Originally posted by konraDarnok To critique your first point, aesthetics: What you've done here is a pretty classic Argumentum ad populum.
The answer to most questions does not depend on a majority vote. This is where the "Argumentum ad populum" applies. There are, however, some questions, where the majority vote is important. For instance, the question "Does the majority find the K-01 design appealing or not?".
It is my understanding that good design will (ultimately) be well received by the majority of people. If only a minority of people say "I like it" then the design has failed.
Originally posted by konraDarnok To the second point, Is as little design as possible I'd say this design exemplifies this principal.
What function does the chimney/snorkel have?
Surely the mode dial could have been placed in such a way that it would not need a pedestal.
What function does the bulge have?
You may argue that it helps to raise the flash but a flash raising mechanism should take care of that not a part that permanently adds height to the camera.
Originally posted by konraDarnok There's nothing pretensions about this camera. The buttons and controls are straight forward -- with no anonymous extraneous switches and dials that modern cameras have in abundance.
There is no need for the snorkel.
The on/off switch looks good but is big and not as functional as previous solutions. It can be switched off with the index finger, but it seems more natural to switch it on with the thumb. Previous Pentax on/off switch designs made it easy to switch the camera on with the index finger so that the index finger can immediately be put on the shutter release button. I don't see that kind of natural operation with the K-01. Maybe handling one would teach me otherwise, but I don't see how. Misere has also
complained about the K-01's on/off switch. EDIT: Maybe the on/off switch works after all if one
holds the K-01 like an F1 steering wheel?
Originally posted by konraDarnok Your example of the bump is misplaced. They had to put the flash housing somewhere -- as directly below it is the mount.
Look at the Q. The K-01 would have been big without adding further bulk to it by using a bulge and an elevated mode dial.
Originally posted by konraDarnok And the "snorkle" is designed so this camera can be laid. flat on any side -- even the top.
Why would anyone lay the camera on its top?
Also, judging from images, the camera would not lay straight on its top. EDIT:
It does! (I'm not convinced, though, that the mode dial actually reaches the ground).
Originally posted by konraDarnok This camera is designed to be held at arms length. It looks to me like the buttons are laid on to achieve that.
The index finger can not comfortably operate the exposure compensation button whether you hold the camera at arm's length or not.