprised Pentax is still out there, but they know the name and the reputation.

Are we still talking about people that have no camera? What age group do you think they are and how do you think they've found out about Pentax? And what impression do you think they would get about their reputation? The latter will definitely depend on whether they'll find a Pentax user or they'll stumble into a Canon or Nikon one.

I think they start with word of mouth and then do some research. And, if Pentax gets their marketing right, they should discover the K-01 is less than half the price of its only current competitor.

I don't know which camera you think is the only competitor of the K-01, but the E-PM1 kit sells for $500 and with the price difference you can get an EVF, an adapter, and a few inexpensive manual lenses from ebay. And you get SR too.

Key word: should. The success of the K-01 (like all consumer goods) will largely depend on Pentax getting the advertising right, something they haven't been known for in the past.

The K-01 will probably do well as a K-r replacement for the Pentax user base. It seems to be more solidly built, so that's a plus. I don't think it's a product designed to attract new people. Some may like the idea, but they'll ask their current camera maker for the same thing rather than switching over for a consumer level product.

[Fontan]

A funny message from another stupid in North America where looks are everything!!! Even at 1270$ I'll take looks over the camera that belongs to my kid's room. That being said, you should compare oranges to oranges. Plastic-fantastic DAL35 F2.4 VS XF 35 F1.4???? Come one!!! B.t.w, how much Nikon's 35/1.4 runs for? 1500$? And yes, technically DA70/2.4 should be there instead of the FA77/1.8 as an equivalent of the XF60/2.4, but hey DA21/3.2 isn't quite up to levels of the XF18/2 either!!!

The dude probably meant DA35/2.8 ltd, which I think is a phenomenal lens. But, in the over all scheme of things I would still gladly pay an extra grand or two for Fuji. Just a matter of preference, really. It is an expensive hobby to begin with, and in the long run you might as well get what you want.

[johnmflores]

the system that is just plain sexy, the system that you're not ashamed to put on a table near you while enjoying a coffee somewhere on a terrace in [type a name of any old european city here]:

I'll bet you the cost of that coffee that you're sipping in that old european city that if you placed the Fuji and K-01 on a table, the Fuji would be surrounded by mostly older white-haired gentlemen and the K-01 mostly by a younger, more diverse crowd. But hey, if your idea of a good time is drawing the attention of older white-haired gentleman, then go for it!

Plastic-fantastic DAL35 F2.4 VS XF 35 F1.4???? Come one!!! B.t.w, how much Nikon's 35/1.4 runs for? 1500$? And yes, technically DA70/2.4 should be there instead of the FA77/1.8 as an equivalent of the XF60/2.4, but hey DA21/3.2 isn't quite up to levels of the XF18/2 either!!!

You really should consider a career in product reviews, because you seem to have a unique ability to divine the quality of products that have not yet entered the market.

[alexeyga]

I'll bet you the cost of that coffee that you're sipping in that old european city that if you placed the Fuji and K-01 on a table, the Fuji would be surrounded by mostly older white-haired gentlemen and the K-01 mostly by a younger, more diverse crowd. But hey, if your idea of a good time is drawing the attention of older white-haired gentleman, then go for it!



You really should consider a career in product reviews, because you seem to have a unique ability to divine the quality of products that have not yet entered the market.

For somebody who's been so long on this site you should know that for most people on these sites numbers are everything and an f2 lens is in any case better than the f3.2 - one... Joking aside, I was just trying to show two comparable kits.

But as far as "white-haired gentlemen vs younger, more diverse crowd" goes, you'd be surprised - numbers are not everything and when it comes to niche-products, age rarely mattes, only the budget. Nobody says that K-01 is a bad camera, just that, like many recent Pentax releases, people were expecting a lot more, and in this case - something radically different, that could have been (again) a game-changer for the company like X100 was for Fuji... instead, it's just another "wtf was that???!!!" nobody knows what...

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Plus you don't have real manual focus.

What is real manual focus? Or let me rephrase: what kind of manual focus is not real?

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

I'll bet you the cost of that coffee that you're sipping in that old european city that if you placed the Fuji and K-01 on a table, the Fuji would be surrounded by mostly older white-haired gentlemen and the K-01 mostly by a younger, more diverse crowd.

Probably some young hoodlums looking for a brick to use in robbing a jewelry store.

[johnmflores]

For somebody who's been so long on this site you should know that for most people on these sites numbers are everything and an f2 lens is in any case better than the f3.2 - one... Joking aside, I was just trying to show two comparable kits.

But as far as "white-haired gentlemen vs younger, more diverse crowd" goes, you'd be surprised - numbers are not everything and when it comes to niche-products, age rarely mattes, only the budget. Nobody says that K-01 is a bad camera, just that, like many recent Pentax releases, people were expecting a lot more, and in this case - something radically different, that could have been (again) a game-changer for the company like X100 was for Fuji... instead, it's just another "wtf was that???!!!" nobody knows what...

You're right, the X100 was a hit for Fuji, and has put them back on the map in the minds of photographers. The X-Pro 1 could build upon that momentum quite well, but we'll have to wait until it's actually released to the general public to see if that happens. It's not my cuppa, but I do wish them luck - the more competition, the better for all of us.

And the K-01, is in fact "radically different". So different in fact that many Pentaxians are having a hard time wrapping their head around it. At the end of the day is it a game changer or WFT? It's still kind of early to tell, considering that it was just announced the other day. So before we label it a failure, I suggest we let it actually get sold and used.

[johnmflores]

Probably some young hoodlums looking for a brick to use in robbing a jewelry store.

In that case, I'd simply pick up the Fuji and snap some photos of the .... Oh SNAP, neither camera actually exists yet!

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

I thought we were comparing the K-01 with the Fuji? What's the K-5 got to do with it?

It's not the kind of comparison you are thinking about. The K-01 is compared to the XPro1 and OM-D as being a disappointing announcement. When talk switches to capabilities, XPro1 can only be compared to the K-5. It's not that the K-01 is not a capable camera - but it is prevented by design to compete against the others.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

In that case, I'd simply pick up the Fuji and snap some photos of the .... Oh SNAP, neither camera actually exists yet!

Wasn't the brick sighted in Singapore already? And the Fuji in Hong-Kong? It's not a big stretch to imagine the Paris scene.

[creampuff]

How much was the K-5 at launch? $1,600..... What do you expect the K-5 replacement to sell for?
Fuji lenses are selling for $600.00 which puts it on par with Pentax lenses.

What exactly makes this more expensive than the Pentax system? I realize you are a Pentax fanboy and you want to defend the system at all cost, but that math is pretty simple to prove. The price of the Fuji system is in line with the Pentax K-5 system and lenses.

Now you're really talking like an opinionated idiot calling people a fanboy. Isn't the title of this thread that you started comparing the K-01 versus the Fuji X-Pro 1? And what's the point of comparing the K-5??? If you feel Pentax has designed a flop, maybe it's better for you to continue to use your other camera brands rather than suffer angst surrounding the trials and tribulations of Pentax. It's pretty amazing that so many detractors come out of the woodwork when they can't fathom what the K-01 is all about.