[6BQ5]

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.

I agree. Last night I was looking at my K-30 and I realized just how much smaller the right hand side of the camera can be if the battery compartment were smaller. Sure, it's nice to be able to take AA batteries but the space required for that adapter is huge!

[squareeyes]

Pentax MX-1 with Tilting LCD - more than 3mm

Pentax MX-1 with Tilting LCD - more than 3mm

Sorry I am late, but the point is that the tilting mechanism adds only 2.5-4 mm to the thickness of the body. It may be 8-9 thick, but the LCD already takes 4-6 mm

[monochrome]

Sorry I am late, but the point is that the tilting mechanism adds only 2.5-4 mm to the thickness of the body. It may be 8-9 thick, but the LCD already takes 4-6 mm

I think 4mm is a lot.

[JPT]

I think Ricoh could make a success of a "K-02" with following formula.

1. Add an EVF. Don't add a tilting screen to this model.

2. Use an APS-C sensor with some kind of on-sensor PDAF. Almost every other manufacturer has some form of this technology, so I see no reason why Ricoh can't.

3. Adopt a more classic SLR layout, with a more centralised mount. I don't care if it looks retro or not, but when you attach a lens with little to grip (e,d, DA40mm) it is more ergonomic to have space on the body for your left hand to hold. The huge grip on DSLRs is overkill for small lenses and the lack of anything on the body for the left hand to grip is sub-optimal. I love the handling of my MZ-3 film camera with a small lens on it. As a side benefit, it seems that cameras with centralised mounts are attractive to consumers, such the Olympus EM-5, the Fuji X cameras and the Q.

4. Use the DSLR twin-dial hyper-program system. Don't regress to a retro dials like the Nikon DF. Since Pentax lenses don't have aperture rings any more it doesn't make sense anyway.

5. Reduce the battery size to something like the K-30/K-50. It kind of pains me to say this, because I love the long battery life of the K-01, but everyone who picks it up says how heavy it is and that will turn people off at the point of sale.

6. Don't sell it with the standard DSLR kit zooms. Market it with the DA Limited range instead. In fact, Ricoh could create a kind of system-within-a-system of compact silver/black lenses. They are more than half way there, but they could remake the macro 50, the macro 100 and the fisheye 10-17 in the same style and have a nice set of lenses. Of course, there is nothing to stop users mounting FA limited lenses or any other K-mount lens.

7. Price it just under $1000, like the EM-5 and the Fuji XE-2. In the Pentax line-up, it would sit neatly between the K-50 and the K-3, without being a direct competitor to either.

I think this would be a great and practical formula for a camera. It builds on Ricoh's existing products and doesn't carry the risk of introducing a new mount. If released, it would probably be my next camera.

[ChopperCharles]

I would say, add an optional EVF. Honestly, after using the K-01, I think it would be less of a camera if it had the EVF. It wouldn't be as good as an OVF, and the experience would be diminished. Just another almost-SLR, instead of a camera that makes you use it differently -- which is what really brings out the fun I think.

I would follow the Q's lead and add a dial on the front that I can program to different color or scene modes or whatnot -- I use that ALL the time on my Q, to change between bleach bypass, B&W, Vivid, and Reversal (my favorite) modes. Make it look like a thick ME Super, black and silver and retro styled like the MX-1. Not sure going to the K-30 style dual-dial is really necessary, as it over complicates the camera for new users. I'm happy enough with the one dial, but i would like to be able to shift the shutter speed in P-mode. That's the only thing I really noticed when moving from the K-x and K-01 to the K-30. (And the only reason I use that is because Pentax cameras select a ridiculously slow shutter speed when using flash)

Charles.

[JPT]

Having an optional EVF would be fine for me but I hate the way those things stick out the top, looking vulnerable. It would be great if someone could make an EVF attachment that looked and felt like part of the camera, rather than something bolted on.

The attraction of the EVF is that it would be the only Pentax to enable focus peaking through the viewfinder.

The front dial is a great idea, as long as they refine the customization to make it more useful than the original Q. I don't know if the Q7 is better in this regard.

[jon404]

I like my K-01 very much. Got around the missing viewfinder problem by gaffer-taping a Hoodman loupe to the back -- makes the camera a joy to use -- except that the autofocus is horrible with a telephoto on fast-moving subjects, like a plane in the sky. It's not a DSLR.

The image quality is excellent. Second to none. If I were Pentax, I'd re-package it with an optical viewfinder -- and re-style it to look more like a typical camera. Faux DSLR, like the new Olympus. Pick up the Ricoh GR's control layout, ooohh. And, my personal big wish, building PocketWizard Plus transmitter circuitry right into the camera -- a great 'hook' to sell it as a pro model. Color -- black. All black. Again, traditional pro look 'n feel. Keep the K-mount. And fix that telephoto autofocus!

[Steve.Ledger]

Got around the missing viewfinder problem by gaffer-taping a Hoodman loupe to the back

Errr... It's not missing. For something to be missing it needs to have existed in the first place.

You know, using my Q, the MX-1 and the K-01 I'm actually finding the K-7 a little awkward to use because I have to hold the damn thing up to my eye and squint the other one! This means all my photos are 'eye level' unless I crouch. It also means constantly clearing nose grease off the LCD.
Using just the back LCD means I'm not restricted, I can even sit the camera on the ground and fire the shutter with my toe if necessary as I can see the subject well enough to frame.

Only a very few occasions in bright sun has it been difficult, but never impossible.

So nope, I don't want an appendage EVF. A tilting screen like the MX-1 would be much more useful (as I posted earlier here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/147-pentax-mirrorless-cameras/244496-some...ml#post2620675)

[monochrome]

Errr... It's not missing. For something to be missing it needs to have existed in the first place.

You know, using my Q, the MX-1 and the K-01 I'm actually finding the K-7 a little awkward to use because I have to hold the damn thing up to my eye and squint the other one! This means all my photos are 'eye level' unless I crouch. It also means constantly clearing nose grease off the LCD.
Using just the back LCD means I'm not restricted, I can even sit the camera on the ground and fire the shutter with my toe if necessary as I can see the subject well enough to frame.

Only a very few occasions in bright sun has it been difficult, but never impossible.

So nope, I don't want an appendage EVF. A tilting screen like the MX-1 would be much more useful (as I posted earlier here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/147-pentax-mirrorless-cameras/244496-some...l#post2620675)

What I've learned:
Q has a purpose and does it very well
K-01 has a purpose and does it very well
K3 has a purpose and does it superbly.

The purposes are uniquely distinct with just a small overlap. If I use each camera according to its purpose I am uniquely happy with the result.

[jon404]

Monochrome -- I've come around to this way of thinking as well. Instead of trying to force one camera to do everything, it's simpler to have different cameras, each doing what it does best. For me, that's the GR for a wide-angle snapshot pocket camera; the K-01 with f/2.4 35mm lens for 'normal' field of view images, and the K-30 with 55-300mm lens for telephoto action pictures. I enjoy using each of them... the controls are similar enough that it's easy to go back and forth. Easy enough to keep the GR in my shirt pocket, and the other two in the car... since we are never far from our cars here in southern California.

Steve -- a tilt-up screen would be great -- maybe also designed so that you could pull it out and turn it around -- like a video camera -- so you could see yourself on it for decent selfies or Youtube videos. And you might be right about the viewfinder -- each year, the back screens get brighter and brighter -- the GR screen is MUCH better than the older K-01 screen. I wonder if any sports photographers are using the back screens -- live view -- for action shots? Only problem, for me anyway, is being nearsighted -- which the viewfinders let me adjust for.

[Steve.Ledger]

You mean like this, Jon?

[jon404]

Yes -- but let's make it all black -- top, controls, etc -- plus a little branding --

[Steve.Ledger]

K-08?

[jon404]

That's what the graphic on the tilt screen looked like to me -- maybe it should just be -- K-1?

EDIT -- oops, forget that -- they are probably saving K-1 for the FF Pentax, if it ever arrives.

What do you think they should call a new K-01?

[Steve.Ledger]

I used the current K-01 splash screen, Jon.
I guess you have disabled yours?

What do you think they should call a new K-01?

K-02