[eddie1960]

I disagree.

so do I

As for the "pentax designs for the enthusiast community" statement...well they do but they need to design for a wider community than that if the enthusiasts want to have cameras available in 10 years. Even leica has low end made by panasonic to take advantage of revenue derived by their name. No enthusiast thinks those models are the "real" leica though - but the revenue helps keep the company profitable so they can make the high end.Zeiss partner with Sony for the same reason. In fact if they hadn't done that (having the zeiss name on questionable at best P&S lenses) they would probably be a defunct company by now.

I see nothing wrong with introducing something very different. the negative buzz is from a small vocal community not the broader mass market. Esthetics are also down to a matter of personal taste and something that looks so different form what we all think of as the norm is bound to invoke reaction. I've seen some positive reaction as well. thing is for Pentax who get very little press they got a ton with this. And despite your thinking there really is no such thing as bad press. Getting Press brings the brand name to consumers and ultimately most of the press also talks about other Pentax gear praising it )like the K5) So it does get people to look at the brand.
Personally I like it and may well buy it as a secondary that also does great video.
The majority of the target market is people who have never used an EVF or OVF in their life so I doubt they will even care (and if you talk to camera salespeople m4/3 and nex customers hardly ever buy the EVF aside from some enthusiasts - who will now buy Nex 7 OMD and Fuji....and maybe the next Pentax mirrorless that comes with them in mind)

The vitriol i've been seeing for a camera not designed for the people spouting it amazes me. Yep they made a camera without you in mind. they are after all in business to service as people as possible.So don't buy this one. buy the next or buy a different system. all these things are just tools for taking pictures. Find what works for you and use it. if you need something different for a use your current gear can't do then go for another camera. Reality is the K5 covers almost all the bases a photographer needs in what is still an incredibly small and lightweight package with better build than anything the competitors offer in the class
Mirrorless is still a developing market and it's good to see Pentax make an entry into a more serious end while covering the other end with the Q. they complement each other I think
And having a K mount mirrorless ensures a broad enough market to keep the mount growing (because although most K-01 buyers will by the 18-55 kit and never buy another lens, a percentage will develop LBA and as they develop their skill they will move into the DSLR segment because they have a lens investment. No-one who buys a nikon V1 will be doing that.

[kenafein]

Art concrete was a race to the minimalist conclusion that modernism ended as. Serious 'Art' has nothing to do with taste but the visual explorations by the artist of the language of the visual and the self. Abstract work is meant to refer to itself and not external objects where the iconography of the work is not meant to be derivative, although I suppose painting a triangle could be called derivative because it's already a recognized shape or object. I never liked Picasso as he was a mannerist who placed style before content. He became a cartoonist later in life, for want of a better description. I would prefer a De Kooning Woman painting to a Picasso any day. But that's my 'taste' based on a lifetime of art and spending 4 years in an Art School studying this stuff.

Art in a museum is archival and meant to be representative of an historical phase. It has nothing to do with promoting taste.

If I painted an oval on a square canvas would you really expect to see a few other features that help you interpret it as a face? Art is at it's best when it is an open exploration the visual, and when it is, it helps if you leave your preconceptions at the door. If you don't trust that the artist is being honest then you'll not learn a thing from the visual experience.

Art can be dirty. It doesn't have to play nice.

I appreciate creativity, skill, effort and passion even if I don't personally like the piece. A triangle on a blank canvas is not and never will be art, and I think it's insulting to those with passion and talent. There simply are things I've seen hanging in a museum that a 5 year old can do better, perhaps because it's still fun for them, they're expressing themselves and they're not trying to be too clever(and failing miserably).

[monochrome]

Though we haven't seen many images from it yet, I keep thinking that the K-01 is a bit of a throw-back to the Pentax philosophy of old where they used to eliminate certain features in order to produce an extremely capable image-making machine at a very competitive price...as in the 6X7 and 645 where Pentax opted not to include interchangeable backs or use lenses with leaf shutters. It looks to me like Pentax kept the two most important pieces of the puzzle (the sensor and the lenses), then asked themselves how many features they could eliminate in order to lower costs.

Barriers to entry for P&S shooter:

• Complexity
  • No TAv; fewer, addressable buttons
• Size
  • Someone will soon notice that size matters most when a lens is mounted - XS lenses on a larger body may well be smaller than competitors smaller bodies with their lenses mounted.
• Money

[redrockcoulee]

So, how should a car look? Like a Honda Accord? An S2000? An Element? You seem to imply there's only one right answer. Which is it?

There is only right answer 1979-93 Saab 900 hatchback Perferably Edwardian Grey. See that was not so hard.

I have used the X100 and really liked it but it was not the camera for me (only borrowed it and will again). It is totally possible that people who have "real" cameras would like using the K-01 but not to own one due to being so used to more conventional ones.

It is true that every camera out there already has passed more a test of time compared to a yet to be released one whose suspected target audience might be those who would not spend time on photo forums. Hard to judge their opinions yet. My 500 C/M model had been in production for around 60 years and the Rollei design even longer. Not sure how they would be judged if they were just released today. Doubt the market for the K-01 would even think they were ergonomic either.

I cannot argue with the design principles but do disagree with how they were intrepretated. The more I see the camera the better I think it looks and if the design was awful that would not be the case. It is often those things that we like instantly that we tire of first whereas things that take a little more looking and studying of often grow on us and more importantly stay with us. Of course the Saab 900 does both

[jogiba]

I don't know why Pentaxforumers beat themselves silly discussing to death that they know better than the other guy especially over something as subjective as design. One man's meat is another man's poison... so if you cannot come to terms with what Marc Newson has designed, then shut the f--- up, don't buy the K-01 and spend your money on something else. What's the point of being so opinionated when it won't change one iota Pentax's plans for this camera. Like as if they will listen to anonymous nobodies who probably don't have the means to buy but need to get their design discomfort angst off their chests. Seriously, if I were Pentax, I'd say "who gives a shit about a these guys, there are plenty others who'll buy this camera."

I used the K-01 up close and I didn't have any issue using it. Neither did my fellow Singapore Pentax users who played around with it. It is an easy camera to use. Instead of overthinking about the supposed design flaws, perhaps it would be better to put that mental effort into making better pictures. Go out and shoot people...

I agree 100%, Pentax has been making SLRs longer than any company in Japan and they know what works and what doesn't. There is not much you could change in the K-01 size at the $749 price level and still use K-mount lenses without an adapter. One look at the Sony NEX-5N with any lens other than the slow 16mm pancake and you see the small body size has no real world advantage.

[Wheatfield]

So, how should a car look? Like a Honda Accord? An S2000? An Element? You seem to imply there's only one right answer. Which is it?

There is only one right answer.
3 or 4 wheels and a body of some sort with doors.
What do you think a car should look like?

I suppose it would be easier to say I know what a car shouldn't look like. It shouldn't look like a grain silo, or a tractor, or a pile of Lego, for example.

[Class A]

The reason for negative posts such as this is because some Pentax's users fervently hope that this camera is not a harbinger of things to come, ...

That is exactly correct as far as it concerns me.

I don't quite think that anything anyone writes on the forum here will have any direct impact on future decisions by Pentax, but aiming to have direct impact on Pentax is certainly not the only motivation to post here.

He was not out on a lark of his own on this project.

Obviously he needed to work with Pentax and Pentax had its input but he also explicitly said he does not value customer feedback. I find that inappropriate for an industrial designer.

While there is positive user feedback (e.g., from Singapore) there was also negative feedback (the critique of the exposure compensation button placement in the first "hands-on" video).

Many here remark that it is not possible to critique the ergonomics of a camera design from images alone, but a) I dispute that to an extent, and b) someone who held and handled the K-01 made the same remark about the exposure compensation button (see the above video).

If only a few people in a feedback group would have mentioned the placement of the exposure compensation button, that should have been good enough feedback for any good designer to reconsider the placement. I'm absolutely positive that the feedback from the other users (e.g., the Singapore users) would have just been as positive or even better had the exposure compensation button be placed differently.

I don't know why Pentaxforumers beat themselves silly discussing to death that they know better than the other guy especially over something as subjective as design.

Usability is not entirely subjective.

And if one major theme of the response to a new camera is "fugliness" then this is not "subjective" but a problem.

One man's meat is another man's poison... so if you cannot come to terms with what Marc Newson has designed, then shut the f--- up, don't buy the K-01 and spend your money on something else.

1. Can you explain to me why you are posting here that others should STFU? What kind of privilege do you enjoy that others don't? If you reserve the right to post your opinion here (in a thread you could have easily ignored) then it appears to me that you must grant others the right no to STFU.
2. Your advice/conclusion "Don't buy the K-01" is certainly not what would be good for Pentax. And that was exactly the motivation for this thread: I want Pentax to do well. Hence, I'm frustrated when I feel that they are shooting themselves into the foot. I'm frustrated that the K-01 came close to an attractive product that would have done heaps of good for Pentax, but instead is something you must be concerned about whether it will find acceptance in the market.

Ergonomics have been a strong suit of Pentax DSLRs. I'm just very disappointed that I feel they dropped the ball with the K-01 in that discipline.

Like as if they will listen to anonymous nobodies who probably don't have the means to buy but need to get their design discomfort angst off their chests.

"Nobodies"?
"Design discomfort angst"?
Really?

It is an easy camera to use.

So you are happy to

1. press the exposure compensation button (and let it go),
2. turn the rear dial, and then
3. press the exposure button again (and let it go).

I believe that this approach does not allow a fluid as operation as it is possible on Pentax DSLRs and while the "toggle"-approach somewhat alleviates the bad placement of the exposure compensation button, it still would have been better placed somewhere else.

perhaps it would be better to put that mental effort into making better pictures.

How did you decide that it was a better use of your time to write your post rather than making better pictures?

---

Last edited by Class A; 02-08-2012 at 03:26 PM.

[Class A]

The vitriol i've been seeing for a camera not designed for the people spouting it amazes me.

And it amazes me how passionately people are jumping to the defence of Pentax not matter what.

I think I made it clear that my motivation for writing critical posts is a passion for Pentax as a company. So we should all be in the same boat, right?

Rational thinking would suggest that anyone who has constructive criticism to offer that may lead to improvements should be valued. But in reality, often critical remarks are stamped as being "negative" and posters are told to STFU. Where's that vitriol coming from?

Yep they made a camera without you in mind. they are after all in business to service as people as possible.So don't buy this one.

I want all Pentax products to be great, whether I am a potential customer or not. I would not have bought the K-01 even if it had come with an EVF and better design, but I would have felt a lot better for Pentax if it had.

Why? Because here it comes again, from you this time, the advice "Don't buy this one". That's exactly the conclusion many people will arrive at, some of which who may have bought a different K-01. That's what I don't want.

Hey, if the K-01 will open up a market for Pentax exactly because the K-01 does not satisfy all of Rams' design rules, that'll be fine for me! As long as Pentax continues to be serious about the ergonomics of their DSLRs, I personally don't care so much what K-01 users must do to get their pictures.

I'm just a bit concerned that

• the K-01 won't be that new magnet for new customers.
• the K-01 will repel some people who would have considered a different K-01.
• Pentax may lose its ergonomics plot even for cameras I'm personally interested in.

[TaoMaas]

It is often those things that we like instantly that we tire of first whereas things that take a little more looking and studying of often grow on us and more importantly stay with us.

I totally agree. I like to say, "If first impressions were always right, nobody would have ever taken a second drink of beer."

[jogiba]

Ergonomics have been a strong suit of Pentax DSLRs. I'm just very disappointed that I feel they dropped the ball with the K-01 in that discipline

The K-01 is not a DSLR, if YOU want a Pentax DSLR then get the K-5. The K-01 is the world's first mirrorless interchangeable lens camera that uses the full line of DSLR lenses from one of the big three (Canon, Nikon & Pentax) DSLR vendors. The K-01 is a no brainer for video compared to the K-5 so if you are not into video then get the K-5 and stop wishing the K-01 looked like the K-5.

[TaoMaas]

So you are happy to

1. press the exposure compensation button (and let it go),
2. turn the rear dial, and then
3. press the exposure button again (and let it go).

I believe that this approach does not allow a fluid as operation as it is possible on Pentax DSLRs and while the "toggle"-approach somewhat alleviates the bad placement of the exposure compensation button, it still would have been better placed somewhere else.

See? It's not that unusual to ignore feedback from actual users, is it? I can understand why Mr. Newson isn't that concerned with hearing about his designs. Once we start trying to please other people, it's very easy to lose that which makes our designs...or photographs...or musical compositions..."us". If I build your dream camera, is it your design or mine?

[johnmflores]

That is exactly correct as far as it concerns me.

Obviously he needed to work with Pentax and Pentax had its input but he also explicitly said he does not value customer feedback. I find that inappropriate for an industrial designer.

Let's rememeber - Marc Newson is not the only name on this camera. Pentax gets top billing here. Pentax was Marc Newson's client. Pentax did market research and defined the product parameters - including the exclusion of the EVF - not Marc Newson. If Marc Newson went to his client and presented a design that was fundamentally unworkable, it was Pentax's responsibility to tell Newson to go back to the drawing board and try again. And if Pentax was smart, they'd have the very same people involved in the K-7, K-5, and K-x/K-r in those meetings to evaluate what Newson brought to them. That's the way the design process works, so if the K-01 has some usability flaws, Pentax is as responsible as Newson is.

While there is positive user feedback (e.g., from Singapore) there was also negative feedback (the critique of the exposure compensation button placement in the first "hands-on" video).

Many here remark that it is not possible to critique the ergonomics of a camera design from images alone, but a) I dispute that to an extent, and b) someone who held and handled the K-01 made the same remark about the exposure compensation button (see the above video).

If only a few people in a feedback group would have mentioned the placement of the exposure compensation button, that should have been good enough feedback for any good designer to reconsider the placement. I'm absolutely positive that the feedback from the other users (e.g., the Singapore users) would have just been as positive or even better had the exposure compensation button be placed differently.
...
So you are happy to

1. press the exposure compensation button (and let it go),
2. turn the rear dial, and then
3. press the exposure button again (and let it go).

I believe that this approach does not allow a fluid as operation as it is possible on Pentax DSLRs and while the "toggle"-approach somewhat alleviates the bad placement of the exposure compensation button, it still would have been better placed somewhere else.

Funny. I just picked up my wife's single-dial K-x. It works just like the K-01 - tap, turn dial, tap. From a usability standpoint (and I've done some of this professionally), this is actually an acceptable method, as the press-to-hold while spinning method requires more dexterity to accomplish and is potentially more prone to errors.

A key part of a process like this is also what kind of feedback the device provides as the function is performed. Feedback needs to be clear and instructive. On the K-x, the display line of the OVF changes to show that moving the dial will control exposure comp. Without an EVF, I'd have to look at the K-01 more closely to see if the rear LCD provides sufficient feedback to the user.

At the end of the day, the toggle approach may not be due to your belief that the button is misplaced. You are drawing connections between things that may not in fact exist.

[rawr]

he does not value customer feedback

This 'no need to listen to customer feedback' issue seems to rile people the most, and gets them believing designers like Newson are somehow snobs.

But there are two sorts of customer involved here:

- the commissioning client;
- the 'end-user' of the product.

The relationship to the end-user for a lot of industrial designers is often not direct, but mediated through the client. If the client says 'use this battery, use this size lens mount, make sure there is room in the body for a drive motor, shutter and sensor of this size, don't put in a viewfinder, put a green button somewhere, find a place for a pop-up flash and a hot-shoe too, use a rear LCD this big, make sure it can accommodate plugs for a mic, USB and HDMI out on the side, make sure it as a 4 way control dial on the rear like other Pentaxes' etc then that already sets something of a 'floor' for what the designer can achieve with the ergonomics of the design.

The client then relies on the designers industrial experience, creativity and problem solving to wrap something interesting, usable and on spec around the client's requirements. It's a perfectly normal process.

The design process doesn't always need to be steered by 'end users' for it to work. 'Crowd sourcing' ideas, relying on 'focus groups', or designing something by committee, more often means death to good products or designs than any improvement.

[rawr]

So you are happy to press the exposure compensation button (and let it go), turn the rear dial, and then press the exposure button again (and let it go).

That's fine. It's how the K-x works. You should try it sometime.

[anthony mazzeri]

There is only one right answer.
3 or 4 wheels and a body of some sort with doors.
What do you think a car should look like?

No wheels. I want a hovercar.

Whenever they do invent those, I fully expect many existing car drivers to denigrate my new hovercar and inisist the only way to drive properly is with four wheels on the ground for stability and steerability.