[Doundounba]

The K-01 for $300 was a great deal for Pentax users, in the short term. Long-term it impacted the viability of the company, albeit in a small way.

That's quite unclear. I suspect that at $400 it was still profitable, and it was only very briefly under that. Certainly the camera brought at least some people into the Pentax brand. I am one of those. I would have never owned a Pentax had the K-01 not presented such a fantastic value in image quality vrs price paid. Now I have a small stable of k-mount lenses, and if Ricoh plays their cards right, my next camera will also be a Pentax. My two K-01 bodies are still perfectly functional, one is around 16k actuations and the other around 8k (I think), so if all goes well, they still have lots of mileage in them. I know I'll get the upgrade urge before they give up the ghost though - I'm already starting to feel it! If there's no new mirrorless body by the time I want to upgrade, I'm not sure what I'll do.

I do agree that if I was in Ricoh's shoes, it's unclear that I'd want to invest in another APS-C, K-mount mirrorless. I love my K-01s, but the mount's registration distance makes it very hard to make a camera that won't look portly with respect to the other APS-C or m4/3 mirrorless cameras out there. Which is why if I were them, I'd be thinking full-frame mirrorless, where the k-mount won't be as much of a problem. Or join the m4/3 group, but they don't seem to want to go that way. That being said, even in m4/3, the trend has been to larger and larger cameras (e.g. E-M1), so maybe now a new K-02 with APS-C and K-mount might not look as comparatively large as before, but still. In any case, I can't wait to see what will be the Next Big Thing from Ricoh... We should see at Photokina, right?

[monochrome]

The K-01 for $300 was a great deal for Pentax users, in the short term. Long-term it impacted the viability of the company, albeit in a small way.

Would you care to quantify that statement for us?

[ElJamoquio]

Would you care to quantify that statement for us?

No.... or rather, would you care to quantify a statement like 'there's no way a K-01 with lens at $300 was a bad deal'?

Of course it's not a bad deal. There's a reason it was one of the best deals ever - it was not sustainable.

Why is there no other $300 1 year old APS-C camera+lens available from another manufacturer?

[philbaum]

IN answer to the original question then... in one of the Pentax Executive's interviews one of them said the K-01 has a design flaw that prevents it from being effectively upgraded. A new mirror less would have to be designed from scratch. .

I suspect, have no proof, that the design flaw which he talked about, was the decision to go to the XS K mount. The xs design allows some specially designed K mount lenses to sit partially within the old mirror box area. This helped achieve more "mirrorless" compact overall dimensions. The brilliance of this idea was it allowed existing K mount lenses to be used on the K01, but also allowed some new lenses to designed to reduce the overall lens+body thickness dimension.

I think what torpedoed the K01 was not the xs design, but the outfitting of the body. Some nice features were left off the K01 compared to the competition, e.g. the Nex mirrorless had tilting lcd screens, while the K01 didn't. IR ports were reduced from front and back on most Pentax dslrs to front only. HDR capability was cut back if i remembered right. I felt irritated at the design when it came out because i had planned to buy one, than the actual camera was reviewed and too many features that i liked on my dslrs had been removed or limited.

Even so, i expected to see a K02 which would rectify the problems. When the news came out that there would be no follow-up, i bought 2 Nexes and haven regretted the decision.

So the design flaw, perhaps, in Pentax's mind was not coming out with a new mirrorless mount when they had the opportunity. XS modified K-mount didn't capture the public's attention. Like Sony's e mount did with the Nex. Today, one can actually buy a tilting screen on a Pentax DSLR, but at a price tag of $8500. :-( Hopefully it will be exported to Pentax aps dslrs in the future.

[monochrome]

No.... or rather, would you care to quantify a statement like 'there's no way a K-01 with lens at $300 was a bad deal'?

Of course it's not a bad deal. There's a reason it was one of the best deals ever - it was not sustainable.

Why is there no other $300 1 year old APS-C camera+lens available from another manufacturer?

I didn't make that statement. I never was so rash as to say a single run of 125,000 units imperiled the entire enterprise either. I recall you have a visceral prejudice against the K-01 and I take your posts in that context - but seriously?

I don't know how to quantify the cost of a K-01 out the factory door (that is, the cost to RICOH IMAGING CO., LTD.), but I do know that the regional distributors mark them up from factory price to pay for what they do - and the retailers mark them up as much as 100% at list price from the regional distributor price. Even B&H, Adorama and Amazon make a profit and buy at distributor price, not factory price.

Ricoh Imaging Company, Ltd. likely made a profit on the entire run of K-01's at the factory door, even taking into account the inventory liquidation. It is the distributors (such as Ricoh Imaging USA, which did absolutely nothing with the K-01) who missed out on a profit opportunity.

Interesting that Ned Bunnell retired shortly afterward.

[ppppsssstttt]

i love this thread. i'm glad someone posed the question because i wanted to ask as well. i love the k-01 and wanted to pick up a second body, but thought there might be something better along the way when the time comes. picked up a Q instead though...

in one of the Pentax Executive's interviews one of them said the K-01 has a design flaw that prevents it from being effectively upgraded. A new mirror less would have to be designed from scratch

where do these interviews come from? not because i'm questioning you, but because i'd like to be a little more plugged in into which direction the company is going, but that's a little hard to predict anyways...

[normhead]

i love this thread. i'm glad someone posed the question because i wanted to ask as well. i love the k-01 and wanted to pick up a second body, but thought there might be something better along the way when the time comes. picked up a Q instead though...



where do these interviews come from? not because i'm questioning you, but because i'd like to be a little more plugged in into which direction the company is going, but that's a little hard to predict anyways...

I've read them all here on the forum.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/254712-imaging-reso...iew-ricoh.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/252614-cp-2014-interview-posted.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/246044-interview-ch...ing-japan.html

Just type in "interview" and change the parameters to "search titles only" and you'll find many.

[zmohie]

Good points. The k 01 was a smart way to go with mirror less market but it had some flaws. Pentax can expand this concept with less investment. .simply put a view finder and tilted lcd plus Wi fi and a comfortable grip. No need for new mount. A mirror less k mount is the most smart step that pentax had done since it has catched the digital era.

[Adam]

I wonder why pentax always does the wrong .they made the smart concept in the mirrorless system and stopped it.
I think mirrorless became a trend in the market. while pentax stopped a very excllent concept/k01/.. the others has projects begining from zero lenses .
I am seeing pentax do the same wrong way when it had taken much time to go with digital era .
pentax can do its mirrorless camera up on the k01. no matter what is the size. k02 with EVF AND A COMFORTABLE grib.
FUJI has about 6 lenses and the new system attracts many day to night.

The reason the K-01 failed was that for its size, there was no reason for it not to have a mirror or at least an electronic viewfinder. At the time, other manufacturers had mirrorless cameras that were more compact, faster to focus, and cheaper, and that spoke to consumers. Marc Newson definitely didn't help either, it turns out.

I'd like to see Pentax come out with a mirrorless offering with something larger than point-and-shoot sensor, but the Q is selling well (in Japan at least), and other manufacturers seem to have the other bases covered, so it's a tough market. What could Pentax offer that's not already out there if they started from scratch?

[lytrytyr]

The reason the K-01 failed was that for its size, there was no reason for it not to have a mirror

I'm not sure about that.

My K-50, basically a K-01 with a mirror,
is bulkier and harder to carry around than my K-01.

And the size comparisons with other mirrorless bodies out there are meaningless.
It's the body+lens combo size that matters.

Once you put a beercan on a cigarette packet,
you might as well have a brick!

[ElJamoquio]

I didn't make that statement. I never was so rash as to say a single run of 125,000 units imperiled the entire enterprise either.

Neither did I.

I recall you have a visceral prejudice against the K-01

I thought it was a very poor product at $850. At $300 I wanted one but missed out.

and I take your posts in that context - but seriously?

And do you have a visceral prejudice for the K-01, and but seriously, strawmen?

Ricoh Imaging Company, Ltd. likely made a profit on the entire run of K-01's at the factory door, even taking into account the inventory liquidation

I think that's fairly clearly not the case; both the unprecendented reduction in price and the total abandonment of the segment (including the additional lenses they were working on) indicate otherwise.

Interesting that Ned Bunnell retired shortly afterward.

Ned was forced out for a lot of reasons. The failure of the K-01 was perhaps one but I doubt it. It's not like there's a K-02 in Europe and Japan.

---------- Post added 05-19-14 at 04:30 PM ----------

I'm not sure about that.

My K-50, basically a K-01 with a mirror,
is bulkier and harder to carry around than my K-01.

I find the K-01 to be harder to carry around. When My hands are not on it, it's no better than the K-5. When my hands are on it, the K-5's superior ergonomics trump the additional weight.

And the size comparisons with other mirrorless bodies out there are meaningless.
It's the body+lens combo size that matters.

Once you put a beercan on a cigarette packet,
you might as well have a brick!

Sure, but the A7R + 35/mm are a svelte combo. Compare the K-01 and FA* 24mm F/2 ... I suspect the K-01 is heavier and larger. The K-01 was cheaper, sure.

[VisualDarkness]

My brother can carry his Samsung NX with two or three good primes with the same or less bulk than K-01 with just the 40/2.8 XS. There you have the size issue for a size sensitive market, it's the truth.

[normhead]

My brother can carry his Samsung NX with two or three good primes with the same or less bulk than K-01 with just the 40/2.8 XS. There you have the size issue for a size sensitive market, it's the truth.

Or he could carry a Pentax Q.... size sensitive doesn't mean smallest, it means the largest most feature packed camera comparable with the other lenses you carry, that you can fit in the space you have... at least to some of us. It's not a race to miniaturize.

[monochrome]

I think that's fairly clearly not the case; both the unprecendented reduction in price and the total abandonment of the segment (including the additional lenses they were working on) indicate otherwise.

And I asked you to quantify why you think 'that's fairly clearly not the case'. End user price is not factory cost. Q is the Pentax mirrorless offering.

[ElJamoquio]

And I asked you to quantify why you think 'that's fairly clearly not the case'. End user price is not factory cost. Q is the Pentax mirrorless offering.

And I asked you for a paypal transfer of $10,000 per post. Still waiting.

If it was a money-gainer, then why isn't there a K-02? Where are the other XS lenses?

Both the unprecendented reduction in price and the total abandonment of the segment (including the additional lenses they were working on) indicate pretty clearly that it was a flop and a money-loser. If you're not willing to accept that then I guess we'll never agree, and we should move on.



The Q is not in the same segment as the K-01 was. It's in the tiny ILC segment with the Nikon V1/J1/etc, and the Canon M. The DSLR replacement segment doesn't have an offering by Pentax; no one is comparing an A7 or a NEX against the Q.


Remember this lens announced by Pentax?