[johnmflores]

A full frame K-01 with the 31mm, 43mm and 77mm primes would be nice. A great quality, compact setup.

[rognone]

Imho a future mirrorless "K-02" either Aps-c or FF should have addressed a problem: Fast AF, even in low light.

We all know the AF is not the selling point on Pentax Cameras, but even if it's not groundbreaking stuff, the AF in Pentax
it's almost always 2 things: really accurate + good in low light. Now, most mirrorless really slow down in low light.

For fast continuos autofocus there are a lot of mirrorless... but the "Mirrorless with good AF in low light" selection is really small.

So yes... boxy or slim... aps-c or FF, I really hope Pentax will address this issue.

[larryaustin3]

imho, the top reasons the K-01 failed are:
1. It was $800 when it came out, way overpriced.
2. It lacked an EVF.
3. People said it was ugly and had terrible ergonomics.
4. The specs were outdated and not competitive with other cameras on the market (CDAF only, a tiny buffer).
5. It lacked Pentax weather sealing and dual command dials, which the existing Pentax users have come to expect.

I'm willing to be corrected on any of these points because I acknowledge I'm just one opinion and I can't speak for the entire marketplace of Pentaxians and non-Pentaxians alike who didn't buy the K-01. That said, isn't it true that if we can't even agree on why the K-01 flopped in the first place, there is no hope for a K-02 of any kind?

[Tony Belding]

imho, the top reasons the K-01 failed are:
3. People said it was ugly and had terrible ergonomics.

The ergonomics were different, and I don't think it was meant to be held in the conventional way. I think you were meant to operate the top buttons with your thumb, which might be more natural to someone who grew up on Nintendo and pre-iPhone texting. It must have sounded good in theory, but in practice anybody who already had SLR experience (all us old-timers) would pick it up and try to hold it in their familiar way, and then find all the buttons poorly placed.


As for the looks… The bright yellow brick was polarizing, to say the least. The black version is much more dignified, but the garish and toy-like yellow one is what everybody remembers.

Also, it needs to be said that the K-01 can be really dreadful in bright sunlight. It's not just the lack of an EVF. There are other cameras with an LCD that is brighter and shows up better in glare conditions. I believe my GRD4, for example, has a considerably improved LCD over the K-01.

[lotech]

I'm more with #2,3,5, and K-02 is quite possible in Pentax's tradition we already have K5ii, K3ii now K1ii

imho, the top reasons the K-01 failed are:
1. It was $800 when it came out, way overpriced.
2. It lacked an EVF.
3. People said it was ugly and had terrible ergonomics.
4. The specs were outdated and not competitive with other cameras on the market (CDAF only, a tiny buffer).
5. It lacked Pentax weather sealing and dual command dials, which the existing Pentax users have come to expect.

I'm willing to be corrected on any of these points because I acknowledge I'm just one opinion and I can't speak for the entire marketplace of Pentaxians and non-Pentaxians alike who didn't buy the K-01. That said, isn't it true that if we can't even agree on why the K-01 flopped in the first place, there is no hope for a K-02 of any kind?

[Not a Number]

5. It lacked Pentax weather sealing and dual command dials, which the existing Pentax users have come to expect.

The K-r, K-x, K300/500 all lack weather sealing and have only one eDial.

[LeRolls]

I'd be in for a FF mirrorless that accepts K mount lenses. The FA Limiteds would be perfect.

[gri]

I've been waiting for mirrorless since K-01. The future is in the mirrorless cameras. One example - the eye autofocus in Sony A7 Iii is brutally good Can we have it in DSLR....

In the end is all about live or...

Изпратено от моят VKY-L09 с помощта на Tapatalk

[RobA_Oz]

Given the move to KAF4, I can see a shorter registration mirrorless body being feasible at some point. Fly-by-wire adapters, made to a very tight OEM specification of course, should be a lot easier to manufacture and would allow the use of K-mount lenses as an interim measure, along with a couple of compact new lenses. One of the attractions of the first K-mount bodies to me, was the release of a M42 to K adapter, even though there was a good range of the first K lenses.

However, there would need to be a substantial number of KAF4 lenses in production before such a move could be countenanced, and that’s unlikely to happen in the near term, so Pentax would be a market follower. On the positive side, a delay of that length will allow a few relevant technologies to develop and come down in price – better EVFs, on-sensor AE, etc, so it would be a market follower with a good value proposition.

[Robot camera]

I totally disagree. I don't know about other people, but I purchased my first SLR in May 1979 because I wanted interchangeable lenses. After three SLRs, when I went digital in Feb 2007 I tried a compact camera to get size down. After nine months I decided that had been a terrible mistake and I purchased a DSLR. I don't need a mirror!!! I need a K-mount, or an EF-mount, or a EF-M-mount, or even a K-M-mount .... I need a something-mount with a viewfinder. If Pentax came out tomorrow with a K-02 with EVF, I'd be ready to scrimp then purchase.

What I meant was, they took away the mirror and pentaprism, but didn't put anything in its place. The whole point of an SLR camera system is a good viewfinder, so any camera of different design that is part of that system yet doesn't have a viewfinder, is in my view a crippled camera. While some liked the K-01, I couldn't see the point of it.

[reh321]

What I meant was, they took away the mirror and pentaprism, but didn't put anything in its place. The whole point of an SLR camera system is a good viewfinder, so any camera of different design that is part of that system yet doesn't have a viewfinder, is in my view a crippled camera. While some liked the K-01, I couldn't see the point of it.

I agree that the K-01 was a waste of time because it had no viewfinder, but that is not the whole question; I have seen some very good EVFs on cameras - not as good as OVFs in some aspects, but better than OVFs in areas that matter to me {such as seeing in low light}. When I envision a K-02, it includes a quality EVF. Also, I believe the major point of an SLR camera is InterChangeable Lenses.

[travelour]

Frankly, I'd rather Pentax invest their R&D resources in optics for the DSLR and auto-focus technology. However, I have to admit that I worry they will fall behind (and not be able to recover) if they don't invest their yen in mirrorless. Is there some way to triage that? Develop high end lenses that work on Sony cams with a mind to later adapt them to a Pentax mirrorless??? Maybe build some user loyalty from cross brands in the process? Would Sony allow that? Stupid idea?

[dnas]

I mentioned it in another thread, but the K-01 used standard Pentax K mount lenses, which made the overall system and camera big, and no EVF, giving no tangible reason to buy them over Pentax DSLRs.

What should have happened was similar to what was done with the Canon EOS M: Produce a small mirrorless body and a basic set of two good quality zooms and a pancake lens, plus bundle an adapter that adapted the EOS M camera to Canon EF DSLR lenses.

In this case, a small APS-C mirrorless Pentax body with a new mount, with a Pentax K-mount lens adapter including the aperture lever. And build in "on sensor" phase detection points to make the AF seamless. I think I would have bought that. One model with EVF, and much smaller one without. If this had been done when the Pentax K-01 came out, it would have beaten Canon to the punch.

[lotech]

One thing I want to add which I mentioned before in other post, to include some sort of "Sensor Protection" in the mirrorless camera. There are 2 things I don't feel comfortable with mirrorless, one is the EVF the other is the unprotected sensor. I did own couple Fuji few years back, the EVF are much better than I thought, they are very fine and quick respond, worked very well even in day light, but the sensors are still unprotected, I even see finger print on the sensor in shop demo unit ! some said due to the live viewing the shutter must kept open all the time, the shutter will open even when the camera turned off, this is the simpliest design without wasting battery power. I am not sure about that and don't know how the K01 works I never handled one, but I think it is still possible mechanically cover the shutter during lens change.

One thing I want to add which I mentioned before in other post, to include some sort of "Sensor Protection" in the mirrorless camera. There are 2 things I don't feel comfortable with mirrorless, one is the EVF the other is the unprotected sensor. I did own couple Fuji few years back, the EVF are much better than I thought, they are very fine and quick respond, worked very well even in day light, but the sensors are still unprotected, I even see finger print on the sensor in shop demo unit ! some said due to the live viewing the shutter must kept open all the time, the shutter will open even when the camera turned off, this is the simpliest design without wasting battery power. I am not sure about that and don't know how the K01 works I never handled one, but I think it is still possible mechanically cover the shutter during lens change.

There is a shutter in the K-01 that covers the sensor when it is off, if you turn the camera off during lens changes (always a good idea) the sensor will be covered. The actual sensor is never exposed, the IR filter glass is what you see when the shutter is open. It is relatively easy to clean.

There is a lot of misinformation about the K-01, mostly from people who have never even seen one, much less used one.


The Q series Pentaxes do not have a shutter in the body, but the IR glass over the sensor is easy to clean—it is very close to the lens mount.