Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-21-2013, 07:49 AM   #31
Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 126
Right, the minimal addition is two layers of case behind the sensor and behind the LCD, 3mm max.

12-21-2013, 10:19 AM - 1 Like   #32
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Montréal QC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,705
Personally, instead of shrinking the registration distance, I'd like them to grow the sensor. If they could produce a FF mirrorless K-mount camera that isn't much bigger or heavier than the K-01, and still has in-body image stabilization, I'd be pretty interested...
12-21-2013, 10:48 AM   #33
Loyal Site Supporter
THoog's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,396
QuoteOriginally posted by Steve.Ledger Quote
You seem to be forgetting that the LCD screen assembly is already part of the camera which is already using space internally in the camera body. The tilting screen just requires it to be on a hinge.

Anyhow, I didn't post this to incite an argument, was just a fun mashup I hoped people would enjoy and one that actually would work as well...
Nope, not forgetting the LCD at all - that's why I listed it as 3mm of body thickness. When I looked for real-world examples of a tilt-screens, the average thickness was 8mm. If I'd found a tilt-LCD that was only 3mm thick including folding arm or whatever, I'd say it could be done. Even your mashup looks to be at least 6mm thick.

I'm not trying to be a wet blanket, just explaining engineering realities based on the real world (which is, I guess, being a wet blanket). If it was easy to cram 4 pounds of crap in a 2-lb sack, everyone would do it. Instead, everyone (except Pentax) discarded their legacy requirements, which gave them more room to work with. Actually, Pentax went one further in the Q by discarding a big sensor.
12-21-2013, 11:03 AM   #34
Loyal Site Supporter
THoog's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,396
QuoteOriginally posted by Doundounba Quote
Personally, instead of shrinking the registration distance, I'd like them to grow the sensor. If they could produce a FF mirrorless K-mount camera that isn't much bigger or heavier than the K-01, and still has in-body image stabilization, I'd be pretty interested...
I think it's possible. It doesn't seem like the SR chassis has to be thicker for a bigger sensor, just wider. There's the question of image circle and shake-the-sensor IS, but that's been chewed to death elsewhere.

We know from Sony's latest how small a 35mm body (w/o IBIS or a legacy mirror box) can be. Unfortunately, that means a K-01-sized FF would be slammed for being unnecessarily big, even though it DOES have the K-mount and IBIS constraints (and twice the shot count).

12-21-2013, 12:39 PM   #35
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 147
FF K-02 Mirrorless

QuoteOriginally posted by Doundounba Quote
Personally, instead of shrinking the registration distance, I'd like them to grow the sensor. If they could produce a FF mirrorless K-mount camera that isn't much bigger or heavier than the K-01, and still has in-body image stabilization, I'd be pretty interested...
What a great idea! FF Mirrorless Pentax with K-mount! My slew of M42 Takumars become 'normal' again. No 1.5

Now if they don't ruin it with Sony Alpha 7R pricing - or worse...
12-21-2013, 02:19 PM   #36
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Far North Qld
Posts: 3,248
QuoteOriginally posted by THoog Quote
If it was easy to cram 4 pounds of crap in a 2-lb sack, everyone would do it. Instead, everyone (except Pentax) discarded their legacy requirements, which gave them more room to work with.
Good grief, can't you just enjoy a good idea and not turn a 'positive' into so many negatives.

Merry Christmas.
12-27-2013, 02:29 PM   #37
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Durham, nc
Photos: Albums
Posts: 887
They could concievably make the K-02 use K-mount lenses, but be physically thinner, if they used a folded light path. It wouldn't be cheap though.

Charles.
12-27-2013, 03:03 PM   #38
Loyal Site Supporter
ivanvernon's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Medina, OH
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,565
QuoteOriginally posted by cahudson42 Quote
Yep - we can only dream of a K-02 - one perhaps with a digital viewfinder like the Sony Alpha 7R (at $2298 body only? Without 'image stabilization' (shake reduction) - am I reading the 7R specs correctly? If so - unbelievable. )

My Daughter, now 30, was 'brought up' using my Spotmatic F and then ES II at 15, - with M42 lens (50, 85, 105, 135, 500). High School Camera Club, trip to Europe, developing and printing own B&W stuff, etc..

I had given her a G12 at her wedding two years ago - something for 'point and shoot'. Not to replace it but to complement it, I just got back from giving her a K-01 'kit' setup for manual M42 only, with F3.5 35, F1.4 50, F4 50 Macro , 135, 200, 300 and one Vivitar Zoom ( for 'video only'..:>). I think she was thrilled to be 'back in control' - and we spent hours going over each lens and its use. Which fortunately, she started from a good base of experience.

I'm guessing Husband will now usually shoot with the G12, while she will be breaking in the K-01 kit.

The K-01 is unbeatable for use with M42 Takumars IMO.

Hopefully, Ricoh won't feel 'burned' by the K-01 flop - treat it as a 'learning experience' - and deliver us the 'Next Generation'.

Perhaps with encouragement from Forum Members and Admins - they might do so.
Chris
"The K-01 is unbeatable for use with M42 Takumars IMO."

Would you please explain why you think this? (Not doubting, just curious about your reasoning.)

12-27-2013, 03:54 PM   #39
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,435
Pentax MX-1 with Tilting LCD - more than 3mm

12-27-2013, 04:12 PM   #40
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 147
K-01 and M42 Taks

QuoteOriginally posted by ivanvernon Quote
"The K-01 is unbeatable for use with M42 Takumars IMO."

Would you please explain why you think this? (Not doubting, just curious about your reasoning.)
First, focus peaking, Next, shake reduction, Next - cheap in part because K-01 CDAF auto-focus stinks - but I will never use it. So I can set everything optimized for manual focus. Similar - not paying for PDAF which I also will never use.

30120 Pentax adapter eliminates any need for 'gaffer tape' or other work-arounds with later K lenses. I leave the 30120 adapter in 'permanently' and use only M42 Primes (Well - one exception. An old Vivitar 85-205 F3.8 Kiron I only use for occasional video...). Green button can be set to toggle Focus Peaking. AF/AE-L can be set to Exposure Lock.

Exposure control is great. In normal situations I let the ISO float. But in difficult/backlit situations I switch via ISO button to a fixed ISO, and can easily adjust + or - with E-dial, getting the shutter speed/F-stop I want by manually setting F-stop - or resetting the fixed ISO (I don't see much noise up to 3200 - so a lot of flexibility there).

No mirror. No risk of crashing mirror into my Kilfitt 40mm F2.8 Macro. (which extends pretty well into housing). No mirror complexity.

All of this likely was shaped by my initially learning on an old Spotmatic 'match needle' a 'few' years ago. (After an H3v actually). So all manual is no big deal - used to it.

Try it a bit. Maybe you can borrow a K-01 before you buy it and try it with something like the 50MM F4 MACRO SMC Tak, 50MM 1.4 SMC Tak, 200MM F5.6 Preset (really easy to use manually)

Good Luck!
12-27-2013, 09:56 PM   #41
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Durham, nc
Photos: Albums
Posts: 887
I don't understand you manual focus people. Yes, in live view with peaking it's not only possible, but relatively doable. But PDAF vs viewfinder? PDAF will always win. There is no way manual focus is even possible without live view.

Charles.
12-28-2013, 07:29 PM   #42
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Far North Qld
Posts: 3,248
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Pentax MX-1 with Tilting LCD - more than 3mm
Geezsh, you guys have no imagination. Please account for the thickness of the LCD unit which is already taking up space in the body of the K-01 and then imagine that this LCD unit is simply hinged rather than fixed. Surely you guys can see this, any additional thickness would be minimal and so what if it sticks out a bit more? Surely this would be an exceedingly small price to pay for superior viewfinder usage? I have the MX-1 and find the additional protrudance of no consequence at all. Have faith in the Pentax designers and engineers, no need to second guess them is there?
Sorry, don't mean to sound rude, honest - but I'm shakin my head why a simple fun suggestion and photographic mashup should generate so many nay sayers & negatives.
Cheer up for goodness sakes..

Happy New Year.
01-02-2014, 02:28 AM   #43
JPT
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,184
The Olympus EPL5 has a movable screen and is 38mm thick. The EPM2 is a very similar camera without the movable screen and it is 34mm. So it seems that the screen adds 4mm in this case. I chose those cameras because they were released at the same time and have in-body SR.

And incidentally, since the K-01 is quite thick anyway, I would not mind a movable screen at all. Actually, it would have been useful today, when I was trying to take a group portrait from that awkward height between standing and squatting.
01-04-2014, 01:46 PM   #44
Veteran Member
NitroDC's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 342
I have my film MX right next to me and I feel like they could easily shove a bunch of electronic stuff in there and turn out with a mirrorless with the same shape and size.
01-04-2014, 03:05 PM   #45
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,435
QuoteOriginally posted by NitroDC Quote
I have my film MX right next to me and I feel like they could easily shove a bunch of electronic stuff in there and turn out with a mirrorless with the same shape and size.
FWIW, before I pre-ordered my K-01 I played around extensively with my MESuper, holding it and "shooting" with it as if it had only an LCD. The MESuper is VERY close in many dimensions to the K-01.

In the end for the camera designer / engineer, the problem will always be the battery. They always have to make some compromise between capacity and size. I've come to believe the entire reason for the modern camera grip is to house the battery.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • 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!
4k, camera, concept, da, digital camera, fuji, glass, k-01, k-01 and mirrorless, k-02, k-mount, mirrorless, pentax, post, video
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-01 vs K200D, some thoughts prime.partisan Pentax K-01 13 01-02-2014 03:49 PM
A few thoughts on my K-01- a ? and some snaps Billy Joe Pentax K-01 4 08-11-2013 11:51 PM
Waiting on my first mirrorless: K-01! Penta Welcomes and Introductions 2 01-30-2013 05:49 AM
Some thoughts as a new owner of K-01 elpolodiablo Pentax K-01 15 06-18-2012 07:51 PM
a few quick (i hope) questions on the K-01 from a Pentax and DSLR newb krugorg Pentax K-01 7 03-13-2012 06:22 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:09 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, 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?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top