K-01 gets bad review in What Digital Camera

K-9 · 06-23-2012, 06:34 PM

K-01 review

Only got a 76% rating review, which by their standards, is absolutely horrible. That's the lowest score I've seen them give for this type of camera.

Quote:

The Pentax K-01 isn't like anything else on the market. Its unusual exterior may appeal to design aficionados associated with the world of Marc Newson and other designers, but for most average camera users it's too bulky and, on account of its small grip alone, won't appeal to hardened photographers.

The use of the K-mount may appeal, particularly to existing Pentax users, yet it's hard to see what the K-01 offers that the far superior K-5 doesn't.

Image quality and the quirky Focus Peaking feature are the model's high point, though the lacklustre performance, again, is problematic.

Overall the K-01 feels like a bloated Compact System Camera without the associated size benefits of its competitors, or otherwise a lobotomised DSLR. It straddles the two categories but, and ultimately, fails to deliver anything new or innovative enough to inspire.

**monochrome** · 06-23-2012, 06:45 PM

Bullshit.

Anvh · 06-23-2012, 07:14 PM

What part?

asw66 · 06-23-2012, 07:18 PM

This kind of response from conservative types is to be expected. It doesn't neatly fit into existing categories, and therefore is marked down.

Have the same people reviewed the Fuji XPro 1? In my view the K-01 and XPro 1 are closely comparable: bulky MILCs with high IQ and relatively slow AF. But the K-01 is refreshingly honest about what it is, while the XPro 1 pretends to be rangefinder.

In short, if the reviewers showed good judgement, the K-01 should trounce the XPro 1 in terms of value for money and lens selection. Yet I expect that the reverse would be the case in their eyes.

K-9 · 06-23-2012, 07:32 PM

I consider this to be one of the best magazines on the market and fully trust most of their reviews, but I admit I was a bit surprised by such a low score.

Originally posted by asw66

This kind of response from conservative types is to be expected. It doesn't neatly fit into existing categories, and therefore is marked down.

Have the same people reviewed the Fuji XPro 1? In my view the K-01 and XPro 1 are closely comparable: bulky MILCs with high IQ and relatively slow AF. But the K-01 is refreshingly honest about what it is, while the XPro 1 pretends to be rangefinder.

In short, if the reviewers showed good judgement, the K-01 should trounce the XPro 1 in terms of value for money and lens selection. Yet I expect that the reverse would be the case in their eyes.

Their reviews of the XPRO-1 gave it a 92% score.

Other scores from the magazine:

Q - 80%
GX1- 90%
OM-D E-M5 - 90%
NEX-7 - 88%

K-5 - 90%
K-r - 87%
Sony A77 - 92%
D800 - 94%
5d MKIII - 94%

X100 - 90%
X10 - 91%

wed7 · 06-23-2012, 09:14 PM

maybe they don't really "absorbed" the design after all.

pinholecam · 06-23-2012, 09:36 PM

Originally posted by K-9

I consider this to be one of the best magazines on the market and fully trust most of their reviews, but I admit I was a bit surprised by such a low score.

Their reviews of the XPRO-1 gave it a 92% score.

Having tried the X-pro1 in a recent expo, I've got to say that its AF is the worst I've ever experienced on any camera.

I tried two shots on my daughter one was badly OOF, the other one she was not in the photo at all

These was even when the EVF clearly displayed her within it and locked focus (after some time).
Abysmal EVF/Shutter lag.
The K-01 is certainly better in AF than the XPro1

That said though, K-01 does AF badly on some lenses (what were they given? 40XS or 18-55 kit? ) and does not offer as much whiz bang compared to much of the MILC competition circa 2012.

creampuff · 06-23-2012, 09:59 PM

Originally posted by pinholecam

Having tried the X-pro1 in a recent expo, I've got to say that its AF is the worst I've ever experienced on any camera.

I tried two shots on my daughter one was badly OOF, the other one she was not in the photo at all

These was even when the EVF clearly displayed her within it and locked focus (after some time).
Abysmal EVF/Shutter lag.
The K-01 is certainly better in AF than the XPro1

That said though, K-01 does AF badly on some lenses (what were they given? 40XS or 18-55 kit? ) and does not offer as much whiz bang compared to much of the MILC competition circa 2012.

Yeah I found the X-pro1 just rubbish as well. Horrible shutter lag and AF was forgettable. I can't help thinking those who paid good money for it weren't taken to the cleaners. Too much hype surrounding an underperforming camera.

vladimiroltean · 06-24-2012, 04:38 AM

Quote:

Pentax K-01 review: White Balance & Colour:
Colours are natural yet punchy, and even more vibrant in (standard) JPEG files then their Raw equivalents. Auto White Balance is accurate throughout a variety of scenes, though Raw files are often a little more magenta.

Seriously? Who reads this shit anyway? They spent exactly one paragraph mentioning the focus peak, but wasted a whole page complaining about the AF and design.

jogiba · 06-24-2012, 05:15 AM

Quote:

X10 - 91%

Does the X10 have full manual control in HD video with 1080p30,25,24 and 720p60 and focus peaking with K-mount lenses and IS/SR with all of them ? BTW the X10 image quality looks like shit compared to the K-01.Whatever floats your boat I guess.

X10 @ 3200 iso vs K-01 @ 3200 iso :

click here for 1920x1200 size

ihasa · 06-24-2012, 05:59 AM

The X10 is a compact zoom camera, so the comparison is false.

ihasa · 06-24-2012, 06:08 AM

I think the K-01 makes a lot of sense for existing Pentax shooters, but I must admit from the point of view of general users deciding between the various compact systems, I can understand What Digital Camera's concerns. It wouldn't be my first recommendation, no way! But if you have DA/FA/K lenses? In that case it would make an awesome backup or video body.

Anvh · 06-24-2012, 06:30 AM

Originally posted by ihasa

In that case it would make an awesome backup or video body.

I think you missed some of the threads about the K-01 and video... if you're a bit serious with video then don't take the K-01...

RonHendriks1966 · 06-24-2012, 06:45 AM

Most important part is clearly they recognice the image quality that the K-01 can deliver.

mugund · 06-25-2012, 01:52 PM

Everybody says that K-01's AF speed is not good and bulky. Bulky part is may be in not getting the advantage of K-mount lens but AF part is a real issue. For people who like focus peak, K-01 with legacy K-mount lens is good but given majority of folks like AF and with Nex cameras giving focus peaking in addition to faster focusing will K-01 get more points? Idea is most users in the budge range stick to kit lenses, only the serious photographers go for next set of lenses and might appreciate K-01 but they might not be fond of slow AF
Comparison with XPro1, K-01 is very similar but X-pro1 builds on X100 which was a runaway success so people like compact bodies with prime lens. Given that x-pro1 lens mount is built from scratch, it might be easier to optimizes lenses based on CDAF ala EP3/ OM-D etc.
Lets not take it personal when reviewers gave bad comments, most of them gave high marks to K-5 and kx when they see the merits.
How do we get the feedback from Pentax that they are making efforts to optimize their CDAF performance for K-01? Can we use K30 as indicator?

06-23-2012, 06:34 PM	#1
K-9 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,971	K-01 gets bad review in What Digital Camera K-01 review Only got a 76% rating review, which by their standards, is absolutely horrible. That's the lowest score I've seen them give for this type of camera. Quote: The Pentax K-01 isn't like anything else on the market. Its unusual exterior may appeal to design aficionados associated with the world of Marc Newson and other designers, but for most average camera users it's too bulky and, on account of its small grip alone, won't appeal to hardened photographers. The use of the K-mount may appeal, particularly to existing Pentax users, yet it's hard to see what the K-01 offers that the far superior K-5 doesn't. Image quality and the quirky Focus Peaking feature are the model's high point, though the lacklustre performance, again, is problematic. Overall the K-01 feels like a bloated Compact System Camera without the associated size benefits of its competitors, or otherwise a lobotomised DSLR. It straddles the two categories but, and ultimately, fails to deliver anything new or innovative enough to inspire.

06-23-2012, 07:32 PM	#5
K-9 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,971 Original Poster	I consider this to be one of the best magazines on the market and fully trust most of their reviews, but I admit I was a bit surprised by such a low score. Originally posted by asw66 This kind of response from conservative types is to be expected. It doesn't neatly fit into existing categories, and therefore is marked down. Have the same people reviewed the Fuji XPro 1? In my view the K-01 and XPro 1 are closely comparable: bulky MILCs with high IQ and relatively slow AF. But the K-01 is refreshingly honest about what it is, while the XPro 1 pretends to be rangefinder. In short, if the reviewers showed good judgement, the K-01 should trounce the XPro 1 in terms of value for money and lens selection. Yet I expect that the reverse would be the case in their eyes. Their reviews of the XPRO-1 gave it a 92% score. Other scores from the magazine: Q - 80% GX1- 90% OM-D E-M5 - 90% NEX-7 - 88% K-5 - 90% K-r - 87% Sony A77 - 92% D800 - 94% 5d MKIII - 94% X100 - 90% X10 - 91% Last edited by K-9; 06-23-2012 at 07:38 PM.

06-24-2012, 05:15 AM	#10
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	Quote: X10 - 91% Does the X10 have full manual control in HD video with 1080p30,25,24 and 720p60 and focus peaking with K-mount lenses and IS/SR with all of them ? BTW the X10 image quality looks like shit compared to the K-01.Whatever floats your boat I guess. X10 @ 3200 iso vs K-01 @ 3200 iso : click here for 1920x1200 size Last edited by jogiba; 06-24-2012 at 05:21 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Digital Camera Info Q review	conradj	Pentax Q	5	12-02-2011 08:11 PM
Digital Camera Info K-5 review	conradj	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	7	06-10-2011 10:43 AM
What Camera Digital K-7 REVIEW (Take Two)	Adrian Owerko	Pentax News and Rumors	11	11-21-2009 07:58 AM
Digital Camera Review	GLXLR	Pentax News and Rumors	9	06-14-2009 07:16 AM
Digital Camera Review reviews DA* 55 f/1.4	Urkeldaedalus	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	02-27-2009 09:29 AM

06-23-2012, 06:45 PM	#2
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Bullshit.

06-23-2012, 07:14 PM	#3
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	What part?

06-23-2012, 07:18 PM	#4
asw66 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 347	This kind of response from conservative types is to be expected. It doesn't neatly fit into existing categories, and therefore is marked down. Have the same people reviewed the Fuji XPro 1? In my view the K-01 and XPro 1 are closely comparable: bulky MILCs with high IQ and relatively slow AF. But the K-01 is refreshingly honest about what it is, while the XPro 1 pretends to be rangefinder. In short, if the reviewers showed good judgement, the K-01 should trounce the XPro 1 in terms of value for money and lens selection. Yet I expect that the reverse would be the case in their eyes.

06-23-2012, 09:14 PM	#6
wed7 Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Manila, Philippines Posts: 1,421	maybe they don't really "absorbed" the design after all.

06-23-2012, 09:36 PM	#7
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,706	Originally posted by K-9 I consider this to be one of the best magazines on the market and fully trust most of their reviews, but I admit I was a bit surprised by such a low score. Their reviews of the XPRO-1 gave it a 92% score. Having tried the X-pro1 in a recent expo, I've got to say that its AF is the worst I've ever experienced on any camera. I tried two shots on my daughter one was badly OOF, the other one she was not in the photo at all These was even when the EVF clearly displayed her within it and locked focus (after some time). Abysmal EVF/Shutter lag. The K-01 is certainly better in AF than the XPro1 That said though, K-01 does AF badly on some lenses (what were they given? 40XS or 18-55 kit? ) and does not offer as much whiz bang compared to much of the MILC competition circa 2012.

06-23-2012, 09:59 PM	#8
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	Originally posted by pinholecam Having tried the X-pro1 in a recent expo, I've got to say that its AF is the worst I've ever experienced on any camera. I tried two shots on my daughter one was badly OOF, the other one she was not in the photo at all These was even when the EVF clearly displayed her within it and locked focus (after some time). Abysmal EVF/Shutter lag. The K-01 is certainly better in AF than the XPro1 That said though, K-01 does AF badly on some lenses (what were they given? 40XS or 18-55 kit? ) and does not offer as much whiz bang compared to much of the MILC competition circa 2012. Yeah I found the X-pro1 just rubbish as well. Horrible shutter lag and AF was forgettable. I can't help thinking those who paid good money for it weren't taken to the cleaners. Too much hype surrounding an underperforming camera.

06-24-2012, 04:38 AM	#9
vladimiroltean Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Bucharest, Romania Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,465	Quote: Pentax K-01 review: White Balance & Colour: Colours are natural yet punchy, and even more vibrant in (standard) JPEG files then their Raw equivalents. Auto White Balance is accurate throughout a variety of scenes, though Raw files are often a little more magenta. Seriously? Who reads this shit anyway? They spent exactly one paragraph mentioning the focus peak, but wasted a whole page complaining about the AF and design.

06-24-2012, 05:59 AM	#11
ihasa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: West Midlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,066	The X10 is a compact zoom camera, so the comparison is false.

06-24-2012, 06:08 AM	#12
ihasa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: West Midlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,066	I think the K-01 makes a lot of sense for existing Pentax shooters, but I must admit from the point of view of general users deciding between the various compact systems, I can understand What Digital Camera's concerns. It wouldn't be my first recommendation, no way! But if you have DA/FA/K lenses? In that case it would make an awesome backup or video body.

06-24-2012, 06:30 AM	#13
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by ihasa In that case it would make an awesome backup or video body. I think you missed some of the threads about the K-01 and video... if you're a bit serious with video then don't take the K-01...

06-24-2012, 06:45 AM	#14
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Most important part is clearly they recognice the image quality that the K-01 can deliver.

06-25-2012, 01:52 PM	#15
mugund Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 52	Everybody says that K-01's AF speed is not good and bulky. Bulky part is may be in not getting the advantage of K-mount lens but AF part is a real issue. For people who like focus peak, K-01 with legacy K-mount lens is good but given majority of folks like AF and with Nex cameras giving focus peaking in addition to faster focusing will K-01 get more points? Idea is most users in the budge range stick to kit lenses, only the serious photographers go for next set of lenses and might appreciate K-01 but they might not be fond of slow AF Comparison with XPro1, K-01 is very similar but X-pro1 builds on X100 which was a runaway success so people like compact bodies with prime lens. Given that x-pro1 lens mount is built from scratch, it might be easier to optimizes lenses based on CDAF ala EP3/ OM-D etc. Lets not take it personal when reviewers gave bad comments, most of them gave high marks to K-5 and kx when they see the merits. How do we get the feedback from Pentax that they are making efforts to optimize their CDAF performance for K-01? Can we use K30 as indicator?