[Laurentiu Cristofor]

I rest my case.

I like the EOS M. Check the top view:

Compare camera dimensions side by side

Pentax K-01 is 83% (26.7 mm) thicker than Canon EOS M.

If you lay the K-01 flat, it is almost as tall as the EOS M standing up.

[ElJamoquio]

At least the Canon was designed somewhat ergonomically, rather than what someone in the '60's thought a camera would look like in 50 years.

[EricBrown]

It is all subjective. I find the K-01 very easy to hold and use. I like the feeling a more substantial camera in my hand. The Canon looks nice, but bland. I still give Pentax credit for not always being the "me to" brand.

[ihasa]

I wouldn't call the K-01 ugly, although the bold chunky aesthetics are something you either love or hate.

The Canon is not ugly. Bland, maybe, but I don't mind 'bland' looking cameras.

The Canon wins in terms of elegance of design, as it has been designed from the ground up to provide a compact ILC system. Pentax's solution is more of a compromise, so comes over a little cumbersome and cludgey - but has merit in that it meshes seamlessly with their DSLR system. Like many commenters, I would have preferred to sacrifice a little functionality for an micro-K to K mount adapter based system which would work well with DA and FA ltds.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

I don't want a touch screen on my camera. It means always reviewing images thru finger prints and crud. Pass.

I would love to be able to just touch the screen where I want the focus point to be. It might also be nice just pointing at a setting to change it, rather than having to navigate to the setting with the direction buttons.

My experience has been that the screen on my DSLR gets touched regardless, whether just from handling the camera, or putting it up against my face. It's never particularly bothered me though.

[Zygonyx]

Well, i agree touchscreen is just another marketing trick made to impress the gogo.
If it was of any photographic interest, we would have seen it first on 1D x.
Otherwise, i agree this new M thing improves esthetically from G1X ...
But the features and specs don't tell me anything good nor new almost 3 years after the first NEX.

[Medium FormatPro]

this new M thing improves esthetically from G1X

Considerably differently marketed cameras targeted to much different audiences. Canon already working on a much better (both) sensor & lens combo for the new Gxx (whatever that new model number might be?). And my betting chips are still on the table that Canon comes out with a second mirorless before long; one that accepts all of the existing slr based Canon lens'; also most likely costing in excess of 1k.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

Well, i agree touchscreen is just another marketing trick made to impress the gogo.
If it was of any photographic interest, we would have seen it first on 1D x.

I absolutely agree. That's why I have a hard time taking in-camera shake-reduction seriously.

[ElJamoquio]

The intended user of 645D is expected to be using a tripod.

That said I'm not sure why they didn't still use it. Obviously the 645D can still be hand-held. Perhaps the sensor connection to the camera body isn't very rigid?

[Fontan]

The Canon looks like a medical camera for colonoscopies perhaps.

Oh God. That is gonna hurt a lot.

[Unsinkable II]

I never thought my nose was THAT long... but my screen is always covered in noseprints anyway.

I'm left-eye-dominant, so my nose is always jabbing at buttons, let alone the screen!

[Zygonyx]

I absolutely agree. That's why I have a hard time taking in-camera shake-reduction seriously.

Well, you might find the answer if you use old but shining and fullcompatible Pentax or other manufacturers K-mount primes, but such an use is definitely not widespread amongst what i called " gogo "

[Zygonyx]

Considerably differently marketed cameras targeted to much different audiences. Canon already working on a much better (both) sensor & lens combo for the new Gxx (whatever that new model number might be?). And my betting chips are still on the table that Canon comes out with a second mirorless before long; one that accepts all of the existing slr based Canon lens'; also most likely costing in excess of 1k.

Why not , but in my opinion there is no relation btw ugliness and market segmentation or type of user

[Edgar_in_Indy]

Well, you might find the answer if you use old but shining and fullcompatible Pentax or other manufacturers K-mount primes, but such an use is definitely not widespread amongst what i called " gogo "

I was actually being satirical in my first reply. Shake reduction is one of the things that brought me to, and keeps me with, Pentax. If Canon and Nikon started offering in-camera SR, then I might give them consideration for my next DSLR (if they could exceed the value proposition of the competing Pentax model, which I find doubtful based on history).

Catch-in-Focus is another one of the great features that Pentax offers, but is hard to find on competing models. Although with focus-peaking, perhaps CIF is not as important for manual lenses as it used to be.

[Na Horuk]

So Canon basically stole the black/white look from Pentax? (which Pentax stole from the storm troopers, I guess?) Well, not stole,.. I meant to say "drew inspiration from."
The K-01 is a fun camera, if I wanted a tiny camera, I would go for a Q or something.