[awo425]

Considering the good reviews, Mark Newson and also the designers at Pentax, must be frustrated that this camera wasn't a success financially. I guess they already analyzed where it went wrong, and hopefully they are planning some sort of successor.

$850 launch price for a funky looking DSLR missing mirror maybe?
I bet they analyzed it alright, if they didn't they can read Pentax Forum - Camera & Photography Community - PentaxForums.com for the answers, what I really doubt is that this team will eve do marketing right.

[Tony Belding]

I guess that a retro style camera with better ergonomics (e.g. tilt screen, touch functionality, perhaps EVF...) would have been much more successful.

From a looks and style perspective (not to mention the feature list) the Olympus OM-D pushes all my buttons. Pentax should get to work on a Spotmatic D.

I am enjoying the K-01, though. It's as solid as the yellow brick it so resembles. I got the 21mm Limited lens, and that's a match made in Heaven.

[johncarlgalang]

I bought another one. I wanted the black version, I'm thinking of getting a third. Its so cheap now that getting 3 and putting primes of various focal lengths makes more sense than getting an expensive canikon and making do with the kit lens that comes with it. IMHO.... but yes thanks Marc Newson

[JJJPhoto]

It's the opposite experience I had trying out the Fuji X100 and X10. They are VERY photogenic cameras (handsome in real life, too) but I was unimpressed when I actually handled them. The buttons and control wheels felt like they wouldn't last too long; the fit and finish was not up to the good looks of the cameras. (The Fuji X-Pro1 does seem better/sturdier however.)

I just now discovered this post and thought I'd chime in about the X100 and X10 since I used to own the X100 for a while and still own the X10 in addition to my two K-01 cameras.

I used to love the look and feel of the X100 and X10 and I totally made fun of the K-01 when it was announced before I ever held one in my hands.

I picked up my first K-01 just because it was cheap and quickly purchased a backup when I realized what a great camera this is. In fact, the more time I've spent using the K-01 the more I actually prefer how this camera looks more than the other cameras that I own/owned. It's weird that cameras I used to think were beautiful now look ugly in comparison to the ugly camera that now looks beautiful.

The only thing I would change about the K-01 is that I wish the AF system had an easier time locking AF in low light without the AF-assist light and I wish it would lock AF with all Pentax AF lenses at lightning speed rather than some lenses focusing quickly and other lenses focusing slowly.

Maybe Pentax can still improve the AF via firmware tweaks ... but I don't know if Pentax will invest more firmware development resources to a camera that has officially been discontinued.

Right now I use my K-01 bodies for most of my photography and bust out an Olympus OM-D E-M5 (which now looks UGLY compared to the K-01) when I know I need lighting fast AF of moving subjects or I might be shooting in a dimly-lit room where I need to grab focus quickly without an AF-assist light.

[Pioneer]

How on Earth did this camera fail?

1. Price
I think the initial price was too high. This camera is definitely a great value at $600, but I am not too sure it was an $850 camera. It is an absolute steal at $250. I cannot believe they are still around at that price, that is bottom of the barrel point and shoot prices.

2. Reviews
But even at that I think that it failed because of the reviewers, and the consumer to a certain point. Pentax has been coming out with some very different designs recently, ignoring some of "common wisdom" being spouted by reviewers. The Q did not initially do well because the reviewers could not get past the fact that it used a small sensor, and had no EVF. The K-01 did not do well because it was too big, did not have an EVF, did not have a tilting display screen, and looked different. The K-01 and the Q are way beyond the sum of their parts. Their strengths do not lie in what you can do with other cameras. They can do those things but they do other things far better.

Now I am seeing similar reviews on the MX-1. It doesn't have an EVF nor a tilting screen.

3. Marketing
I don't think Pentax even realizes what they have sometimes. It is kind of like their marketing department doesn't even know how to tout the values of these cameras. Instead of attacking the reviews they seem to be willing to let these products live or die based on what some silly reviewers want to say.

If I had been marketing the K-01 I think the first ad would have been a two spread spot in all the photo mags showing the K-01 alongside two of their competitors, with each camera's lens line-ups shown behind the camera. The K-01 lens line up could have gone so far back into the picture that the lens faded away in the distance. Maybe show them sitting on one of those straight arrow highways in outback Australia. You could have shown the lenses for Pentax going so far back into the distance that it would have been silly. Maybe even make the pavement fade into lenses in the distance.

I think Pentax is coming out with some market take over ideas, but I don't the Ricoh marketing department are market killers.

[Tony Belding]

But even at that I think that it failed because of the reviewers. ... The K-01 did not do well because it was too big, did not have an EVF, did not have a tilting display screen, and looked different.

I don't think you can blame reviewers for the K-01's size, lack of EVF, lack of tilting display screen or its goofy styling. Reviewers didn't make it that way; they only pointed it out.

[tclausen]

1. Price
I think the initial price was too high. This camera is definitely a great value at $600, but I am not too sure it was an $850 camera. It is an absolute steal at $250. I cannot believe they are still around at that price, that is bottom of the barrel point and shoot prices.

2. Reviews
But even at that I think that it failed because of the reviewers, and the consumer to a certain point. Pentax has been coming out with some very different designs recently, ignoring some of "common wisdom" being spouted by reviewers. The Q did not initially do well because the reviewers could not get past the fact that it used a small sensor, and had no EVF. The K-01 did not do well because it was too big, did not have an EVF, did not have a tilting display screen, and looked different. The K-01 and the Q are way beyond the sum of their parts. Their strengths do not lie in what you can do with other cameras. They can do those things but they do other things far better.

Now I am seeing similar reviews on the MX-1. It doesn't have an EVF nor a tilting screen.

I'm pretty sure that the MX-1 has a tilting screen.

(I'm fairly glad that my K-01 doesn't, though, moving parts can fail....)

[Pioneer]

I don't think you can blame reviewers for the K-01's size, lack of EVF, lack of tilting display screen or its goofy styling. Reviewers didn't make it that way; they only pointed it out.

Oh I do not disagree. But the interesting part was the fact that they forgot the rest of the camera. They talked about those features that you feel are "goofy" at the front end of the review...and then again toward the end of the reviews...and finally they drove those same features home in their conclusions.

Ah well, reviewers are not the only people who have a hard time looking past what appears on the outside. The saying is that beauty is only skin deep, but that is all the further anyone ever seems to want to look anymore.

[Transit]

Thank Newson ? Ha !
I think of Newson as I labouriously reinsert the rubber door...
I think of him as I contemplate just ripping the bloody thing off and taping over the hole.
The only thing I thank him for is designing a fail that eventually delivered a great fire sale price.

[bossa]

I like my K-01 and for the price I paid it's unbeatable. I find it's 'limitations' quite refreshing actually as it's core tools are pretty right most of the time for what I use it for.

[squareeyes]

Thank Newson ? Ha !
I think of Newson as I labouriously reinsert the rubber door...
I think of him as I contemplate just ripping the bloody thing off and taping over the hole.
The only thing I thank him for is designing a fail that eventually delivered a great fire sale price.

Dang! that new ropes sure is scratchy!

[GXRUser]

From a looks and style perspective (not to mention the feature list) the Olympus OM-D pushes all my buttons. Pentax should get to work on a Spotmatic D.

I am enjoying the K-01, though. It's as solid as the yellow brick it so resembles. I got the 21mm Limited lens, and that's a match made in Heaven.

Very true. I would love a Spotmatic D, ME-D, or MX-D. Use an EVF instead of mirror and pentaprism/pentamirror.

I very much like my K-01 with DA 70 and DA 21. I have problems outdoors from glare on the LCD. Only a hoodman style loup corrects the LCD viewing issues and that is just too bulky.

[Transit]

Dang! that new ropes sure is scratchy!

Had to resort to the interweb to decipher that
still none the wiser

[squareeyes]

Had to resort to the interweb to decipher that
still none the wiser

decipher that

Some will complain if they are hanged with a new rope.

[Transit]

Okaaay...
seems a little obscure in this instance