[gazonk]

59mm is what I read.
As I posted, this is very close to the K-x depth (63.5mm) if you measure mount to LCD.

Yes, my bad. At least that makes me pretty confident that they've kept sensor SR.

[konraDarnok]

this is something I'd like to know too

Contrast AF works pretty well on the K-5. I'm sure it would be better if the camera was optimized to use it full time.

[TOUGEFC]

You're aware that that is a very old prototype?

I assumed so.

[Greeneg]

My question is what would or might this do to K-5 pricing. Perhaps there will be some really significant bargains on the remaining units in the near future??

[Asahiflex]

We all know that Pentax worked for aaaaaaaages on the 645D. Apparently the design of the Q started 5 years ago. I'm not surprised if they'll admit, in the end, that the design of the K-01 took 7 years or something.

[EvilTwin]

Found this, looks to be the same size specs.
Looks...... well, quite ugly.

PENTAX DSLRs: Timing is everything. Important facts about Pentax you should know. Read this blog then share it with your Canikon friends. :)

That's an old prototype from 1997.

[JinDesu]

My question is what would or might this do to K-5 pricing. Perhaps there will be some really significant bargains on the remaining units in the near future??

If it's a k-r replacement, it shouldn't affect k-5 pricing, as long as it comes out at entry level price.

If it's any higher, then the current k-5 pricing at about $1000 is going to seem stupid.

[Clavius]

Contrast AF works pretty well on the K-5. I'm sure it would be better if the camera was optimized to use it full time.

Contrast AF is slow, even on cameras designed to always use it. Look at the NEX for an example.

What I don't understand is that lots of people constantly complain about the slow AF speed of the K5. While at the same time I hear about how cool contrast AF is. (Hopefully from other people.) It does not compute for me.

[falconeye]

Why not the GXR with a K-mount and K-5 sensor?

Because it doesn't make sense? Would be larger than a K-mount dSLR. And much more expensive.

Removing the mechanical shutter would not change the size of the camera.

No wide pancakes. Almost as big and heavy as my *ist DS. Do not want.

It is a K-5 internally, with a different body and shutterbox. And no AF and mirror/focal screen/prism. The K-5 sensor depends on a mechanical shutter.

Wide pancakes are feasible with protruding rear elements. Such lenses just wouldn't mount on a traditional K mount SLR.

This makes me think that the K01 mount has an additional hole or spare edge and dedicated K01 lenses have an additional pin or edge preventing them to be mounted accidentilly to a K-mount SLR. XS may be the designation for such lenses. However, I doubt it as the 40mm has no protruding rear elements.

I am not so sure initially it would be priced below an entry-level DSLR. It will come in higher.
...
Who needs the added complexity (and warranty headaches) of retractable lenses when you are the pancake lens brand?

I actually meant priced like an entry-level dSLR, not below. The EVF (I guess there is one) adds cost, the removed AF and focus screen/prism with mechanical calibration saves at least as much cost.

image stablization???

I guesses (and argued cf. above) that it has EVF and SR. I concluded it from size comparison with a K-x. W/o SR, a K01 could be thinner than 59mm. W/o EVF, it could be lower.

[monochrome]

You're absolutely right. I somehow quoted the message I meant to quote incorrectly. What I was referring to as a harsh assessment was one in which somebody said that if Kodak had a better understanding of the digital imaging industry, they wouldn't be in the position they are now.

Well we've hijacked the thread but I agree with your assessment. The demands of winding down legacy businesses, though, hindered EK's attempt to exploit their patents. Without that understanding it might appear EK lacked market intuition.

[Moo]

This is the very first time I've ever thought about changing brands. Pentax is replacing models by stripped down versions. KR went out and gets replaced by... this?? I'm afraid for their announcement in the higher-end category.

The only positve thing about this, is that they're keeping the K-mount... For now, that is. Because if they're stupid enough to get rid of the OVF, then what's keeping them from getting rid of K-mount in a few years?

Hear, hear!
Get rid of one major advantage of SLR (optical viewfinder) but without great reductions in size or weight? I say this isn't a K-r replacement, it's an even-lower-tier thing.
Xtra Silly.
If the price is appropriate for a lower-tier, though, it might be good. Good competition for bridge cameras, rather than questionable competiton for SLR/mirrorless...

[konraDarnok]

Contrast AF is slow, even on cameras designed to always use it. Look at the NEX for an example.

What I don't understand is that lots of people constantly complain about the slow AF speed of the K5. While at the same time I hear about how cool contrast AF is. (Hopefully from other people.) It does not compute for me.

I wouldn't call the K-5 implementation 'slow' it's is slower, but it's also more accurate than the Phase AF. And as I stated up thread, I'd use it for most shooting conditions on the K-5 if I had a viewfinder that allowed it -- holding the camera at arm's length sux.

[Asahiflex]

This makes me think that the K01 mount has an additional hole or spare edge and dedicated K01 lenses have an additional pin or edge preventing them to be mounted accidentilly to a K-mount SLR. XS may be the designation for such lenses. However, I doubt it as the 40mm has no protruding rear elements.

Indeed, but I can see a 40mm lens with its mount in front of the front element so that the whole lens is sunken deeply into the body. As a plus this could mean that no hood is needed because of the deep-lying front element.

XS = Xtra Sunken?

[konraDarnok]

Get rid of one major advantage of SLR (optical viewfinder)

What's so great about it? I'd rather have a viewfinder that was closer to WYSIWYG. Which is why the SLR was invented in the first place -- it's closer to the final picture than dual reflex -- it's also why DOF preview was added -- but optical viewfinder can't show you exposure. EVF can.

[RonHendriks1966]

Wow an explosion on this site. Hope it is a nice camera.