Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-13-2012, 08:59 AM   #61
Veteran Member
krebsy75's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chester County, Pa.
Posts: 804
Original Poster
It's possible that the rubber door will wear over time and not remain secure to the camera. Pentax elected to go with form over function here, unfortunately.

QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
I was thinking of the flap over the door but also how durable the build is. That doesn't mean it's bad in any way but probably not ideal for me as I prefer something a bit rugged. The resilience of the build quality and the possibility of loose or weak latches won't become generally apparent until after a few months' of use by a lot of folks so I should have toned my comment down. Apologies. Anyway, I know that if I went into the local dealership I would no doubt admire the k-01 and quite like it but I would still come away with a new K-5 because at its current price here the K-5 with its superb build quality is stunning value.


03-13-2012, 09:24 AM   #62
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,879
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
By the way, any mirrorless camera has problems with long lenses.
Hmm, I never knew that, but I guess I should have!

That said, other MILCs have 200mm lenses, yet the K-01 seems to be struggling even with the kit at 55mm.
03-13-2012, 09:28 AM   #63
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,879
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
So in your eyes, the PDAF of a K100D should perform just as well as that of the K5? Of course not, they don't have to be the same. And so the CDAF of a K-01 doesn't have to be the same as the CDAF of the higher end model.
Are you purposely being obtuse and argumentative, or do you genuinely not understand a) the competitive market and b) how technology progresses?
03-13-2012, 09:30 AM   #64
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,879
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
Yes, they would, and have previously. Actually that was a huge issue with the Kx or Kr (I don't remember which) and somewhat with the K5.. That and the K5 stain issue that their "reams of testers " didn't catch, were really hot topics here for a while.

I don't mean to pick on Pentax here as most companies now use the consumers as QC, rather than doing it in-house.
Yeah, it was the K-r. Something related to Pentax's new AF module.

03-13-2012, 09:36 AM   #65
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,587
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
That said, other MILCs have 200mm lenses, yet the K-01 seems to be struggling even with the kit at 55mm.
Remember that at 55mm, the kit is only f5.6. That isn't much light for it to work with, especially indoors.
03-13-2012, 09:41 AM   #66
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Veluwe
Posts: 339
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
Hmm, I never knew that, but I guess I should have!

That said, other MILCs have 200mm lenses, yet the K-01 seems to be struggling even with the kit at 55mm.

I wonder. For a short while I had panasonic 45-200 and handheld it was no problem at 200 (crop 2x). That is, subject static and not too not decent light. But as I like olympus better and though shorter also lighter, I acquiered 45-150. Very easy, nice results at 150mm. But: static subjects or slight movement.
But of course m43 is no good. .
I wonder about k-01. No need to hurry. Keep up the good trying all and everything out.
Mind you, longer tele always needs support, or not?
03-13-2012, 09:43 AM   #67
Veteran Member
krebsy75's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chester County, Pa.
Posts: 804
Original Poster
This is true but it struggles with the 17-70 as well which is constant f/4. On the prime side, it struggles with the 35 macro which is f/2.8.

The focusing issues don't seem to be limited to low ambient light. I had issues with the 17-70 in full daylight. This discovery caused me to dig deeper.

QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
Remember that at 55mm, the kit is only f5.6. That isn't much light for it to work with, especially indoors.
03-13-2012, 09:55 AM   #68
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 202
I would return it...why struggle with something you are not satisfied with, your use shows it to be dissapointing, with flaws that keep it from meeting your expectations? Working around them sure could be a solution, but why should you have to?...are the advantages worth it?

Maybe the issue(s) will get straightened out, and it'll be worth a revisit.

Life is too short to settle.

03-13-2012, 09:59 AM   #69
Veteran Member
krebsy75's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chester County, Pa.
Posts: 804
Original Poster
My wife loves the cam with either of our 40s. It seemed like a great complement to our K5. We might punt for now and sit on the sidelines for a bit.

I'm beginning to wonder if the only way to do mirrorless right is with dedicated, optimized lenses. Perhaps the K-01 is a flawed concept. Way too soon to draw this kind of conclusion but it has occured to me.

QuoteOriginally posted by jmg257 Quote
I would return it...why struggle with something you are not satisfied with, your use shows it to be dissapointing, with flaws that keep it from meeting your expectations? Working around them sure could be a solution, but why should you have to?...are the advantages worth it?

Maybe the issue(s) will get straightened out, and it'll be worth a revisit.

Life is too short to settle.
03-13-2012, 10:06 AM   #70
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
QuoteOriginally posted by krebsy97 Quote
This is true but it struggles with the 17-70 as well which is constant f/4. On the prime side, it struggles with the 35 macro which is f/2.8.

The focusing issues don't seem to be limited to low ambient light. I had issues with the 17-70 in full daylight. This discovery caused me to dig deeper.
It may have trouble with the slower lenses, but I don't think all fast lenses will work the same with the CDAF. I understand that the 35 F2.8 macro has a long focus throw because it is a macro lens. In addition, some of the older Pentax lens designs don't perform very well in CDAF, I believe. So some lenses perform great (35 F2.4), some ok (the limited primes), and some not so good (35 F2.8 macro).

It would be great to figure out as a collective group which lenses perform wonderfully on the K-01.
03-13-2012, 10:11 AM   #71
Senior Member
mervis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 108
Struggle...

Struggle at all times or struggle in a dark room? Personally, I think too much emphasis is being made on autofocus speed and not on image quality - which is this camera's real strength. (I couldn't care less about autofocus speed, but I think I've made that obvious.)
03-13-2012, 10:16 AM   #72
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 70
QuoteOriginally posted by krebsy97 Quote
My wife loves the cam with either of our 40s. It seemed like a great complement to our K5. We might punt for now and sit on the sidelines for a bit.

I'm beginning to wonder if the only way to do mirrorless right is with dedicated, optimized lenses. Perhaps the K-01 is a flawed concept. Way too soon to draw this kind of conclusion but it has occured to me.
When I look at the video review here (nice one, btw), it seems like the K-01 focus speed/lock in low light is going to be roughly similar to my Ricoh GXR. It isn't bad, but it is worlds away from the latest, fastest CDAF optimized systems.

So, maybe my expectation is a little lower... I just plan to use the K-01 is situations that are well lit (or plan on using snap focus, etc.) and that do not require a quick AF lock. I will keep using my m4/3 kit for those situations (as others will probably keep using their DSLRs).
03-13-2012, 10:26 AM   #73
Veteran Member
krebsy75's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chester County, Pa.
Posts: 804
Original Poster
Keep in mind that the point of this thread was to communicate my discovery that the K5 in LV was able to lock focus more consistently than the K-01. It's slower, but was more successful locking. This leads me to believe that the technology is there for the K-01 to perform better. It's just frustrating when the cam gives up and displays a red box.
03-13-2012, 10:30 AM   #74
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
QuoteOriginally posted by krebsy97 Quote
Keep in mind that the point of this thread was to communicate my discovery that the K5 in LV was able to lock focus more consistently than the K-01. It's slower, but was more successful locking. This leads me to believe that the technology is there for the K-01 to perform better. It's just frustrating when the cam gives up and displays a red box.
Heh, I can imagine how you feel, my k-x is terrible.

I hope that a lot of the focus issues being brought up will be solved by firmware soon. As much as we think it's silly to complain about a CDAF system being used indoors in low-light on subjects with not too much contrast, your typical entry level user buying this camera will have no idea why the camera is not locking focus.

I'm just glad that the camera has quite a good focus peaking system, and focus peaking works in AF mode to pair with quick-shift lenses.
03-13-2012, 10:32 AM   #75
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by Rupert Quote
Gee.....this is all shocking to me......a low priced camera that doesn't focus like a D800? Looks like Pentax screwed us again?

You have your problems, I have mine......my little X10 has a problem with Orbs about once in every 2-3K shots....and over in the Fuji Forum people are jumping off of bridges. I'll just keep on shooting, and if you're smart, you will too! Heck, I'm not even all that smart, and I figured that out!

Regards!
Well, Fuji appears to be replacing the X10 sensor for the people who have problems, must be overreacting I suppose, since it's clearly a non-issue.
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!
auto-focus, da, k-01, k01, k5, mirrorless, pentax k-01, test
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
my most disappointing thing about Pentax slip Pentax DSLR Discussion 16 01-06-2012 10:22 PM
K10D iso 100 noise - bit disappointing Spock Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 01-07-2011 10:22 AM
Pentax disappointing Sensor cleaning. coljung Pentax DSLR Discussion 74 12-02-2010 01:04 PM
Nature A disappointing night... Adam Post Your Photos! 3 11-22-2010 08:00 PM
Nature Discovery Matjazz Post Your Photos! 8 08-08-2010 08:41 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:22 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