Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-22-2015, 08:14 AM   #31
Site Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,217
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
This becomes an interesting puzzle to solve. SR functionality can be moved from the body to the lens. Would that move be a deal-breaker for some people? Lenses may become more expensive although the body may be cheaper to produce. Adapted lenses would have no SR applied to them.
I wouldn't release a line of SR enabled lenses specifically for a mirrorless camera. The idea with mirrorless, in my humble opinion, is to keep the whole package as small as possible. The 5mm you gain each way by dropping SR are less than the size hit you get by stick a SR element in a zoom (they don't seem to stabilize most short primes).

If there is a place to consider optical shake reduction, it would be in telephoto lenses.

10-22-2015, 08:18 AM - 1 Like   #32
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,824
Every point and shoot ever made is mirrorless, and the K-01 is definitely too big to fit in your pocket, so, I wear a coat with big pockets, problem solved.
10-22-2015, 09:35 AM   #33
Loyal Site Supporter

Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,803
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Every point and shoot ever made is mirrorless
And every rangefinder! That strange hybrid called the Olympus Pen F seems to have managed the issue in some other strange way but IIRC even it was far, far closer to WYSIWYG than any P&S or RF.
10-22-2015, 02:14 PM   #34
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Would you be willing to sacrifice SR if that kept things really small, or would that be a deal-breaker for you?
Would be no problem for me.

10-25-2015, 02:59 AM   #35

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Far North Qld
Posts: 3,294
Removing SR would make zero difference to the depth needed for the K-mount lenses, there'd be next to no reduction in body size by removing it.
Look how slim the MX-1 is, it has sensor shift SR as does the Q.
Pentax made the K-01 as small as was possible at the time. Marc Newson didn't design it to be too big.
10-25-2015, 04:55 AM   #36
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,863
I think LCD screen takes much more space on the K-01 than the SR. And since screen technology has advanced a lot (due to tablets, smartphones), I think this can be applied to a camera, as well.

  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
body, camera, evf, k-01, k01, mirrorless, offer, pentax, pentax k-01, post, size, world
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-3 vs K-01 Live View Focus Speed - K-01 Wins! rmtschanz Pentax K-3 25 12-07-2015 06:02 PM
Too Big old4570 Macro Photography 2 12-08-2014 11:55 AM
Too much sound noise while recording with K-01 minilink Pentax K-01 25 07-04-2012 10:23 AM
Is the K-01 too big? Possible solution... Joe Nation Pentax K-01 31 04-28-2012 12:04 PM
K-01 with big lenses: Adam Pentax K-01 2 03-25-2012 07:10 AM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:15 PM. | See also:, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]