[Laurentiu Cristofor]

I also cannot understand the obsession manufacturers have with including video capability in still cameras. If I want to shoot video, I'll use a dedicated video camera.

A dedicated video camera with similar potential would cost much, much more than a DSLR. The advantage of doing video with a DSLR is access to fast lenses and control of aperture (and manual focus, although for some reason people seem to obsess about AF capabilities). For quick movies, you are right that a video camera would be easier to use, but for dedicated people, they can do things with DSLRs that are not achievable with plain video cameras. jogiba, who might be a bit upset with me lately and thinks that I discard the K-01 for having video features, has some great samples of video captured with a DSLR.

Also, for the rest of us that don't care about video, the availability of video comes at very little extra cost. Cameras would be even costlier if companies would split their lines into models with and without video and would have to develop them separately.

[sjwaldron]

The body is polycarbonate plastic? Everything else I've seen so far says it is aluminum. A simple test would be to see if the black body sections are cold to the touch or not. I can easily tell the difference with my DA* 300mm (aluminum) and DA* 55mm (plastic) eventhough they have the same texture.

[Adam]

The frame (what's inside the camera) is made of aluminum (not steel as the 645d and k-5/7) but the black exterior parts are made of plastic. The silver parts are aluminum, or at least that's what it seems like. Only the silver parts are cold to the touch.

[jpzk]

RAW video ? Is it possible with the K-01 and why would it be used ?

I was reading a post in "another" forum which mentioned that some companies prefer having their videos shot in RAW.

"the clients that require RAW video are the ones waiting to schedule shoots with the D800, because it will save them about 80% on their camera expenses since there is no other camera that shoots RAW video and has interchangeable lenses\full 35mm sized sensor for less than $12,000)"

I have no idea why and asking here is the most convenient place. Can someone explain the reason why you'd want a RAW video?

Just a question, for what it's worth ... curious though.

JP

[twitch]

Can someone explain the reason why you'd want a RAW video?

Just a question, for what it's worth ... curious though.

JP

Same reason anyone shoots RAW rather than JPEG for stills.

[jpzk]

Same reason anyone shoots RAW rather than JPEG for stills.

Obvious and elementary. I shouldn't have asked.

What about the K-01 ... can it do RAW video ?
(That was part of the question)

JP

@ Adam: Great, great review !!

[timh]

Nice review, very well done.

No nice surprises about the camera though, based on what we already knew. I think it's a nearly-but-not-quite; shame. For the doing most kinds of photography (as opposed to videography) any Pentax DSLR is still better, going back to at least the K200D when I joined the club. (Note that I wouldn't say the same of all current mirrorless cameras.)

[twitch]

I very much doubt it could record RAW video, even 5DIII & D800's can't do that. Probably more realistic is whether it can deliver uncompressed video through it's HDMI out port which apparently the D800 can. Again I doubt it, but who knows, maybe Prime M is a wonder chip.

[luftfluss]

The lack of a proper viewfinder with full protection from ambient light relegates this camera to the point-and-shoot class IMHO. What benefit do you derive from being able to use all your high-dollar K-mount glass, if you cannot be assured of sharp focus each and every time?

Manual focus, particularly with focus-peeking, can help ensure spot-on focus. Also, it's been proven that CDAF is more reliably precise than PDAF. Certain portrait/study photogs and landscape photogs can easily compose and focus via the LCD. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it can't work.

I also cannot understand the obsession manufacturers have with including video capability in still cameras.

I guess you never use the radio in your car, huh? How about the air conditioner?

If I want to shoot video, I'll use a dedicated video camera. Don't make me pay for spurious video technology in my still camera -- give me a hooded electronic viewfinder instead!

You're not paying for it. The capability is built into the sensor, just like with all the other comparable brands. You are not forced to use nor acknowledge the existence of the video capabilities.

[sjwaldron]

The frame (what's inside the camera) is made of aluminum (not steel as the 645d and k-5/7) but the black exterior parts are made of plastic. The silver parts are aluminum, or at least that's what it seems like. Only the silver parts are cold to the touch.

That's funny how Pentax skirts the issue of mentioning plastic (kind of like how they fail to mention the back panel of the K-7/5 is plastic). I'll be curious to see the cut-away version if they ever release a photo of it, because I would think if they used a metal casing then the camera could have been smaller. I guess that explains their two-toned color scheme.

[jlaubza]

What's the deal with the celebrity designer's design? This camera has yet another 'me too' look - let's face it, point and shoot shapes have to look the way they do so that we can hold them and handle them. The great features are the Pentax K mount and APS-C sensor - the camera body design is virtually irrelevant and any design student could have come up with this one. In fact, some folk might want more of a hand grip on the RHS than what this camera offers.

The real problem though is that whilst it is a pioneer camera, it is limited compared to current state of the art technology (e.g. no EVF) and thus is not a true leader - Pentax has released a prototype camera and it is very obvious from the review where the next model will improve over this one.

[No Maam]

First things first: Thank you Adam for the first in-depth review on the internet! Was a great read and provided at lot of detail information for me, like the 1 FPS in RAW Mode, which are a deal breaker for me.

One point of criticism: The DNG of the K-01 is not in focus at page 13 in " K-01/K-5 Sensor Comparison". So I can't compare the sharpness between the two cameras.
Sorry, I'm a pixel peeper and eager to see which one is the sharpest. Just because I have already seen a few DNGs of the K-01 (franks K-01 vs K-5) and it seems to me, that the K-01 produce slightly sharper images than the K-5.

Thanks again!

[LitoNazareno]

fantastic review. made me visit the local pentax dealer again, after I initially saw the K 01 and noticed the door memory card door made of rubber. your observation on the SD door is a great concern so I checked out the door again on 2nd visit and when my thumb snagged against the rubber flap (it is really just a flap) it opened repeatedly. a firmer closure helped but the center of the flap still opened up a bit. i have experienced rubber items that have turned to powder after a few years as in the soles of running shoes. a lot of you may know what brand I refer to. in short, this may not stand up to rugged use since in addition to the tendency to open, the rubber door is held on by two thin rubber strips. I wonder if the designer is a photographer. thanks again for the review.

it seems to be a good platform though and i was thinking maybe pentax could offer a grip that would cover the whole right side and bolster the whole rubber door cover to make the closure more secure. I am sensitive to this issue since I sometimes snag my pinkie on the battery cover of my Kx and the batteries fall out. I have to take care to avoid doing this it causes concern.

am a pentaxian. own Kx film, Kx digital, Lx, K1000 film, K100D. Mx with vaious lenses from screw mt, k, Km, Da since 70's so that I'm concerned about longevity of equipment

[powP0Wpow]

How was shutter lag? On both AF/MF? Love to hear opinions.

[spartan]

Adam

What matters abotu CDAF is how the 01 compares to other mirrorless and P&S cameras with CDAF. is it possible to compare?

NIck