[Aristophanes]

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.

It could make for an excellent video device if AF could be silent and an articulated LCD is in the design.

[philbaum]

Lenses aren't designed for PDAF (or CDAF). They have (or don't have) an AF motor or screw and a given mechanical accuracy. E.g., my old FA31 focusses in under 1s (using K-5 CDAF).
....
The other two lenses are said to be the standard ones. Only the 40 is rumored to be XS.

To gain another 10 mm is difficult.
...
The removal of SR would gain you 10mm. But if you want to keep it (and I think this is a must) then you probably have to remove the LCD and reduce the number of PCBs behind the sensor from 2 to 1. Which means to redesign the SR mechanism because it currently can only shift a small daughter PCB. But the electronics wil have to go somewhere. So what you gain in depth you loose in width or height ...

I guess the 5mm the K01 is rumoured to be thinner than a K-5 come from a thinner plug between sensor daughter board and main PCB.

If the camera looks "sleek", it will look very compact side by side with a NEX with the 18-55 lens mounted - even with one of the primes mounted. In fact, even the tiniest NEX, the C-3, with the 30mm macro mounted (the smallest lens except for the super wide 16mm pancake) has a total depth of 33mm + 55,5mm = 88,5mm, while the rumored new Pentax with the DA40 mounted has a depth of 59mm + 15mm = 74mm!

Now if they could create a very compact kit zoom too (retracting into the body?), they might have a real winner!

edit: And if you mount the new Sony 50mm 1.8 on the NEX C-3 and the FA50/1.4 on the K01, the K01 will be only 1mm thicker (so it will be thinner than the NEX-7).

Thanks guys, thats the kind of information i wanted.

Its pointless to look at the body as an isolated subject, if one doesn't also consider the pros and cons of each decision affecting that body.

I think of the NEX as a revolutionary moment in camera design because of the insertion of a typical APS sensor in a compact body. But there have been numerous comments on the "popcan" look of some of the zooms attached to the body. Not that its necessarily a bad thing, but just a reminder its the combination of lens/body that matters. I think the relatively large size of the Sony compact zooms is the inclusion of optical IS in the zoom, something that the Pentax design eliminates by including the body SR.

I can wait till February to find out the whole story. I see the backward compatibility of this camera to be a very positive thing for my lenses, without having necessarily to start a whole new collection.

There's a lot of compact mirrorless cameras being bought now, but there's also starting to be an increased number of compact cameras being sold. My preference is to buy cameras for the longer term. Kudos to Pentax for putting a lot of thought into this camera.

[Winder]

CDAF is slow compared with PDAF on K5, and I'm not sure continous AF would work at all with CDAF on K-mount lenses designed for DSLR.

CDAF on Olympus E-P3 is really fast when used with the new glass, but that is the problem.... new glass. Pentax is designing this to work with old glass which means it will probably be slow.

The lenses and the AF system need to work together. My guess is the new lenses that Pentax is bringing out are designed to work with CDAF.

Will this new body support screw drive?

[gazonk]

CDAF on Olympus E-P3 is really fast when used with the new glass, but that is the problem.... new glass. Pentax is designing this to work with old glass which means it will probably be slow.

Could someone explain me why this is so? Why wouldn't it be possible to implement a sensor-based AF algorithm that is quite fast even with old lenses? Is it because the whole CDAF algorithm is based on tiny lens movements?

I somehow have the feeling that there are still good software solutions to be found here... (but then I'm a software designer and programmer myself )

[eddie1960]

da40 is already very small

can't picture it being smaller myself I think the DAL plastic route is what we will see with colours to match the bodies. hopefully they make it available separate from the body as well for those who don't ant mirrorless, but in reality it sounds like a nice smaller second body so i think many would still buy it and the lens (i might, though i imagine i can pick up a da40 for a lot less)

[mecrox]

CDAF on Olympus E-P3 is really fast when used with the new glass, but that is the problem.... new glass. Pentax is designing this to work with old glass which means it will probably be slow.

The lenses and the AF system need to work together. My guess is the new lenses that Pentax is bringing out are designed to work with CDAF.

Will this new body support screw drive?

If what you say is true then am I right in thinking the implication is that you will need to buy new lenses to get the best from the Pentax camera? In which case, if new lenses are needed anyway, why keep the K-mount at all rather than take the opportunity, which may well have to come eventually, of replacing it? Hmmn ... if the new body does not support screw drive then the whole thing really will be odd. But I guess the present specs, only a rumour anyway, aren't enough to go on. Wait and see.

[Rondec]

Thanks guys, thats the kind of information i wanted.

Its pointless to look at the body as an isolated subject, if one doesn't also consider the pros and cons of each decision affecting that body.

I think of the NEX as a revolutionary moment in camera design because of the insertion of a typical APS sensor in a compact body. But there have been numerous comments on the "popcan" look of some of the zooms attached to the body. Not that its necessarily a bad thing, but just a reminder its the combination of lens/body that matters. I think the relatively large size of the Sony compact zooms is the inclusion of optical IS in the zoom, something that the Pentax design eliminates by including the body SR.

I can wait till February to find out the whole story. I see the backward compatibility of this camera to be a very positive thing for my lenses, without having necessarily to start a whole new collection.

There's a lot of compact mirrorless cameras being bought now, but there's also starting to be an increased number of compact cameras being sold. My preference is to buy cameras for the longer term. Kudos to Pentax for putting a lot of thought into this camera.

I think the key is that Pentax has already existent small, excellent primes that will work well with this type of body (assuming that the body has a motor, which I think it will). Sony's only smallish lens is the 16mm, which isn't particularly great. Using these cameras with super zooms like 18-135 or 18-250 makes absolutely no sense and kills their ergonomics completely.

[fikkser]

Why quibble over 15mm?

Not everyone likes miniature. Many like full size cameras and dogs!

+1

We don't want a Pentax to beParis Hiltons accessory.

I think that maybe Pentax knows what the they are doing... If they wanted to make it thin they would have. I mean there's probably a reason for why they made it as it is. If you like thin cameras get one of the infinite mirrorless offers from what ever brand!

[eddie1960]

I think the key is that Pentax has already existent small, excellent primes that will work well with this type of body (assuming that the body has a motor, which I think it will). Sony's only smallish lens is the 16mm, which isn't particularly great. Using these cameras with super zooms like 18-135 or 18-250 makes absolutely no sense and kills their ergonomics completely.

On a nex an 85 will look monstrously large and the ergonomics of that thin body will go to h*ll. on this body it will still be comfortable to use. I think how well this does depends a little on pricing. i think if it is going to become the entry it needs to be less than $600 with the kit lens with the logical next step being a DSLR for $800 . If it comes in at $800 the m43/Nex will still kill it at the entry level where there is the biggest volume (it's not what most of us buy but it is what the market does)

[Parallax]

We don't want a Pentax to beParis Hiltons accessory.

No, but she could give a whole new twist to blowing dust off of the sensor.

[ogl]

the new lenses won't work on the old bodies, the mirror would hit the rear elements of the lenses, but old lenses could be used on the new k-01...

some info...truth or not...I don't know

[ogl]

can't picture it being smaller myself I think the DAL plastic route is what we will see with colours to match the bodies. hopefully they make it available separate from the body as well for those who don't ant mirrorless, but in reality it sounds like a nice smaller second body so i think many would still buy it and the lens (i might, though i imagine i can pick up a da40 for a lot less)

XS are lenses ONLY for mirrorless camera with better possibilities for video mode and better speed. IMO

[PentaxRev]

This looks really promising. The future of Pentax looks good. Time will tell if reality lives up to the promise.

[ogl]

If K-01 will have Pentax Optio RZ10/Ricoh G700 like design - what do you think?

[eddie1960]

i had to go look at the optios on Pentax' site. If it resembles an optio my guess isi the one it resembles is the RZ-10


Edit, now I looked at the G700. given the rumour of a rugged looking camera at CES it would fir the description (looking Rugged and being rugged are of course 2 different things )


now if you combine the rugged grip of the ricoh with the optio look i think it may be a good representation