[Clavius]

No, it doesn't, and the pencils were hazardous.

Here you say yourself that the pencils were used, otherwise they weren't hazardous. (Check) And if you click you link, you can read that the US indeed develope a extremely expensive space-ballpoint. (Check)

What part is false?

Anyway, even IF it was false, the point that I was making would still be valid.

[falconeye]

Hm, the design style of Marc Newsons previous work doesn't mix that well, or should I say doesn't mix at all, with the Pentax Limited style.

From the interview with Marc, I learned that he first tries to get the "design genes" of the company. So, he must have been aware of Pentax "Limited" design language, as visible in the Ltd. lenses, the K-7 body or an MX.

[konraDarnok]

Here you say yourself that the pencils were used, otherwise they weren't hazardous. (Check) And if you click you link, you can read that the US indeed develope a extremely expensive space-ballpoint. (Check)

What part is false?

Anyway, even IF it was false, the point that I was making would still be valid.

Your entire point was that is was "overcomplicated" -- when in fact it was a valid safety consideration that even the Soviets were aware of. Ergo, your thesis is incorrect. Is there anyway to put you on ignore?

[konraDarnok]

From the interview with Marc, I learned that he first tries to get the "design genes" of the company. So, he must have been aware of Pentax "Limited" design language, as visible in the Ltd. lenses, the K-7 body or an MX.

I'm really curious to see what the guy came up with (if the rumor is true). I don't really care for his "art furniture," but he does seem to have a pretty good eye for functional industrial design -- per his Quantas A380 designs.

[gazonk]

Two things about this K01 rumored camera:

1. If the design sells cameras and makes profit for Pentax/Ricoh, but I don't like whatever about it - then hopefully the revenue will accrue to something I do like. If it is a home run - Wow! Who's complaining?
2. Likely there can be some technology transfer to cameras that the negative posters here will want to use somewhere down the road, as there was from 645D R&D into the K-7 (before the 645D was actually produced).

But that's kind of rational.

Exactly - very well put! Good post - +1 from me!

[rparmar]

troll somewhere else dude.

If you can't tell the difference between the word "company" and "manufacturer", no wonder you are having difficulty with someone challenging your belief system. In any case I am willing to let your content-free post be the last word of "informed debate" on this matter. One thing I will say in your favour: Apple needs people like you.

[Clavius]

From the interview with Marc, I learned that he first tries to get the "design genes" of the company. So, he must have been aware of Pentax "Limited" design language, as visible in the Ltd. lenses, the K-7 body or an MX.

Well, that's a bit of a relief.

Hopefully Pentax/Ricoh gave him some strict rules to operate within too.

[Kunzite]

No they're not. But we are well past the obsolescence of film -- that necessitated the SLR design in the first place. The concept is called "Obsolete Before Plateau." Right now we have the best SLRs we've ever -- or will ever have. I'll go ahead and predict the SLR is dead in 5 years. No question.

Sorry, but the problem of seeing (accurately enough for things like composition and focusing) didn't go anywhere, in the digital era. The only difference is that now we have an alternative to the TTL optical viewfinders.
I would hate to see a perfectly working technology being replaced by something worse, just because it's "obsolete". I would love that, facing the threat of those silly miniature TVs, the DSLRs will include better and better OVFs, to the point where we'll get back what was lost with another revolutionary invention - the AF.

[jhaji]

Put some dials and switches on the body please. Nobody should have to go thru a menu for aperture, shutter, focus mode, exposure mode settings. Hoops that Oly and Sony make you jump thru.

[rawr]

My two cents worth. I got into dslr relatively recently after using p&s over the years. Wanted to do a bit more.
So I get the K5 and a 55-300mm lens. Fine camera. Lens floppy. Had to figure out first how to get focus adjustment right. Focus screen front focussing. After a bunch of fiddling now I can get decent shots out of my stuff.
Compared to a friend. Long time photographer, has a collection of Nikon gear. On his second generation dslr, bought a D5100. Charged batteries, took some shots through his window at some birds across the yard, blown away by the quality.

The key points here:
- you were a P&S user transitioning to a DSLR and using telephoto lenses;
- your friend is a long-time photographer and experienced DSLR user.

So your issues were more likely not hardware related. I've taken thousands of photos using the DAL 55-300 and it is a good lens. Using any telephoto, especially at the long end, requires technique and experience. I've also never had to do any focus adjusting on it at all. The K-5 is also an excellent camera equal to any APS-C Nikon.

[philbaum]

Two things about this K01 rumored camera:

1. If the design sells cameras and makes profit for Pentax/Ricoh, but I don't like whatever about it - then hopefully the revenue will accrue to something I do like. If it is a home run - Wow! Who's complaining?
2. Likely there can be some technology transfer to cameras that the negative posters here will want to use somewhere down the road, as there was from 645D R&D into the K-7 (before the 645D was actually produced).

But that's kind of rational.

+1. I agree.

My current cameras are the K5 and an older Canon PS 710 that runs out of steam(but not noise) after 400iso. But i like that camera and always feel sad that it doesn't have a better sensor.

Fast forward to today. The mirrorless cameras offer some real technical advantages over the mirror design, i.e.
a. no vibration problems in moving a mirror assembly back and forth at high speeds, e.g. improved IQ
b. I shoot a lot when i'm around other people, as in theatre events - i really don't want a noisy camera, and the mirror just adds more noise
c. Smaller lighter camera just is more likely to be carried than larger heavier camera, duh...
d. Money saved from eliminating an expensive mirror assembly can be spent in other technical improvements.

I am so delighted to see Pentax try out a new design. Is there risk - of course - there's always risk with any new endeavor.

Look at the number of versions Sony has gone thru with the NEX design - now up to Ver 7. New technology has always been an iterative development process. Congratulations are due to Ricoh/Pentax for trying out something new!!! Is it going to be successful. I hope so, but even if its lacking in some respect - at least they are out there fighting for improvements rather than in some passive mode. If there's a problem with K 01, then like Sony/Nex, i'm sure they will fix it the next 7 times around. I'd rather that then some company which has no motivation or desire to innovate.

Go Pentax, and be interesting!

[Mistral75]

2 other ltd's will be re-introduced for the MILC too. Probably the 70mm no doubt.

That's not what has been rumoured. The K-01 is supposed to be bundled with three kit lenses, one of them being the new 40mm f/2.8 XS, the two remaining ones being existing lenses. Existing lenses, not existing prime lenses: zoom lenses are perfectly possible. Indeed, why couldn't they be the 18-55 and 50-200 kit zooms?

[Anvh]

I'm not sure this has any practical use in a camera, as the image is to be reflected into a pentaprism.

Why would that be a problem?

[Clavius]

Put some dials and switches on the body please. Nobody should have to go thru a menu for aperture, shutter, focus mode, exposure mode settings. Hoops that Oly and Sony make you jump thru.

That was my issue with the NEX too. On my K5 I don't even have to take my eye off the viewfinder and can adjust almost everything.

With the NEX I kept going through all kind of menus. Missing all kinds of moments and opportunities.

But it's only logical that there's little dials and buttons on that thingy, there's no room to put them!

Smaller isn't always better. Everyone wants smaller size, but be careful what you wish for.

[derekkite]

rawr: Great. You got a good one. I'm happy for you. I only wish my focus screen had been aligned properly and that I didn't have to focus adjust my lens.

I'll add that I am particularly ornery and persistent and I figure out how to make things work, what fixes are required. Most just take it back and buy another brand.

The DAL 55-300 that I have should have caused shame in someone when they let it out the door. Good heavens, can't they make something that doesn't rattle when the zoom is extended? If anything my inexperience shows when I didn't try it out before I left the city where I bought it so I could have taken it back right away.

Pentax had a home run with the K5. It is a remarkable device, very capable. The sensor problems and the shutter problems made it's reputation and cost them sales. That is all I'm saying. If Ricoh pulls it's manufacturing weight and gets good components, good production managers so that the excellent design actually works once it is in the hands of purchasers, they will probably have great success. They have the technology and ideas. But it has to work.