[Simen1]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

I think the K-02 needs a very different design. Less brick-like and more SLR like. And it needs an EVF. And of course up to date electronics.

[zoolander]

I think the K-02 needs a very different design. Less brick-like and more SLR like. And it needs an EVF. And of course up to date electronics.

I agree Simen ! I liked the K-30's leather?vinyl covering and its sporty design. I also like the K-50, K-S2's design and K-S1's mode dial (though a little to stiff to turn). I'd be hoping for a new lens mount and K-mount adapter with built in af motor of the DC silent kind. I like electronic viewfinders too.

If only Pentax used focus groups !

[reh321]

I guess this is a reality check:

Last May, after my Canon Rebel had (unexpectedly) died and I suddenly needed a new camera despite a low checking balance, I went to eBay and looked at K-01, K-30, and K-50 cameras. Because I already had the EVF-less Q-7, I passed on the K-01, but I did notice that there were a large number of them listed, including a bunch from Roberts. I didn't see any meaningful (to me) difference between the K-30 and K-50 cameras, so I bid on them as equals, and was pleased to get a new-like-used (shutter count something like 3) K-30 from KEH at a very reasonable price in just a few weeks (I was prepared to go the entire summer with the Q-7 as my primary camera)

Today, out of curiosity, I went back to eBay and looked at the availability of K-01 cameras again. I was surprised to discover that, according to my rough count, there are around 100 new and over 30 used (including a number from Roberts) listed there right now. I'm really surprised to see so many there, including the number from Roberts. If I worked for Pentax, frankly I might have trouble convincing myself to convince management to move forward on any K-02 project, with so many of the K-01 still unsold out there. As a customer, I point to the lack of an EVF, but I'm not sure I could sell that to Pentax (nor to their Ricoh superiors).

[LensBeginner]

I guess this is a reality check:

*snip*

If I worked for Pentax, frankly I might have trouble convincing myself to convince management to move forward on any K-02 project, with so many of the K-01 still unsold out there. As a customer, I point to the lack of an EVF, but I'm not sure I could sell that to Pentax (nor to their Ricoh superiors).

Not many of them on eBay here in Europe... some are unreasonably priced, on top of that (classic eBay shady vendor behavior).

It's a camera that's becoming a little old... K30s and K50 are newer, for instance, and even when it got out, it had some quirks and shortcomings that were strongly limiting.
It's my main camera, for sure, but when I pick my K100Ds up, which is inferior to it in almost every respect, I still appreciate the fast PDAF and snappier motor, the more ergonomic build, and the OVF of course.
LCD "EVF" (with third-party viewfinder) is nice, but it could have used a higher resolution...

IMHO a K-02 with today's tech (as opposed to, what, late 2011, early 2012? can't remember...) would be a blast.
Maybe even as a first camera and not as a specialty second body.

[zoolander]

If I worked for Pentax, frankly I might have trouble convincing myself to convince management to move forward on any K-02 project, with so many of the K-01 still unsold out there. As a customer, I point to the lack of an EVF, but I'm not sure I could sell that to Pentax (nor to their Ricoh superiors).

I agree with some of the things LensBeginner says. I too have notice there are a lot of K-01's on ebay, and yet they ask a fairly high price. When I looked at mirrorless, I was not far off in price of a Fujifilm X-a1, and I went with that, but only because the X-A1 has really awesome high ISO, and the lenses have tested extremely sharp - much more value for money, for a camera without an evf. If I could have bought a K-01 for $100-$150, then I would have pounced on that.

I remember when stores were running out the K-01 body for $300, and I think they're really worth under $150AUD maximum $200.

If Pentax engineers look at the K-01, they know it was a flop. Look at the Canon EOS-M which flopped even worse. A friend of mine picked up an EOS-M body 6 months ago when they were being run out of stores for $200. He didn't even get a flash or lens, just the EF adapter.

I found that an Australian electronics retailer was running out the EOS-M with twin lens kit for under $300: https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/106177

Here's the history of all the offers on the EOS-M: https://www.ozbargain.com.au/product/canon-eos-m

In that link I see even the EOS-M 3 has started to crop up with offers because it too is an orphan which nobody wants.

Similarly to the K-01, we see the EOS-M on ebay ..... GALORE ! canon eos-m | eBay

If we were to take what happened with the K-01 and the EOS-M, I would fairly say that the EOS-M was the greater of the flunkies ........ Both have been orphans. So what went wrong with the EOS-M ? I'd say that the lack of evf, and making people pay for an evf was one of the clinchers, the other is no inbuilt flash, and its the kind of camera you just know you're gonna drop because there's hardly anything to hold onto, so you want a wrist strap for this camera.

So if a Pentax engineer looks at the K-01 and EOS-M series, they could learn how not to do mirrorless. You need: Inbuilt flash; Inbuilt EFV; a decent grip and grippy material. The EOS-M has a few lenses in its own mount plus I think third party lenses if memory serves me right. But you've got to offer some features that nobody else does, like weather proofing, or great high ISO, and even better lenses in their own mount.

I don't think that Pentax should give up, Canon certainly didn't despite 3 series of overpriced flunky cameras.

A K-02 would have to emulate what Fuji or Sony does. Pentax and Canon botched it.

[Nicolas06]

You need: Inbuilt flash; Inbuilt EFV; a decent grip and grippy material.

Your description look like the opposite of an Olympus Pen. But to me but theses guys sell well, there even 4-5 different model of them

Just to say that this is not that easy. Many mirorless people want something small and fashionnable with great picture quality and that what the Pen is providing.

[zoolander]

Your description look like the opposite of an Olympus Pen. But to me but theses guys sell well, there even 4-5 different model of them

Just to say that this is not that easy. Many mirorless people want something small and fashionnable with great picture quality and that what the Pen is providing.

Very good point, how did Olympus do it ? Perhaps seeing how everyone in Canikon land criticizes mirrorless, then when Canikon release one, the Canikon loyalists won't take it up. The mantra being that mirrorless is problematic, you better stick with DSLR's. And the af is better.

[Nicolas06]

Very good point, how did Olympus do it ? Perhaps seeing how everyone in Canikon land criticizes mirrorless, then when Canikon release one, the Canikon loyalists won't take it up. The mantra being that mirrorless is problematic, you better stick with DSLR's. And the af is better.

I think they also target different people. Olympus pen clearly target womens and more generally people that care of the look & feels of objects. You have a very small yet trendy and fashionable object that can also can fit in bag.

The K-01 has an industrial look, it does look cheap and it quite clumpsy. I'am not sure you can do an Olympus Pen like in K-mount because if you see them side by side you'll always prefer the smaller one.

But like you I hope you can still make a trendy, good looking camera that still very small/light, smell luxury and quality. It would be bigger but have a EVF and the selling point would be the exceptionnal quality of lenses like the ltd, DA20-40 and alike you can put on it. You would need to replace the newly colapsible 18-50 as apparently it's current version is not reliable and good looking enough. But if you sell the K-02 in K mount, provide say a Fuji like look, and make it as small/light as possible and sell it with an equally nice looking collapsible kit lens that would be perfect.

More or less you would try to make an OMD-10 like camera but in K-mount.

[luftfluss]

Very good point, how did Olympus do it ? Perhaps seeing how everyone in Canikon land criticizes mirrorless, then when Canikon release one, the Canikon loyalists won't take it up. The mantra being that mirrorless is problematic, you better stick with DSLR's. And the af is better.

Canon's EOS M uses a new lens mount, which Canon loyalists didn't like. It was also (like the K-01) plagued by poor AF at introduction. It must be selling somewhat decently somewhere though, as Canon has since issued 2 revisions.

NIkon's mirrorless has a "1 inch class" sensor with worse IQ than cameras with similar size sensors. Some of the bodies and lenses are very expensive - $1000 for the top body, and also $1000 for the 70-300 f/4-5.6 lens, for example. The Nikon 1 system is noted for its blazingly fast AF, though.

---------- Post added 11-30-15 at 05:41 PM ----------

I think they also target different people. Olympus pen clearly target womens and more generally people that care of the look & feels of objects. You have a very small yet trendy and fashionable object that can also can fit in bag.

The K-01 has an industrial look, it does look cheap and it quite clumpsy. I'am not sure you can do an Olympus Pen like in K-mount because if you see them side by side you'll always prefer the smaller one.

But like you I hope you can still make a trendy, good looking camera that still very small/light, smell luxury and quality. It would be bigger but have a EVF and the selling point would be the exceptionnal quality of lenses like the ltd, DA20-40 and alike you can put on it. You would need to replace the newly colapsible 18-50 as apparently it's current version is not reliable and good looking enough. But if you sell the K-02 in K mount, provide say a Fuji like look, and make it as small/light as possible and sell it with an equally nice looking collapsible kit lens that would be perfect.

More or less you would try to make an OMD-10 like camera but in K-mount.

F**k making a collapsible zoom lens. Ship it with the 35/2.4.

[Nicolas06]

F**k making a collapsible zoom lens. Ship it with the 35/2.4.

Not everybody is Ansel Adams working only with a 50mm (here APSC equiv.). One of the reason to not shoot with a smartphone is the hability to zoom. I have no issue with primes, I currently own only that, but you are not going to get many sales if you restrict yourself to primes.

[zoolander]

he K-01 has an industrial look, it does look cheap and it quite clumpsy. I'am not sure you can do an Olympus Pen like in K-mount because if you see them side by side you'll always prefer the smaller one.

But like you I hope you can still make a trendy, good looking camera that still very small/light, smell luxury and quality. It would be bigger but have a EVF and the selling point would be the exceptionnal quality of lenses like the ltd, DA20-40 and alike you can put on it. You would need to replace the newly colapsible 18-50 as apparently it's current version is not reliable and good looking enough. But if you sell the K-02 in K mount, provide say a Fuji like look, and make it as small/light as possible and sell it with an equally nice looking collapsible kit lens that would be perfect.

More or less you would try to make an OMD-10 like camera but in K-mount.

I would disagree with you on copying the Olympus or Fuji cameras. You've got to be unique, the K-01 was kinda unique, but effectively its a K-30 internals without an OVF, in a Marc Newsom plasto-jacket..

The K-S1 is more likely to be the candidate because internals have been shrunk down, and if they take out the OVF, you'd hope that they find room for an EVF - no EVF no sales ! but an add-on EVF at an extra cost means - no sale too ! A flash that tilts backwards like fuji and Sony, but definitely not like the "mr roboto" one in the Pentax Q. I really like the rear dial set-up on the K-S1, but its too tight to turn, and needs a switch that locks and loosens it.

Pentax needs to equip a K-02 with everything you get at Sony or Fuji, otherwise people will walk away from an underequipped K-01. Plus, I agree with you on the need for lenses, if you don't make dedicated lenses that can match the sharpness of Fuji or at-least Sony E (and the third party), then there's no point. The limiteds are very nice, but to be competitive in the mirrorless market, you've got to have a dedicated and compact range of lenses.

[Na Horuk]

A big part of Pentax mirrorless is brand name. Problem is that a lot of competition already made a good name in the mirrorless market, while Pentax' attempt caused a big reaction, but not overall positive one (even though K-01 was in many ways as good as its rivals back then and in some ways better; albeit worse in others).
Pentax is often ignored as brand name, something I hope will chance once this FF comes out. If it sells well, Pentax might get the money reserves to try a K-02. This is a big advantage that Sony and Canikon have. Sony has lots of money to experiment. Canikon have high brand recognizably, so they can raise prices or sell not-so-great cameras without problem.

[luftfluss]

Not everybody is Ansel Adams working only with a 50mm (here APSC equiv.). One of the reason to not shoot with a smartphone is the hability to zoom. I have no issue with primes, I currently own only that, but you are not going to get many sales if you restrict yourself to primes.

- The Pentax 18-55 and 18-50 are both slow, ugly, mediocre lenses. I don't see Pentax ever developing a Fuji-esque 18-55 f/2.8-4. Both that lens and the Fuji 16-50 are well ahead of the 2 Pentax cheap zooms. Heck, the Oly 14-42 I had was sharper than any of the 18-55's I've owned, until the Pentax was stopped down.

- The DA 35/2.4 is light and sharp, and would fit in better with the K-0x ethos. The K-02 (or whatever) is already going to be comparatively think in order to accommodate the K-mount, why exacerbate the situation with a clumsy zoom.

- Pentax could include a voucher to provide a substantial discount on a zoom purchase. $100 off the 18-135, maybe. This would also help spur LBA.

- Including a quality prime would help with product differentiation. Not going for the soccer-mom set. Let Canon do that and lose money.

[Nicolas06]

- The Pentax 18-55 and 18-50 are both slow, ugly, mediocre lenses. I don't see Pentax ever developing a Fuji-esque 18-55 f/2.8-4. Both that lens and the Fuji 16-50 are well ahead of the 2 Pentax cheap zooms. Heck, the Oly 14-42 I had was sharper than any of the 18-55's I've owned, until the Pentax was stopped down.

- The DA 35/2.4 is light and sharp, and would fit in better with the K-0x ethos. The K-02 (or whatever) is already going to be comparatively think in order to accommodate the K-mount, why exacerbate the situation with a clumsy zoom.

- Pentax could include a voucher to provide a substantial discount on a zoom purchase. $100 off the 18-135, maybe. This would also help spur LBA.

- Including a quality prime would help with product differentiation. Not going for the soccer-mom set. Let Canon do that and lose money.

Man the K01 had a quality prime: DA40 XS. This didn't help. Here you design what YOU or ME could want. Not what would have a chance to sell.

And Olympus is selling much more than Fuji. Fuji target a narrow market but it is theur only offering and they never managed to get past their 16MP X-trans sensor. If they don't react fast, their echosystem will die. The problem is that there likely not enougth client to justify the investment, in particular if they continue on their specific sensor technology.

[luftfluss]

Man the K01 had a quality prime: DA40 XS. This didn't help. Here you design what YOU or ME could want. Not what would have a chance to sell.

How can you possibly know whether or not the DA40 XS hindered sales?

And Olympus is selling much more than Fuji. Fuji target a narrow market but it is theur only offering and they never managed to get past their 16MP X-trans sensor. If they don't react fast, their echosystem will die. The problem is that there likely not enougth client to justify the investment, in particular if they continue on their specific sensor technology

Yes, Oly is selling well. And what's the strength of the m4/3 lens system? Primes.

You have completely missed my point about Fuji. I only cited their 2 kit lens offerings as examples of quality kit lenses, I made no other comment about Fuji.

I'm looking at the situation pragmatically. The el-cheapo Pentax zooms are not very good. So... which current cheap lenses are? The DA 35/2.4 and the DA 50/1.8. The DA 50/1.8 is kinda long on APS-C, so that leaves the 35. My issue is not with "zooms", my issue is with "low quality zooms". If Pentax wishes to build a better zoom for the hypothetical K-02, that would be great, but I don't think they will.