[THoog]

Image IQ aside, the K-S1 seems like a stop-gap half-baked fund-raising release to me.
There's so much missing from a 2014 release DSLR it's not funny.
If the price dropped to AUD$199 I'd buy one for fun, but it's not even in the ball park at release or even current pricing.

The same things were being said about the K-01 in 2012, four months after its launch. The K-S1 certainly is a successor to the K-01's popularity. Or lack thereof.

I certainly don't consider it to be a K-02. Pentax have had enough feedback from the K-01 community to know exactly what they'd need to do for a successor.

I think the only thing the "community" agrees on is that they want the K-02 to launch at $250.

I had stated that the body would stay pretty much the same. I'm actually a fan of how it looks. I also don't think it needs an EVF but I'm sure there's still a lot of pentaxians that need their optical fixation so maybe a detachable hot shoe one. It would be very focused on video. It would have phase detect af with a very good and accurate continuous AF aimed for video. And that it would would have a brand new SR that would be similar or better than what Olympus is using. Also it would be weather sealed. Now I would like to add what just occurred to me. That is, that the K-02 on top of what was previously stated would be the long awaited FF pentax camera. Yes that's right! And it will use the 12mp sony sensor from the A7s.

While I will agree with the OP that Pentax needs to pursue improvements in video as well as new (to them) technologies like Phase Detect on Sensor and FF, trying to cram all those things plus WR into a controversial body design - which compared poorly in size to other MILCs even in 2012 - and linking it back to a previous sales flop would be extremely unwise.

---

Last edited by THoog; 01-03-2015 at 07:18 AM. Reason: Meant to quote the OP's first post.

[Steve.Ledger]

The same things were being said about the K-01 in 2012, four months after its launch. The K-S1 certainly is a successor to the K-01's popularity. Or lack thereof.

Which is why I stressed from a 2014 release DSLR.

While I will agree with the OP that Pentax needs to pursue improvements in video as well as new (to them) technologies like Phase Detect on Sensor and FF, trying to cram all those things plus WR into a controversial body design - which compared poorly in size to other MILCs even in 2012 - and linking it back to a previous sales flop would be extremely unwise.

Trying to do the impossible would be unwise. But trying to compete is not.

[monochrome]

A design similar to what Fuji and Olympus are doing.

But Fuji and Olympus are already doing that - what would a third one add?

[ma-ledezma]

Originally posted by ma-ledezma Quote A design similar to what Fuji and Olympus are doing. But Fuji and Olympus are already doing that - what would a third one add?

K mount. I'm thinking of buying either the Fuji T-X1 or one of the Olympus OM-D's, but I will rather purchase a Pentax K-02 if I can use my K mount lenses.

[PiDicus Rex]

Haven't we done this chat already?

What a K-02 needs, is the same thing the K-01 needs - Sensor Shift in video mode, 48kHz audio, minimum 50mbits data rate for h.264, prefer Mjpeg at 100mbits or Compressed Cinema DNG raw, and, most importantly, Turn The Damn HDMI on with Clean Feed 1080p 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 output so we can record using a Samurai or Shogun.

Of course, in a new body, we can get all that with decent ergonomics, but the K-01 could do most of it with decent Firmware.

Some say the Stills side of the firmware needs better AF, I'd agree at the telephoto end, but every modern Prime I've tried is close to instant.

[Dave's clichés]

It's taken a lot of time for Fuji/Olympus/Sony/ Panasonic/Samsung to have perfected their Contrast detect systems based on a sensor that has phase detect pixels to tell the AF system which way the focus point has to go ( ie. object in front or behind the focus point so there's no hunting) This means Pentax first have to use a phase detect sensor and then design an AF around it, the technology is cutting edge and complicated, it takes time and a lot of expensive research, not forgetting the know-how, they are already behind in the game by three or four years and frankly I don't think they are in a position to achieve it without great financial aid from Ricoh. The electronic viewfinder is the same story, Samsung have just taken the lead with their NX1, this is a company with enormous financial and technical resources, they have put all their wherewithal and investment into the design of the camera and will continue to do so.
A mirror-less camera needs both an electronic viewfinder and phase detect/contest detect AF to have the remotest chance of being profitable/successful in these competitive times. If ever that was achieved the next problem would be the registration distance of lenses, a new distance would have to be chosen to keep the bodies compact, which means yet another range of lenses. Take all this into account along with Ricoh insisting that Pentax stand on their own financial two feet and be profitable and one can clearly see what Pentax are up against. They know where they are in the mirror-less race and that's why they stick to the Q series, it's small, relatively inexpensive and at the moment they have not too great a competition!

[monochrome]

K mount. I'm thinking of buying either the Fuji T-X1 or one of the Olympus OM-D's, but I will rather purchase a Pentax K-02 if I can use my K mount lenses.

But the 45.46mm register distance effectively makes doing what Fuji and Oly are doing impossible for Pentax to do. With that long a register distance Pentax needs an entirely new paradigm for mirrorless.

Cameras sorted by Register Distance

[pentaxian_tmb]

But the 45.46mm register distance effectively makes doing what Fuji and Oly are doing impossible for Pentax to do. With that long a register distance Pentax needs an entirely new paradigm for mirrorless.

Cameras sorted by Register Distance

Why can't you just stuff the inwards of a k01 into a mx, me super, or k1000 body?

[THoog]

Why can't you just stuff the inwards of a k01 into a mx, me super, or k1000 body?

Those film bodies only have a couple mm from the film plane to the back of the camera. The K-01 has 13mm of stuff behind the film plane (mostly the S/R chassis) - and most DSLRs have more. That means the body has to be ~1cm thicker, or else the lens mount 'snout' has to project ~1cm further forward, along with the AF and aperture motors/linkages. Either way, you end up with something very different from the original SLR body.

[JPT]

The way any sensible company thinks about product design is to define their target market first, then select the features and develop the product. In my opinion Pentax messed up at the features stage - not because of the lack of a viewfinder, but because of the size and weight imposed by the K-mout. When I pass the K-01 to my non-photographer friends, none of the comment on the lack of a viewfinder, but they often comment about how big and heavy it is. Remember that Pentax also released the K-30 at almost the same time for people who want a viewfinder.

Pentax and now Ricoh seems to be aware that they need to reach out to a younger market and has been trying for years with coloured DSLRs, the K-01 and now the K-S1. I don't know how successful they have been but they haven't cut their losses yet, so I imagine it is not a complete failure. In any case, I think they knew who they wanted to sell to and I think that market exists.

For me the failure was in the selection of features. When the target customer compares the K-01 to other cameras in the shop, their conversation with the sales person is likely to go like this.
C "Why does this camera have to be so big compared to the other mirrorless cameras?"
S "To maintain compatibility with K-mount lenses.
C "Why should I care about that. I don't have any K-mount lenses. I'm getting the Olympus instead. It does the same thing and it's much lighter."
Basically, K-mount was the mistake. It imposed a size and weight penalty compared to competing products that they tried to disguise with a trendy design, but it wasn't enough. Actually, I think the design was very well implemented. I really think Marc Newson did a good job and the mistakes were probably made before he got involved.

A lot of the suggestions here about an EVF and high-end video features are great suggestions for some sort of camera, but they completely change who the camera would be aimed at. In effect you are talking about a different product, and a significantly more sophisticated and expensive one. This would probably be a product above the K-30/K-50, maybe above the K-5/K-3 and certainly aimed at enthusiasts.

If they really wanted to lure a new set of non-enthusiast customers, they shouldn't have used K-mount. I can understand them not wanting to introduce a new mount, but then they should have just made it a fixed-lens camera. I imagine that a large sensor fixed lens camera with the Marc Newson styling could have been quite successful, especially if it had simplified controls, a touchscreen and good smartphone integration. If they could do that for around $500, that's what I think a hypothetical "K-02" should be - with no EVF!

[richandfleur]

Two things to add reading the above:


1) I think it's actually insulting to believe you could lure the younger market with some coloured LED's in the handle etc.


2) yes, to maximise the size benefits of mirrorless you probably need a new native lens mount, however, Pentax could easily release an official weather sealed spacer to adapt older K mount lenses to the new mount. Heck they could release their own focal reducer too, to allow the FF field of view and depth of field on APS-C also. You know, all the things you can do on a Sony Alpha/NEX mirrorless right now (well without the weather sealing at least... )

[Steve.Ledger]

1) I think it's actually insulting to believe you could lure the younger market with some coloured LED's in the handle etc.

Have you been to Japan Richard? Because that's the exact sort of thing the younger Asian consumer loves.
The Western market is becoming small by comparison to Asian markets.

[richandfleur]

Have you been to Japan Richard? Because that's the exact sort of thing the younger Asian consumer loves.
The Western market is becoming small by comparison to Asian markets.

Yes.

But this is a round about way to me departing pentax if I'm not their target market anymore.

[PiDicus Rex]

C "Why does this camera have to be so big compared to the other mirrorless cameras?"
S "To maintain compatibility with K-mount lenses.
C "Why should I care about that. I don't have any K-mount lenses. I'm getting the Olympus instead. It does the same thing and it's much lighter."

That's the point where a sales person should have mentioned the Q series as the smallest mirrorless with interchangeable lenses....

When I pass the K-01 to my non-photographer friends, none of the comment on the lack of a viewfinder, but they often comment about how big and heavy it is.

That's a more telling observation then most - the K-01 may have been too big for 'regular' customers ( who would probably have preferred the Q if informed about it ) and it's lack of optical viewfinder means it doesn't appeal to 'traditional' photographers,... but it does appeal to those of us that shoot video more often then photos....

If any Pentax deserved a 'video only' firmware,.... It really was a screw-up in marketing and firmware, but the basics of the format - being able to have thousands of choices of value-priced lenses for cinematic use is an absolute bonus - it's one camera with more potential then is being realised.

A K-02 would need to keep the layout, have better shaped grip, and must have all the video features done correctly - we already know Pentax will always provide awesome quality stills, it's time for the video features to be made to the same high standard.

[Steve.Ledger]

But this is a round about way to me departing pentax if I'm not their target market anymore.

Ah but you can still buy Pentax accessories and lenses, unless they start putting animated LEDs on them