Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-25-2012, 06:15 PM   #136
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
This does sound familiar. And the best solution is an MFT camera. Since Pentax hasn't produced anything to compete, I'll be buying another three products in the MFT system in the next month. Not only for me, but my wife and daughter. Sorry, but the K-01 doesn't cut it. Especially for casual shooters. The only appeal it has is for those already fixated on the K-mount.
I am sorry but on what account K01 does not cut it and MFT does, further how did you decide that pentax has not produced anything competive. And competive on what?? Size of image quality.

If size if your criteria then Q is way smaller and pocketable than any MFT ever made. If IQ is your criteria then K01 is better than any MFT camera ever made.

So it is MFT who does not cut it against mirrorlesses produced by pentax rather than K01 not cutting it.


In my opinion once anyone buys MFT, it comments himself to mediocrity: A camera system not best at anything. Not small enough to be pocketable (Q trumps), not great IQ compared to NEX , K01 etc. Not as versatile as NEX with legacy lenses and lose to Q on telephoto advantage of crop factor.

MFT is the most useless format to date. There are some deluded fans who like it though.

02-25-2012, 09:01 PM   #137
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 87
A good overview about the design

Marc Newson Designs a New Camera for Pentax and the Tech Nerds Hate it. I think this is a well reasoned article about the design and the disconnect between techies, designers, and possibly real people. A good read.
02-25-2012, 09:32 PM   #138
Pentaxian
Clicker's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,241
LOL, giving credibility to a couple of blogs based on " personal opinions", you might as well just discuss it right here in the forums where some like it with their opinions and some hate it with their opinions.
02-26-2012, 04:23 AM   #139
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Veluwe
Posts: 339
Here I am the most deluded pentax user ever. Because I love m43.
A poor simpleton, interested in mere mediocracy racing the streets with a crappy q, piling up incredibly low quality no any use small photo's.
Battling with an often unwieldy and in many places not accepted k5 with superb image quality, only wishing for faster accurate af because in my little notebook accurate = fast.

In my mere mediocracy I bravely struggle along, but proudly define my very own criteria about what I think delivers brilliant and classy, true picture quality. And belief me, ease of use, speed and accuracy, low weight, all are factors.
Well, money buys all. If you have it. And as long as you can physically handle what you carry.
Touchy subject.

And I don't care at all for perfect technical quality. Perfect, by my definition, is what brings out the smiles and tears, and recognition.

02-26-2012, 06:10 AM   #140
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,704
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
I'm sure that K-01 buyers are looking forwards to needing dark cloths so that they can see their view screens too.
People tell me i'm crazy when I use a dark cloth the view the ground glass when I'm using my 4X5 and 8X10 cameras.

If I ever get a K-01 I'll be sure to get a hoodman loupe with it.
02-26-2012, 06:24 AM   #141
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,114
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
You know, I like this Forum and I like reading and sometimes exchanging posts with the K-01 antagonists, but I'm really getting tired of the implication that if I buy this camera or like the design or don't demand my AE-L works just the way it "should" that I must then not be a serious photographer. I guess I'm not a serious photographer. No training, no courses, never sold a print, don't post much here. SIGH
Amen! I've used a red K-x for paying work. I've used Ricoh and Canon point-and-shoots for paying work. I plan on putting the yellow K-01 into the workflow and see how it swims. If that makes me an "unserious" photographer, so be it. I prefer the "unserious" company.
02-26-2012, 06:30 AM   #142
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,625
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
Amen! I've used a red K-x for paying work. I've used Ricoh and Canon point-and-shoots for paying work. I plan on putting the yellow K-01 into the workflow and see how it swims. If that makes me an "unserious" photographer, so be it. I prefer the "unserious" company.
You know who else wasn't serious? The Joker. Is that who you want to follow? Terrorizing the poor professional photographers with your brightly colored tools of destruction, trying to make them "smile" when they only want to frown?

Don't be a Joker. Be Batman. Buy a Canon.

Or be Ashton Kutcher, but that's worse than the Joker.
02-26-2012, 06:45 AM   #143
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,199
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
This does sound familiar. And the best solution is an MFT camera. Since Pentax hasn't produced anything to compete, I'll be buying another three products in the MFT system in the next month. Not only for me, but my wife and daughter. Sorry, but the K-01 doesn't cut it. Especially for casual shooters. The only appeal it has is for those already fixated on the K-mount.
MFT is not the best solution for her, nor for me.

Cool - for you. You've got what you need elsewhere.

My wife can use those Tak's when they're de-yellowed, if she wants, or anything else I have - without an adapter.

It's a Pentax.

02-26-2012, 06:52 AM   #144
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,199
QuoteOriginally posted by isaacc7 Quote
Marc Newson Designs a New Camera for Pentax and the Tech Nerds Hate it. I think this is a well reasoned article about the design and the disconnect between techies, designers, and possibly real people. A good read.
I laughed at the lede!!!

"Granted, they’ve got about as much taste as a newt with its tongue cut out"

Haven't even gotten deep into the article yet.
02-26-2012, 10:23 AM   #145
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,210
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
MFT is not the best solution for her, nor for me.

Cool - for you. You've got what you need elsewhere.

My wife can use those Tak's when they're de-yellowed, if she wants, or anything else I have - without an adapter.

It's a Pentax.
If the K-01 existed 2 years ago, I never would have gotten in to mft!!!!
02-26-2012, 02:45 PM   #146
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,199
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
If the K-01 existed 2 years ago, I never would have gotten in to mft!!!!
Can I assert that some of the negative arguments come from people who are now invested in MFT or is that an invalid assumption? I never started.
02-26-2012, 03:19 PM   #147
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,210
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Can I assert that some of the negative arguments come from people who are now invested in MFT or is that an invalid assumption? I never started.
I don't know. I have never put a negative argument against the K-01. In fact, in every debate that came up about a potential Pentax mirrorless, I always advocated making such a body aps-c and K-mount compliant. I will continue using dSLR and SLR cameras. The interchangeability of the lenses is a benefit. Any negative I would have would hold true for most other mirroless bodies.
02-26-2012, 05:20 PM - 2 Likes   #148
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
MFT is the most useless format to date. There are some deluded fans who like it though.
MFT is useless but much larger sensor than Q? MFT useless but much more extensive system than Q or K-01 (unless you want over-large lenses for your over-large camera). MFT is useless but seven (and counting) companies make products for it? MFT is useless but many pros use it as a portable solution for when they don't want to compromise significantly on IQ. MFT is useless for supporting 50 lens mounts but the K-01, limited to one lens mount, is better?

MFT is useless but I thrill my clients with images taken with it? MFT is useless but my first image accepted for a juried gallery showing was with an Olympus PEN?

Really, everyone has their own likes and dislikes but your hostility and lack of perspective betrays a real Pentax fanboy.

QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Can I assert that some of the negative arguments come from people who are now invested in MFT or is that an invalid assumption? I never started.
I am far more invested in Pentax. On that basis I have waited for them to release something I want to buy. In the meantime I spent a pittance on MFT and was surprised how the system solved many issues Pentax has not dealt with in years (like proper exposure).

Last edited by rparmar; 02-26-2012 at 05:27 PM.
02-27-2012, 01:02 AM   #149
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,894
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
This does sound familiar. And the best solution is an MFT camera. Since Pentax hasn't produced anything to compete, I'll be buying another three products in the MFT system in the next month. Not only for me, but my wife and daughter. Sorry, but the K-01 doesn't cut it. Especially for casual shooters. The only appeal it has is for those already fixated on the K-mount.
Though I certainly don't agree that mft is a 'useless' system as commented some posts above (far from it, its a wonderful compromise), I don't think you are giving the K-01 a fair chance either.

Coupled with small AF lenses like the DA ltds and DA35/2.4, DA50/1.8; 40XS, it does become a 'like sized' system.
Yes its bigger, but its not that far off.
Both systems will need small bags to carry.
Both will have not too big lenses that won't dangle down the neck.
Both will rely on AF, which I'd believe most would want the convenience of AF for most stuff.
Both will likely be used w/o a viewfinder.

What it gives over the mft would be better distortion corrected lenses; usability of your K-mounts; APS-C sensor advantage (often I do welcome more DOF on m4/3 for same FOV instead); better sensor (certainly, even against the 16mp one on my G3).
K-01 has more lenses to leverage on if necessary (zooms; fast zooms; longer lenses; MF primes that are more usable at 1.5x crop).
The undisclosed K-01 lens has the rear element recessed into the mount. That means Pentax knows this particular 'trick' to make some lenses have a smaller mounted profile. So it hints at more of such small lenses in the future.

Don't forget that m4/3 took 2-3yrs to get to what it is now. Pentax is only at yr zero and is already offering K-01 usable with small DA's with more to come in the future.

Last edited by pinholecam; 02-27-2012 at 01:07 AM.
02-27-2012, 08:54 AM   #150
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
That's a good and fair analysis. Since I can't remember if I've explained my perspective properly in this thread I will do so, on the basis of the potential markets for such a camera.

The K-01 should be compared to other cameras with MFT and APS-C sensors. It doesn't take a genius to notice the IQ improvements with these over a point and shoot. Indeed, I received some images from a nice tropical island only yesterday. A friend was looking for a step up in quality, and is now very happy with her Olympus PEN E-P3 (after seeing what I did with my PEN).

Will the K-01 shoot a nicer image than MFT? Yes, if you compare it to older models, but not noticeably for most users. However, the new Olympus OM-D has been tested to have 2 EV dynamic range improvements (!) and 2 stop IBIS improvement (!) over the E-P3. It looks like images from this camera are going to be equivalent or better than the K-01. Until the next model. Swings and roundabouts.

Let's look at the four MILC markets.

1. The point 'n' shoot upgrader wants something cute, small, and functional. Likely they do not want a viewfinder. For them the tiny Olympus E-PL3, with great video and tilt screen, is one good choice, alongside options in Panasonic, Sony, etc. The K-01 is large in comparison and larger still with a zoom lens. One may argue that small differences in size don't matter but, sorry, the market says otherwise. Slim is in.

2. The lens connoisseur wants to be able to mount Leica M, Nikon, strange video format, and other lenses on a capable digital body. And they want to do is for less than six grand, though likely they are not too price sensitive (or how would they have accumulated all that glass?). The K-01 doesn't work for them, since it is restricted to a single lens mount.

3. Rangefinder addicts want the look & feel and direct control of a rangefinder and don't mind paying for workmanship. Fuji is catering to this market, but the solid metal build of the Olympus PEN series has attracted some Leica users as well.

4. DSLR users looking for a backup camera, something smaller for those times when size matters a lot. Of this group, only Pentax users will choose the K-01 since no-one else will get their lenses to work. This group tends to care a lot about nit-picking IQ (hey, I do too, in appropriate contexts), ergonomics, and having a proper viewfinder. It seems to me the K-01 fails on all but one of those counts. Why not simply buy a K-5 and get a vastly superior photographic experience? Besides, the K-01 appears to change key ergonomic aspects of the camera, breaking compatibility with previous models. That makes for a poor choice as a backup.

The icing on this inedible cake is that Pentax will be releasing lenses compatible only with the K-01, simply to make the system smaller. Pentax have snuck a fourth mount in the back door! Why did they not design a smaller mount in the first place? They could then have released a coupled K-mount adapter, just like what they are doing for their toy camera, the Q. Or they could have simply joined the MFT Consortium and start selling quality glass to that market. They had two years to do this before the MFT vendors themselves caught up. Either way would have made infinitely more sense than trying to design a new system to compete head-on.

And how does this new system compete? To be fair, I will consider those aspects traditionally considered to be Pentax strengths, to see how these are being leveraging to gain market share and build brand identity.
  • Weathersealing? A win for the Olympus OM-D. Sealed flash too. Where is Pentax with that?
  • Ergonomics? A win for the Olympus OM-D with two dials and mucho customisation.
  • Compact size: A win for practically everyone except the rangefinder clones and the K-01.
  • Aesthetics? Well, the Olympus PEN and Fuji series have it all over the competition. Panasonic if you want your little camera to look like your DSLR. Sony if you want to look tres moderne. Pentax if you want a brick with some curves thrown in from a different design brain altogether.
  • IBIS: A win for Olympus and Pentax, with the former leaping ahead with their new 5-axis system that works also for video and stabilises the viewfinder. Once again, Pentax have been resting on their laurels while others innovate.
  • IQ: A win (we will graciously assume) for the K-01 alongside the OM-D, if by IQ you mean high ISO and high DR. (There's a lot more to it than that!)
  • Price: The glut of second-hand MFT bodies ensures that system wins. But those who wait might find the K-01 deeply discounted before long.

Pentax has dropped the ball. Their "design-oriented" approach to making something "different" is an admission that they have given up the field to the competition. [End sports analogies.]

Last edited by rparmar; 02-27-2012 at 09:01 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
bubble, k-01, k01, mirrorless, pentax k-01
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mortgages / bubble yet again Nesster General Talk 3 11-10-2011 05:36 PM
Macro Eye of the Bubble LeeRunge Post Your Photos! 2 09-25-2011 04:13 PM
Macro Bubble Blowing Fly eaglem Post Your Photos! 4 07-14-2011 01:37 AM
Macro Bubble Bubble eaglem Post Your Photos! 8 03-13-2011 05:42 PM
Nature Plunge Bubble Tamia Post Your Photos! 3 07-04-2010 12:10 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:30 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top