[monochrome]

Of them, Minolta and Contax have dissappered

It is important that we not view the K-01 experience as a single discreet event, but in the context of everything else happening at Ricoh and Pentax Ricoh Imaging. There are numerous posts on this subject on recent speculation threads.

Pentax really isn't an independent camera company, having been owned by Hoya Corporation and now by Ricoh Corp (around the 300th largest company on Earth). Pentax and Contax had the same experience with the original Phillips digital sensor - it didn't work - but Pentax pulled back from disaster. Contax tried to carry on and eventually failed. Pentax survivied to be bought and dismemebered by Hoya, and the digital imaging husk sold off to Ricoh.

Minolta hasn't really disappeared - the name was changed to Sony, so one could say the NEX is a Minolta - though one could also say its new corporate owners have made a hash of running it. Olympus is a question mark, to my mind, since we became aware that they have fudged their books for over a decade. What is the future for Fuji and Panasonic in the face of Personal Digital Devices and Sigma in the face of the Pentax juggernaut?

Of all the brand names that might disappear soon I would bet Ricoh is higher on the list than Pentax

---

Last edited by monochrome; 03-21-2013 at 07:01 AM.

[EchoOscar]

Yet the Leica mirrorless has three of those same four items and still presently sells for just a tad short of 2k; and also gets near perfect reviews and results all of the time. I'll put this one into Pentax's side of the court...

Yet I fail to see how that has anything to do with the point I was trying to make in that post. Which was, dressing the K-01 into a new fake DSLR jacket wouldn't make much difference, nor would it make much sense right now. They might as well update the K-r, or come up with an entirely new and hopefully unique mirrorless camera design, with a proper AF and EVF,and with or without the regular K mount.

Besides, the Leica X1 and X2 are glorified p&s cameras, not mirrorless system cameras like K-01. They may sell for $2k, but the sales figures aren't really that high. Leica are still getting most of their income from the sales of their lenses and even pricier M bodies. Which, BTW, aren't really typical digital mirrorless cameras, either, but classic rangefinder cameras with a digital sensor.
Not much point in comparing Leica to Pentax, IMO, they are like apples and peanuts. Both quite ok in their own worlds.

The larger sensor compact cameras are a new trend, albeit still a niche one, where Leica have been for a couple of years already. Looks like even Canikon have taken the bait into that game, as well as Sony and Sigma, whereas Pentax haven't, so far.

[RustyWrangler]

If the K-01 would not have used K mount lenses, I would have bought something else. The K mount was the only reason I bought it. Now that I have used it for a couple of months, there are many other reasons to like it.

[Rob22315]

If the K-01 would not have used K mount lenses, I would have bought something else. The K mount was the only reason I bought it. Now that I have used it for a couple of months, there are many other reasons to like it.

Amen!

[tdmsu]

I love the build quality of any Pentax, and especially the K-01. Canons just feel plasticky and cheaply made. Nikons are more solid, but also many times more expensive for what... faster AF and a name on the front?

[Na Horuk]

I like the K-01's design, mirrorless and all. But I wouldn't mind Pentax also making a mini DSLR, a tier lower than the K-30. I think the K-01 should be a line separate from DSLRs, its own special species of cameras. I also really like the K-x design, it could probably be made a little smaller.

[monochrome]

I marvel that so many people have suggestions for what the K-01 should have been and so many people who actually boughtr one are so happy with what it is.

I will believe to my dying day that te combination of mis-pricing, and the ROAR of disapproval from this community doomed the K-01 before it ever got a chance.

[boriscleto]

I marvel that so many people have suggestions for what the K-01 should have been and so many people who actually boughtr one are so happy with what it is.

I will believe to my dying day that te combination of mis-pricing, and the ROAR of disapproval from this community doomed the K-01 before it ever got a chance.

If it had been $500 w/ the 40mm at launch I would not currently own a K-5...

[monochrome]

If it had been $500 w/ the 40mm at launch I would not currently own a K-5...

If the kit had been $500 at launch I would also own a K-5

[THoog]

I marvel that so many people have suggestions for what the K-01 should have been and so many people who actually boughtr one are so happy with what it is.

I will believe to my dying day that te combination of mis-pricing, and the ROAR of disapproval from this community doomed the K-01 before it ever got a chance.

I suppose every new model is subjected to "it should have been <what I personally want/need>", but the K-01 seemed to get more of that than usual. It should have been an entry-level dSLR, it should have been a compact mirrorless with a new mount with reduced register distance, it should have been a mirrorless compatible with (some other brand's) mount, it should have been a full-frame (all at the same $299 closeout price, no doubt). Maybe it's just my perception; maybe it's because Pentax' lineup is so small at present that there is more critical pressure on the products that do come out.

It should have been a giant robot with rocket launchers in the arms.

[NickLarsson]

It should have been a giant robot with rocket launchers in the arms.

Actually, Pentax already did that :

[audiobomber]

Here are the CameraSize stats for K-x vs. SL1 (Note that the K-m/2000 was the same size as the K-x):

■Pentax K-x is 5% (5.7 mm) wider and 1% (0.8 mm) taller than Canon Rebel SL1.
■Pentax K-x is 3% (1.9 mm) thinner than Canon Rebel SL1.
■Pentax K-x [581 g] weights 43% (174 grams) more than Canon Rebel SL1 [407 g] (*inc. batteries and memory card).
■Pentax K-x dimensions: 122.5x91.5x67.5 mm (camera body only, excluding protrusion)
Canon Rebel SL1 dimensions: 116.8x90.7x69.4 mm (camera body only, excluding protrusion)

The Olympus E420 the smallest DSLR ever made:

■Olympus E-420 is 11% (12.7 mm) wider and 0% (0.3 mm) taller than Canon Rebel SL1.
■Olympus E-420 is 24% (16.4 mm) thinner than Canon Rebel SL1.
■Olympus E-420 [445 g] weights 9% (38 grams) more than Canon Rebel SL1 [407 g] (*inc. batteries and memory card).
■Olympus E-420 dimensions: 129.5x91x53 mm (camera body only, excluding protrusion)
Canon Rebel SL1 dimensions: 116.8x90.7x69.4 mm (camera body only, excluding protrusion)

If we use these figures to calculate volume, we see that the K-x/m/2000 were similar in size to the new Canon. The main difference is that the Pentax has a fantastic sculpted grip. It is clear that the Oly is the smallest DSLR ever made:

Pentax K-x = 122.5x91.5x67.5 = 7.57
Canon SL1 = 116.8x90.7x69.4 = 7.35
Olympus E420 = 129.5x91x53 = 6.26

http://camerasize.com/compare/#229,448
http://camerasize.com/compare/#206,448

The K-01 is smaller than any DSLR:
121x79x59 = 5.64

[THoog]

And that's exactly the sort of wonderful nonsense I've come to expect from my beloved Pentax. But I had in mind something... bigger...

You Tube

You Tube

[EchoOscar]

I marvel that so many people have suggestions for what the K-01 should have been and so many people who actually boughtr one are so happy with what it is.

Actually, that's nothing new, and certainly not unique to Pentax and the K-01.
I believe more often than not, whenever a high-profile designer from outside the industry has been called in to design a camera, a motorcycle, a car, a boat or whatever, the end result has been controversial and dividing opinions quite strongly, with people both hating and loving it with passion, and ended up being a commercial flop.

We could blame either the designer or the 'stupid' audience, but that wouldn't change the outcome. Same with the K-01. It was a case of form over function all the way, with a price tag to highlight it.

I will believe to my dying day that te combination of mis-pricing, and the ROAR of disapproval from this community doomed the K-01 before it ever got a chance.

In case you are referring to this particular online community, I believe you may be exaggerating the true power and impact of this forum on the global sales of Pentax cameras, at least a 'little' bit.

FWIW, I've got nothing against the K-01 per se. It's a weird little camera, not really my cup of tea but, I might just buy myself one some day, anyway, just for the heck of it. I think I'd prefer a yellow one.

[RustyWrangler]

I for one am happy that the K-01 is not entry level. I had not shopped for a camera since I bought my K110D several years ago. The Brick was on the downhill price slide before I knew it existed (Jan. 13). The build quality reminds me more of my MX than any digital that I have handled regardlessof manufacturer. That includes my son in law's seven thousand something Nikon which I suspect was more expensive than the Brick even at it's introductory price.