the pics of K-01

Rupert · 02-01-2012, 09:02 PM

Looks do matter....this is good looking....that is not.

[IMG]

[/IMG]

Regards!

johnmflores · 02-01-2012, 09:03 PM

Originally posted by Rupert

Looks do matter....this is good looking....that is not.

[/url] [/IMG]

Regards!

That camera does nothing for me. It says, "old man"

sjwaldron · 02-01-2012, 09:08 PM

I think buttons and dials are a good thing. I also don't think the K-01 will be lacking in that department for its size. Each button means one less expedition into the menu.

hcarvalhoalves · 02-01-2012, 09:10 PM

Originally posted by Rupert

Looks do matter....this is good looking....that is not.

[/url] [/IMG]

Regards!

Yeah, I dig classics too. Problem is that I couldn't care less for rangefinder.

rr1736 · 02-01-2012, 09:15 PM

Ugly will be determined by price and how well it functions. Most camera are not object of art but slaves of functionality.
I dont want a small pocket camera that why I use a DSLR my K-5 which I have used for the past year is great. If this camera is an equal and uses the sames lenses then I will buy it. The idea of mirrorless is to remove parts and have a camera which will functions trouble free longer. The size of the camera is not critical to me.
I do believe that a EVF is essential. My 7 year old grandchild wants a camera with a view finder becausea screen are hard to see in sunlight.

Paul Ewins · 02-01-2012, 09:18 PM

To be honest there are very few cameras that I would actually call pretty. Almost all of them adhere to "form follows function" and while some are definitely more ungainly than others there are very few that I would want to own based on the looks alone. The Fuji is just another rangefinder - no better or worse than the rest of that breed. So long as the K-01 performs well ergonomically (the other part of a designer's job) the only aesthetic concerns should be with the output from the camera. Of course, since all we have at the moment is photos of the camera that is all we can comment on, but the appearance of the camera should be the last thing we worry about.

bossa · 02-01-2012, 09:21 PM

Originally posted by hcarvalhoalves

Everybody is saying it's ugly - I don't get it. Ugly in my book is this:

It's bulky, it's heavy and it's full of buttons. The K-01 seems the opposite: it's compact, seems to afford (fit) really well in the hands and the button layout makes sense. Besides, it's remarkable, doesn't look like all cameras in the market, which is probably what the designer aimed for.

By the texture and weight, it seems to be alloy. Hope it's WR, that would be killer.

Now, what I don't get is: no viewfinder? There wasn't a full photo of the backside yet, but if it's LCD only... boy, will be a huge letdown.

Yes, that's a Borg implant though and they're allowed to be fugly.

yusuf · 02-01-2012, 09:27 PM

Originally posted by hcarvalhoalves

Now, what I don't get is: no viewfinder? There wasn't a full photo of the backside yet, but if it's LCD only... boy, will be a huge letdown.

Agree, I am sure they would have thought about the fact that such a relatively big camera will be difficult to handle without viewfinder. If no VF, there is something else. Just a few more hours of wait & lets see what Pentax has for us.

rr1736 · 02-01-2012, 09:35 PM - **1 Like**

Yes the Fuji range finder looking camera are attractive and if I only wanted to impress people they might be what I would want, heck I would owne a Leica, but I want to take pictures. I want to take pictures with a camera that works well and uses my current lenses looks are not that important.

K1D27H · 02-01-2012, 09:37 PM

Originally posted by Rupert

Looks do matter....this is good looking....that is not.

[/url] [/IMG]

Regards!

It looks okay, handling is good. But manual focus is bad, only a bit better than X100 (I own one). And the white orbs problem kinda kills my want for it.

stevebrot · 02-01-2012, 09:41 PM

Originally posted by hcarvalhoalves

Yeah, I dig classics too. Problem is that I couldn't care less for rangefinder.

Ummm...in case anybody cares to notice, the Fuji in the photo is not a rangefinder camera. The lack of a rangefinder window is the first clue. Leica is the only current maker of digital rangefinder cameras.

The Fuji does, however, have a hybrid optical viewfinder similar to the optical bright frameline finders found on most (not all) rangefinder cameras. I consider that to be a huge plus point in favor of something like the Fuji. Through-the-lens framing is not necessarily the best option for many types of shooting. I own several rangefinder film cameras and can truthfully say that I don't miss the SLR view of things when shooting with any of them. It is sort of liberating to not see your subject confined to the flat frame. Two of my RF cams have 1:1 finders and it is very cool to shoot both eyes open.

Steve

(...has also been known to use the "sport finder" on a TLR...never uses the lcd panel on the Canon G2 either...)

magkelly · 02-01-2012, 09:44 PM

Even when I don't particularly like a type of camera if a camera has a nice design I'll say so. It's the same with cars. I don't have to like a particular style of car, want to actually drive it, to appreciate a certain design. But there are pretty cars, there are unremarkable cars and there are flat out FUGLY cars. This camera may have some nice innards but it's outer design is a bit nasty. It looks like a dollar store clone toy. I was expecting something sleek, shiny, cute if not my personal thing, but that's just NOT what I'd call pretty and no amount of functionality will be able to change that. People who buy these little cameras they buy them for what they can do, but they also very much buy them because of what they look like. They're essentially neat tech toys, something to use, but also to show off. Who would want to show that off, seriously? I'd be far more inclined to hide it away when I wasn't using it than to let someone else actually see it.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 02-01-2012, 09:46 PM

Originally posted by stevebrot

I consider that to be a huge plus point in favor of something like the Fuji.

It's the only thing worrying me about the Fuji cameras. I understand your point about the wider FOV, but I'm concerned about how the hybrid design gives you an average OVF combined with an average EVF. Do you have any experience with the X100 or X10 - how good is the EVF part on those models compared to something like a NEX5N or NEX7?

m8o · 02-01-2012, 09:50 PM

In reply to magkelly et al w/the same sentiment (me included) ... that large black "washer" over the lens as the built-in hood is really not helping matters and I'd go so far as saying it factors largely into the unattractiveness. I bet you put an old Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4 or f1/1.2 on it and it'll greatly change the character of the package and won't look all that bad...

Azimuth · 02-01-2012, 09:52 PM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

Do you have any experience with the X100 or X10 - how good is the EVF part on those models compared to something like a NEX5N or NEX7?

I'm an X100 user but can't really comment on the NEX cameras. The EVF on the X100 is really nice to use in my opinion.

I would be perfectly happy without the OVF, but a viewfinder is essential for a mirrorless camera to succeed with enthusiasts. I think Fuji has proved that.

I'm sad about the K-01 lacking a viewfinder but I'm still hopeful that something special may yet be revealed.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Is it just me or does the K-x take better pics than the K-r?	vapentaxuser	Pentax DSLR Discussion	31	10-25-2012 05:38 PM
Misc A few various pics	shaun2k	Post Your Photos!	15	02-16-2010 06:23 AM
Question Attached pics vs External link pics	cbaytan	Site Suggestions and Help	15	12-27-2009 06:19 PM
Fun to take pics with a kit lens again (Beware lots of pics)	dsport	Post Your Photos!	16	11-19-2008 06:56 AM
Pics in a park by K20D+DA*50-135mm (Many PICS)	dsport	Post Your Photos!	2	10-18-2008 10:51 PM

02-01-2012, 09:02 PM	#136
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Looks do matter....this is good looking....that is not. [IMG] [/IMG] Regards!

02-01-2012, 09:03 PM	#137
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by Rupert Looks do matter....this is good looking....that is not. [/url] [/IMG] Regards! That camera does nothing for me. It says, "old man"

02-01-2012, 09:08 PM	#138
sjwaldron Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,235	I think buttons and dials are a good thing. I also don't think the K-01 will be lacking in that department for its size. Each button means one less expedition into the menu.

02-01-2012, 09:10 PM	#139
hcarvalhoalves Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: São Paulo, Brazil Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,019	Originally posted by Rupert Looks do matter....this is good looking....that is not. [/url] [/IMG] Regards! Yeah, I dig classics too. Problem is that I couldn't care less for rangefinder.

02-01-2012, 09:15 PM	#140
rr1736 Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Chicago Illinois Photos: Albums Posts: 203	Ugly will be determined by price and how well it functions. Most camera are not object of art but slaves of functionality. I dont want a small pocket camera that why I use a DSLR my K-5 which I have used for the past year is great. If this camera is an equal and uses the sames lenses then I will buy it. The idea of mirrorless is to remove parts and have a camera which will functions trouble free longer. The size of the camera is not critical to me. I do believe that a EVF is essential. My 7 year old grandchild wants a camera with a view finder becausea screen are hard to see in sunlight.

02-01-2012, 09:18 PM	#141
Paul Ewins Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Melbourne, Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 274	To be honest there are very few cameras that I would actually call pretty. Almost all of them adhere to "form follows function" and while some are definitely more ungainly than others there are very few that I would want to own based on the looks alone. The Fuji is just another rangefinder - no better or worse than the rest of that breed. So long as the K-01 performs well ergonomically (the other part of a designer's job) the only aesthetic concerns should be with the output from the camera. Of course, since all we have at the moment is photos of the camera that is all we can comment on, but the appearance of the camera should be the last thing we worry about.

02-01-2012, 09:21 PM	#142
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	Originally posted by hcarvalhoalves Everybody is saying it's ugly - I don't get it. Ugly in my book is this: It's bulky, it's heavy and it's full of buttons. The K-01 seems the opposite: it's compact, seems to afford (fit) really well in the hands and the button layout makes sense. Besides, it's remarkable, doesn't look like all cameras in the market, which is probably what the designer aimed for. By the texture and weight, it seems to be alloy. Hope it's WR, that would be killer. Now, what I don't get is: no viewfinder? There wasn't a full photo of the backside yet, but if it's LCD only... boy, will be a huge letdown. Yes, that's a Borg implant though and they're allowed to be fugly.

02-01-2012, 09:27 PM	#143
yusuf Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Palo Alto, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,497	Originally posted by hcarvalhoalves Now, what I don't get is: no viewfinder? There wasn't a full photo of the backside yet, but if it's LCD only... boy, will be a huge letdown. Agree, I am sure they would have thought about the fact that such a relatively big camera will be difficult to handle without viewfinder. If no VF, there is something else. Just a few more hours of wait & lets see what Pentax has for us.

02-01-2012, 09:35 PM - 1 Like	#144
rr1736 Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Chicago Illinois Photos: Albums Posts: 203	Yes the Fuji range finder looking camera are attractive and if I only wanted to impress people they might be what I would want, heck I would owne a Leica, but I want to take pictures. I want to take pictures with a camera that works well and uses my current lenses looks are not that important.

02-01-2012, 09:37 PM	#145
K1D27H Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Nakhon Pathom, Thailand Photos: Gallery Posts: 109	Originally posted by Rupert Looks do matter....this is good looking....that is not. [/url] [/IMG] Regards! It looks okay, handling is good. But manual focus is bad, only a bit better than X100 (I own one). And the white orbs problem kinda kills my want for it.

02-01-2012, 09:41 PM	#146
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by hcarvalhoalves Yeah, I dig classics too. Problem is that I couldn't care less for rangefinder. Ummm...in case anybody cares to notice, the Fuji in the photo is not a rangefinder camera. The lack of a rangefinder window is the first clue. Leica is the only current maker of digital rangefinder cameras. The Fuji does, however, have a hybrid optical viewfinder similar to the optical bright frameline finders found on most (not all) rangefinder cameras. I consider that to be a huge plus point in favor of something like the Fuji. Through-the-lens framing is not necessarily the best option for many types of shooting. I own several rangefinder film cameras and can truthfully say that I don't miss the SLR view of things when shooting with any of them. It is sort of liberating to not see your subject confined to the flat frame. Two of my RF cams have 1:1 finders and it is very cool to shoot both eyes open. Steve (...has also been known to use the "sport finder" on a TLR...never uses the lcd panel on the Canon G2 either...)

02-01-2012, 09:44 PM	#147
magkelly Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,901	Even when I don't particularly like a type of camera if a camera has a nice design I'll say so. It's the same with cars. I don't have to like a particular style of car, want to actually drive it, to appreciate a certain design. But there are pretty cars, there are unremarkable cars and there are flat out FUGLY cars. This camera may have some nice innards but it's outer design is a bit nasty. It looks like a dollar store clone toy. I was expecting something sleek, shiny, cute if not my personal thing, but that's just NOT what I'd call pretty and no amount of functionality will be able to change that. People who buy these little cameras they buy them for what they can do, but they also very much buy them because of what they look like. They're essentially neat tech toys, something to use, but also to show off. Who would want to show that off, seriously? I'd be far more inclined to hide it away when I wasn't using it than to let someone else actually see it.

02-01-2012, 09:46 PM	#148
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by stevebrot I consider that to be a huge plus point in favor of something like the Fuji. It's the only thing worrying me about the Fuji cameras. I understand your point about the wider FOV, but I'm concerned about how the hybrid design gives you an average OVF combined with an average EVF. Do you have any experience with the X100 or X10 - how good is the EVF part on those models compared to something like a NEX5N or NEX7?

02-01-2012, 09:50 PM	#149
m8o Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI] Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,092	In reply to magkelly et al w/the same sentiment (me included) ... that large black "washer" over the lens as the built-in hood is really not helping matters and I'd go so far as saying it factors largely into the unattractiveness. I bet you put an old Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4 or f1/1.2 on it and it'll greatly change the character of the package and won't look all that bad...

02-01-2012, 09:52 PM	#150
Azimuth Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 26	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Do you have any experience with the X100 or X10 - how good is the EVF part on those models compared to something like a NEX5N or NEX7? I'm an X100 user but can't really comment on the NEX cameras. The EVF on the X100 is really nice to use in my opinion. I would be perfectly happy without the OVF, but a viewfinder is essential for a mirrorless camera to succeed with enthusiasts. I think Fuji has proved that. I'm sad about the K-01 lacking a viewfinder but I'm still hopeful that something special may yet be revealed.