[Winder]

I would think that manual focusing would be a royal pain in the ass without EVF or OVF, the way k-01 is set up. I cannot manual focus in live view mode. Not steady enough for me.

I agree. LiveView is not what I want to use. The only thing I use my LCD screen for is to check my histogram ever 10 shots or so to make sure I have not bumped a setting or blown exposure. That is more habit and paranoia than real necessity. I did use if for some macro work a while back, but that is rare. I can deal with a high quality EVF or OVF.

I hope that Pentax will improved the OVF in the K-5 to stay ahead of the developing EVF technology.

[JohnBee]

By the way, for those who talked about how "huge" the Olympus is, read this:
The Olympus E-M5 from every angle

Smaller than the GH2.

I don't know about other people here, but I find the Oly to be the one of the sweetest looking digital cameras ever made!

[Winder]

And for the daily update:
K-01:
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #3,432 in Camera & Photo (See Top 100 in Camera & Photo)
#71 in Electronics > Camera & Photo > Digital Cameras > Compact System Cameras

Fuji XP1:
Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #62 in Camera & Photo (See Top 100 in Camera & Photo)
#2 in Electronics > Camera & Photo > Digital Cameras > Compact System Cameras

[Winder]

I don't know about other people here, but I find the Oly to be the one of the sweetest looking digital cameras ever made!

It definitely is appealing. Olympus has some good designers.

[DaveBlack]

It definitely is appealing. Olympus has some good designers.

From the OM-D photos I really want to buy this camera for my compact system. I just love the retro faux dslr design plus a good selection of native lenses and other accessories. The K-01 just don't give me the I want to buy it feeling. The Pro X-1 is really nice, but the price of it keeps me from wanting to buy it, plus lack of accessories.

Still I will want and see what Pentax/Ricoh has for us in the way of a K-5 replacement/upgrade. From the interview with the Pentax R&D official I will expect slightly smaller camera bodies and improvements in the VF. I am guessing the improvement will be a hybrid optical/digital VF using either the Pentax patent from a few years ago or the Samsung transparent OLED.

[normhead]

I'm not sure why but I have never felt the need to rate cameras in terms of how they look. I don't rate hammers by how they look, I don't rate shovels by how they look. I find it interesting though this whole trying to turn cameras into a fashion statement kind of thing. I guess it's the Apple syndrome. Every company knows all they need to make a ridiculous profit is to turn their customers into some kind of cult following who will line up for the latest everything. wait overnight outside stores etc. I'd carry thte worst looking piece of junk ever made if it took great pictures at the best price. I really hope camera companies don't start pandering to you folks. I want functional, I don't want to pay for great looks. It's almost like there should be two Pentax forums. One for the design fanboys who barely look at the technical specs... and want to talk about what's "pretty " and what isn't, and those who want to talk performance and results. Cameras have almost all looked pretty much the same over the years, based on function... it would be a shame to see that change much. The little changes that are made in terms of styling. It's still a box with a barrel on the front no matter what you do. Analyzing minor deviations from the mechanical necessity for "good looks" would be at best a pursuit of the trivial. I just can't comprehend how so much time can be spent emphasizing the un-important. My tiny little Optio W9 is very small and ridiculous to handle. It fits nicely in your pocket, not in your hand. I use it because of it's function, not because of ergonomics or styling. Same with my K20D. I have never bought a camera based on it's styling. I sense there might be some people here who have... but, I know they aren't talking to me.

[userage]

The Olympus is gorgeous, only thing I see wrong with design is that VF hump, its quite tall. Never the less still amazing, loved their PEN range's design also.

[Winder]

I'm not sure why but I have never felt the need to rate cameras in terms of how they look. I don't rate hammers by how they look, I don't rate shovels by how they look. I find it interesting though this whole trying to turn cameras into a fashion statement kind of thing. I guess it's the Apple syndrome. Every company knows all they need to make a ridiculous profit is to turn their customers into some kind of cult following who will line up for the latest everything. wait overnight outside stores etc. I'd carry thte worst looking piece of junk ever made if it took great pictures at the best price. I really hope camera companies don't start pandering to you folks. I want functional, I don't want to pay for great looks. It's almost like there should be two Pentax forums. One for the design fanboys who barely look at the technical specs... and want to talk about what's "pretty " and what isn't, and those who want to talk performance and results. Cameras have almost all looked pretty much the same over the years, based on function... it would be a shame to see that change much. The little changes that are made in terms of styling. It's still a box with a barrel on the front no matter what you do. Analyzing minor deviations from the mechanical necessity for "good looks" would be at best a pursuit of the trivial. I just can't comprehend how so much time can be spent emphasizing the un-important. My tiny little Optio W9 is very small and ridiculous to handle. It fits nicely in your pocket, not in your hand. I use it because of it's function, not because of ergonomics or styling. Same with my K20D. I have never bought a camera based on it's styling. I sense there might be some people here who have... but, I know they aren't talking to me.

Photographers tend to be visual people (obviously), people who swing hammers for a living.... not so much. People who did ditches with shovels.... not so much.
Photographers tend to have good taste (good ones anyway) and recognize what is visually appealing to the public... After all that is how they make their living.

Photographers carrying around the standard black DSLR are hardly making fashion statements. Most photographers are fine with the utility of the plain black DSLR and don't buy based on style.

I think the difference here is that while people don't buy cameras simply because they look good or are stylish, they will refuse to buy a camera because it is fugly.

[eddie1960]

they will refuse to buy a camera because it is fugly.

On that you would be wrong there have been many Fugly cameras over the years that sold.

think of this for instance

[Winder]

The Olympus is gorgeous, only thing I see wrong with design is that VF hump, its quite tall. Never the less still amazing, loved their PEN range's design also.

We will just have to see how the sensor performs. As good as it looks it still has to be competitive with other options on the market.

[johnmflores]

...and we wait with bated breath for you Amazon pre-order report...

[Winder]

On that you would be wrong there have been many Fugly cameras over the years that sold.

think of this for instance

That is more utilitarian than fugly. There are a lot of utilitarian cameras in history that were not necessarily attractive that sold well. The K-01 is just fugly, and since they stripped the OVF/EVF and did not provide a tilting LCD it has even less utility. Pentax said "let's strip away some core functional features and make it fugly. I bet fan boys will buy anything that says Pentax on it." My guess it took about 12 shots of sake for something as screwed up as the K-01 to become reality.

[Winder]

...and we wait with bated breath for you Amazon pre-order report...

Scroll up. Already posted it this morning.

Several people said I would make my predictions and this thread would die off and nobody would ever check to see if I was right/wrong. I would hate for that to happen. If I am wrong I want everyone to be able to tell me. I'm sure several would love the opportunity to rub it in a bit.... I would hate to deprive them of that opportunity.

[eddie1960]

That is more utilitarian than fugly. There are a lot of utilitarian cameras in history that were not necessarily attractive that sold well. The K-01 is just fugly, and since they stripped the OVF/EVF and did not provide a tilting LCD it has even less utility. Pentax said "let's strip away some core functional features and make it fugly. I bet fan boys will buy anything that says Pentax on it." My guess it took about 12 shots of sake for something as screwed up as the K-01 to become reality.

thing is it's Fugly to you because it wasn't the feature set you want. I understand not wanting a camera for those reasons. but certainly outside the very narrow forum community (which in the greater scheme of things represents only a small portion of camera buyers and users) there will be people who buy this camera and like it. The same response happened last year with the Q. You hardly see a Q user on the forums either.....but they did sell a good number to people who presumably are happy with them or they would have found this place and bitched about it.
It's one of those things a camera is a tool the brand doesn't really matter. does it do what you want it to? great buy it and use it. If it doesn't try a different tool. all tools are limited in some way.
As long as Pentax releases more cameras than this one (and there is no reason to believe otherwise) I'm sure there will be better models (probably in mirrorless and of course DSLR as well)
Personally i don't find it all that Fugly myself, and may well buy one as a secondary camera. or I may just use the cash to buy an FA77 for my K7 and stick with the K10 and ds as my secondary cameras

[Winder]

thing is it's Fugly to you because it wasn't the feature set you want. I understand not wanting a camera for those reasons. but certainly outside the very narrow forum community (which in the greater scheme of things represents only a small portion of camera buyers and users) there will be people who buy this camera and like it. The same response happened last year with the Q. You hardly see a Q user on the forums either.....but they did sell a good number to people who presumably are happy with them or they would have found this place and bitched about it.
It's one of those things a camera is a tool the brand doesn't really matter. does it do what you want it to? great buy it and use it. If it doesn't try a different tool. all tools are limited in some way.
As long as Pentax releases more cameras than this one (and there is no reason to believe otherwise) I'm sure there will be better models (probably in mirrorless and of course DSLR as well)
Personally i don't find it all that Fugly myself, and may well buy one as a secondary camera. or I may just use the cash to buy an FA77 for my K7 and stick with the K10 and ds as my secondary cameras

Not sure the Q is much of a success. I admit that my needs/wants are very different form most people.

If I care enough about IQ to want to deal with working with prime lenses then I probably care enough to carry a bigger camera. If Size is the most important factor in my decision then modern smart phones are the clear winner.

I don't see anyone announcing 3rd party support for the Q. It is not selling well enough to attract 3rd party development. I would buy M4/3 long before I would buy the Q. There are several P&S cameras I would buy before selecting the Q.