[befocus]

But what would be the point, besides adding unneeded complexity?
The camera would be much bigger. The lens would be able to focus anyway. All those precision mechanisms would be expensive, and require calibration. The distance scale on the lenses would become useless. Some lenses won't work as they were designed to (e.g. FREE).
Sorry, I can only think of reasons not to do it.

Pentax got in-body stabilization insted of in-lens like some other brands, it require precision mechanisms, calibration, but it's a nice feature.
A built-in autofocus system shifting the sensor position would be great if it would be fast enough.

You can af with a mf lens, and all the new lenses can be designed to have a fixed design
You pay more for the body initially, but get cheaper lenses and can adapt everything keeping the AF

[Gimbal]

Hm, a rubber brick with a rubber lens. From the sound of this I think I will spend my money on something else...

[Asahiflex]

Hm, a rubber brick with a rubber lens. From the sound of this I think I will spend my money on something else...

It should be a big plus that the combination easily bounces back when dropped.

[eddie1960]

Few more Pentax K-01 details | Photo Rumors

The camera is designed by a famous designer
The new 40mm f/2.8 pancake lens is less than 1 centimeter thick and my understanding is that it will work only with the new K-01 body
The Pentax K-01 and the 40mm lens are covered with some kind of rubber-like material for better grip
The K-01 will have an external mic output for video recording

1 CM!!!! Extra small it is then
(that's what 4/10 of an inch for those of us who still think imperial and convert )
my guess is the camera measurement leaked for depth with this lens won't be any deeper since a grip on the side probably stick out more
how deep is a m 4/3 with a 20mm lens attached

[Chex]

Covered in rubber.. so is this Ricoh hoping that Pentax can bounce back after the Q?

[falconeye]

A built-in autofocus system shifting the sensor position would be great if it would be fast enough.

This idea is a recurring theme which is why I thought I should explain why it is unfeasible.

1. An AF would have to travel by more than the registration distance allows, and in the wrong direction. E.g., a DFA100WR would have to be shifted 200,000μm!

2. The shifting precision needs to be 30μm or better. Feasible but not very cheap.

3. Many lenses are poor performers if only the focal plane is shifted. They use relative shifting of a few internal lens elements for better performance which is a special case of internal focussing (IF).

4. AF performance would be affected negatively because larger masses need be accelerated as soon as the lens rather than the sensor needs to be shifted due to the limited space in the body.


So, forget sbout this idea sooner than later.


Nevertheless, part of the idea is useful actually: to fine adjust focus during the very last steps of contrast AF. This may be done faster and more accurately using sensor shift than using the focus motor.

[kent]

People , Y U NO clever?
seriously, what's wrong with rubber like material? Does it affect ISO performance? Does it affect menu speed, external controls and burst mode? If not, please STFU. I am tired of reading that total spam about how you hate pentax new camera which is even only rumoured and no one knows if these rumours are worth a penny. If you are so unhappy, so unlucky with pentax, go and sell everything and buy Canikon like the rest of the world.

[Docrwm]

I'm not sure what could be a good solution for Pentax.
There is a lot of good offers conserning mirrorless bodies, so why should some one buy a new kind of body with same features as existing bodies already have.
I bought today an already discontinued Olympus E-PL1 kit with only 199€.
Also today Tamron and Tokina have made an agreement to support m3/4 system, so I believe my cheap investment will not be bad at all.
Pentax must do something which is really astonishing before they can be interested enough for a wide range of photographers.

Nice deal. I just saw the E-PL1 with two lens kit on sale for $379. Still too small for my tastes and hands but it felt well made. The 2nd lens usually sells for around $200 by itself. Not sure what that gets you though as I can't seem to find anyone selling an E-PL3 body only.

[JinDesu]

1 CM!!!! Extra small it is then
(that's what 4/10 of an inch for those of us who still think imperial and convert )
my guess is the camera measurement leaked for depth with this lens won't be any deeper since a grip on the side probably stick out more
how deep is a m 4/3 with a 20mm lens attached

Going from 3cm to 1.5cm to less than 1cm... gives a new definition to pancake!

[audiobomber]

People , Y U NO clever?
seriously, what's wrong with rubber like material? Does it affect ISO performance? Does it affect menu speed, external controls and burst mode? If not, please STFU. I am tired of reading that total spam about how you hate pentax new camera which is even only rumoured and no one knows if these rumours are worth a penny. If you are so unhappy, so unlucky with pentax, go and sell everything and buy Canikon like the rest of the world.

I agree with everything above, but unfortunately there will be lots pissing and moaning when the new camera is announced, because it can't possibly satisfy everyone's list. It is annoying to hear that someone is leaving based on a rumour though.

[konraDarnok]

This idea is a recurring theme which is why I thought I should explain why it is unfeasible.

It's already been implemented in the Contax AX? And that was before digital.

1. An AF would have to travel by more than the registration distance allows, and in the wrong direction. E.g., a DFA100WR would have to be shifted 200,000μm!

You'd have to set a focus range first -- like using the 1.7x telecoverter. 5cm should be enough to focus most lenses with ease I'd think.

2. The shifting precision needs to be 30μm or better. Feasible but not very cheap.

Why would it need to be any more precise than the current focus system?

3. Many lenses are poor performers if only the focal plane is shifted. They use relative shifting of a few internal lens elements for better performance which is a special case of internal focussing (IF)

I could certain see how it would less than ideal for some types of lenses -- but a new system would come with its own optimized lenses.

4. AF performance would be affected negatively because larger masses need be accelerated as soon as the lens rather than the sensor needs to be shifted due to the limited space in the body.

You don't think a sensor assembly would weight a whole lot less than hunks of glass?

[eurostar]

Probably most of the lens is recessed inside the camera. Only a very narrow focus ring protrudes outside the camera. If they would leave the focus to AF only, they could do lenses that doesn't protrude outside the body at all.

[bobmaxja]

The use of rubber( really thermoplastic elastomer ) is in design call soft touch. Also one big advantage is you can colored any color you want. This material is translucent naturally . I just imagine geepint it translucent and you can see the frame!!
This seem more and more targeted at trendsetter not user of traditional DSLR. That why they give the mandate to a designer outside Japan

THis look like is trully the replacement of the K-R. By making a complete change in the model or from , that could explain also why production line stop earlier for retooling for that new line

[konraDarnok]

what's wrong with rubber like material?

I dunno, about a quarter of the K-5 has is already covered in rubber.

[fstdslrkx]

Ha. So the rumor about rugged-looking camera was true. As far as i see it, rubber like coating actually adds protection to camera so it is a plus and not a minus. Unless it is 6cm-deep rubber brick, of course.