MX1 new Camera model

Caat · 01-08-2013, 01:33 AM

Originally posted by lytrytyr

I hate seeing the names of great Pentax SLRs like MX and LX being recycled on P&S cameras!

I think this is better described as an enthusiast compact rather than a P&S to be fair.

Although I do agree that classic DSLR names should remain the preserve of interchangeable lens cameras. K-1000 would perhaps have been a better to recycle.

Still, LX is still available to use on a classic-styled DSLR.

SonDa5 · 01-08-2013, 01:48 AM

This camera has zero chance to compete in its class. The Price will surely drop but I wouldn't waste money on sub par camera like this. Looks nice.

Sensor seems very weak.

Lurch · 01-08-2013, 01:52 AM

I dont think I'm the only one who wished the this and the K-01 could get together to create a 'K-5 sensored' MILC that looked like this MX-1
*sniff*

Fogel70 · 01-08-2013, 02:07 AM

Originally posted by SonDa5

This camera has zero chance to compete in its class. The Price will surely drop but I wouldn't waste money on sub par camera like this. Looks nice.

The majority of cameras in this class has the same size on the sensor as MX-1, so don't think it will do any worse than the other ones.

repaap · 01-08-2013, 02:17 AM

I think that we should first see how it does, before judge it to be a failure. I like this retro look. There is lot to like, and perhaps it draws new customers eye too.

Alizarine · 01-08-2013, 02:18 AM

Originally posted by SonDa5

This camera has zero chance to compete in its class.

Couldn't say that for a camera that hasn't even been released.

A lot of bashers also laughed at the K-01 due to its design; now, little by little, it's gaining recognition for its performance.

Originally posted by SonDa5

Sensor seems very weak.

Couldn't say that for the Q....

Re: Q with 06 lens versus 5DmkII with 70-200 IS II: Pentax Compact Camera Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

froeschle · 01-08-2013, 02:22 AM

Using the MX name for a compact camera (1/1.7", 28-112/8.4-11.7 FF equiv.) is a bit odd.
Additionally, the MX-1 seems to be an Olympus XZ-2 clone.
Probably, the XZ-2 and the MX-1 can be traced back to the same manufacturer.
Sanyo?
So, Pentax at least had to spend not so much in R&D.

Alizarine · 01-08-2013, 02:28 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by froeschle

So, Pentax at least had to spend not so much in R&D.

And if they can get more money from less costs, then that means more resources for the higher-end (e.g. ILC systems) products

Rather than making the same Optios (with exception to the WG series), this is a great move for Pentax-Ricoh.

pingflood · 01-08-2013, 03:01 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by sam-joseph

I still think this one would be better....

Apologies for crudeness of image.

Regards

Pentax fire Marc Newson and hire Dalí to design this one?

gazonk · 01-08-2013, 03:12 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

asaru: I too am not overjoyed by this reusing of old flagship designations, for cheap point&shoots.

Well, the already used the MX name for the weird MX 4

mecrox · 01-08-2013, 03:27 AM

The styling cues on the MX1 are interesting. If it is nearly the same camera as the Olympus XZ-2 under the skin, then on the surface it looks fairly different. Whereas the Oly is larger-looking, black, chunky and rather macho (angular lines, mini-grip with visible screw, etc.), the MX-1 looks slimmer, much more elegant and perhaps is aimed to bring more female users into the frame. The instant brassing idea is interesting, an element of Pentax home-market wabi sabi perhaps but also something more likely to appeal in countries which have never had a stock of old DSLRs to make this kind of thing familiar or desirable? So a canny mix of old and new with a lot of appeal to wealthy folks in newly industrialized countries in the mix too. Yes or no to VF or hotshoe is an irrelevance in this context. If those are requirements the salesman should steer you to a quite different cabinet of cameras. I hope the MX1 does very well and I am sure I would find it a pleasure to use even though, I imagine, a fair part of what we are being shown isn't really intended for buyers just in the West. I wonder if the femme fatale in the next Bond movie will be toting one of these. Perhaps the XZ-2 is in style more suitable for Odd Job.

Class A · 01-08-2013, 03:41 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

Not bad but another enthusiast P&S and nothing to write home about.

I concur.

AFAIC, the "retro" styling is only halfheartedly done which basically misses the boat. Either you create appeal by doing it right, or you just leave a "me too, but I don't know what this is really about" impression. At least it appears to be an improvement w.r.t. to the K-01's design (not that that was hard to achieve).

theperception2008 · 01-08-2013, 04:00 AM

Originally posted by Alizarine

Couldn't say that for a camera that hasn't even been released.

A lot of bashers also laughed at the K-01 due to its design; now, little by little, it's gaining recognition for its performance.

Couldn't say that for the Q....

Re: Q with 06 lens versus 5DmkII with 70-200 IS II: Pentax Compact Camera Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Wow that is a very interesting comparison! Pentax sure knows how to get maximum results out of the sensor! It's also the fact that cameras that usually use the 1/2.3 sensor have cheaply made lenses usually and do not have raw capabilities which can get more from the sensor and allows one to refine the image after the fact.

ogl · 01-08-2013, 04:48 AM

Originally posted by SonDa5

This camera has zero chance to compete in its class. The Price will surely drop but I wouldn't waste money on sub par camera like this. Looks nice.

Sensor seems very weak.

XZ-2 is better than X10. MUCH BETTER.

**Ash** · 01-08-2013, 04:59 AM

Apart from frank, who has actually been using this little compact camera and given it some good reports, has anyone else here tried the camera and seen what it can do?
If so, give us your thoughts.
Otherwise, all the naysaying has zero value.

The camera looks pretty good to me. The 'retro' look is no workup of the OM-D - it is hardly in any similar class to be compared with it. This camera is a digital redo of the MX, only it's not an ILC. Pentax already has the Q. This one will be a novel and small compact for the discerning point & shooter to sink their teeth into. Although I personally have little interest in this camera and won't be buying it, I think it's a great idea.

01-08-2013, 04:48 AM	#194
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by SonDa5 This camera has zero chance to compete in its class. The Price will surely drop but I wouldn't waste money on sub par camera like this. Looks nice. Sensor seems very weak. XZ-2 is better than X10. MUCH BETTER. Last edited by ogl; 01-08-2013 at 05:20 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
645D being discontinued - for new model?	interested_observer	Pentax Medium Format	9	09-28-2012 11:35 AM
Help, where do I get the camera model signature images?	BirdDude007	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	2	05-24-2012 04:03 PM
K20D or another model (new to Pentax)?	TheGreatGonzo	Pentax DSLR Discussion	13	03-27-2012 09:17 AM
645 Film camera. Which model?	Joburger	Pentax Medium Format	26	04-06-2011 03:54 PM
Camera Kings Import model?	ncrecordkeeper	Pentax DSLR Discussion	3	02-16-2010 03:32 PM

01-08-2013, 01:33 AM	#181
Caat Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: United Kingdom Photos: Albums Posts: 927	Originally posted by lytrytyr I hate seeing the names of great Pentax SLRs like MX and LX being recycled on P&S cameras! I think this is better described as an enthusiast compact rather than a P&S to be fair. Although I do agree that classic DSLR names should remain the preserve of interchangeable lens cameras. K-1000 would perhaps have been a better to recycle. Still, LX is still available to use on a classic-styled DSLR.

01-08-2013, 01:48 AM	#182
SonDa5 Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 70	This camera has zero chance to compete in its class. The Price will surely drop but I wouldn't waste money on sub par camera like this. Looks nice. Sensor seems very weak.

01-08-2013, 01:52 AM	#183
Lurch Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Canberra, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 582	I dont think I'm the only one who wished the this and the K-01 could get together to create a 'K-5 sensored' MILC that looked like this MX-1 sniff

01-08-2013, 02:07 AM	#184
Fogel70 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Photos: Albums Posts: 3,062	Originally posted by SonDa5 This camera has zero chance to compete in its class. The Price will surely drop but I wouldn't waste money on sub par camera like this. Looks nice. The majority of cameras in this class has the same size on the sensor as MX-1, so don't think it will do any worse than the other ones.

01-08-2013, 02:17 AM	#185
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	I think that we should first see how it does, before judge it to be a failure. I like this retro look. There is lot to like, and perhaps it draws new customers eye too.

01-08-2013, 02:18 AM	#186
Alizarine Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Manila Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,185	Originally posted by SonDa5 This camera has zero chance to compete in its class. Couldn't say that for a camera that hasn't even been released. A lot of bashers also laughed at the K-01 due to its design; now, little by little, it's gaining recognition for its performance. Originally posted by SonDa5 Sensor seems very weak. Couldn't say that for the Q.... Re: Q with 06 lens versus 5DmkII with 70-200 IS II: Pentax Compact Camera Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

01-08-2013, 02:22 AM	#187
froeschle Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 552	Using the MX name for a compact camera (1/1.7", 28-112/8.4-11.7 FF equiv.) is a bit odd. Additionally, the MX-1 seems to be an Olympus XZ-2 clone. Probably, the XZ-2 and the MX-1 can be traced back to the same manufacturer. Sanyo? So, Pentax at least had to spend not so much in R&D.

01-08-2013, 02:28 AM - 1 Like	#188
Alizarine Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Manila Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,185	Originally posted by froeschle So, Pentax at least had to spend not so much in R&D. And if they can get more money from less costs, then that means more resources for the higher-end (e.g. ILC systems) products Rather than making the same Optios (with exception to the WG series), this is a great move for Pentax-Ricoh.

01-08-2013, 03:01 AM - 1 Like	#189
pingflood Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Borås, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,169	Originally posted by sam-joseph I still think this one would be better.... Apologies for crudeness of image. Regards Pentax fire Marc Newson and hire Dalí to design this one?

01-08-2013, 03:12 AM	#190
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by Kunzite asaru: I too am not overjoyed by this reusing of old flagship designations, for cheap point&shoots. Well, the already used the MX name for the weird MX 4

01-08-2013, 03:27 AM	#191
mecrox Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Oxford, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,375	The styling cues on the MX1 are interesting. If it is nearly the same camera as the Olympus XZ-2 under the skin, then on the surface it looks fairly different. Whereas the Oly is larger-looking, black, chunky and rather macho (angular lines, mini-grip with visible screw, etc.), the MX-1 looks slimmer, much more elegant and perhaps is aimed to bring more female users into the frame. The instant brassing idea is interesting, an element of Pentax home-market wabi sabi perhaps but also something more likely to appeal in countries which have never had a stock of old DSLRs to make this kind of thing familiar or desirable? So a canny mix of old and new with a lot of appeal to wealthy folks in newly industrialized countries in the mix too. Yes or no to VF or hotshoe is an irrelevance in this context. If those are requirements the salesman should steer you to a quite different cabinet of cameras. I hope the MX1 does very well and I am sure I would find it a pleasure to use even though, I imagine, a fair part of what we are being shown isn't really intended for buyers just in the West. I wonder if the femme fatale in the next Bond movie will be toting one of these. Perhaps the XZ-2 is in style more suitable for Odd Job.

01-08-2013, 03:41 AM	#192
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by falconeye Not bad but another enthusiast P&S and nothing to write home about. I concur. AFAIC, the "retro" styling is only halfheartedly done which basically misses the boat. Either you create appeal by doing it right, or you just leave a "me too, but I don't know what this is really about" impression. At least it appears to be an improvement w.r.t. to the K-01's design (not that that was hard to achieve).

01-08-2013, 04:00 AM	#193
theperception2008 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Łódź, Poland and Riverside, California, U.S.A Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 488	Originally posted by Alizarine Couldn't say that for a camera that hasn't even been released. A lot of bashers also laughed at the K-01 due to its design; now, little by little, it's gaining recognition for its performance. Couldn't say that for the Q.... Re: Q with 06 lens versus 5DmkII with 70-200 IS II: Pentax Compact Camera Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Wow that is a very interesting comparison! Pentax sure knows how to get maximum results out of the sensor! It's also the fact that cameras that usually use the 1/2.3 sensor have cheaply made lenses usually and do not have raw capabilities which can get more from the sensor and allows one to refine the image after the fact.

01-08-2013, 04:59 AM	#195
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Apart from frank, who has actually been using this little compact camera and given it some good reports, has anyone else here tried the camera and seen what it can do? If so, give us your thoughts. Otherwise, all the naysaying has zero value. The camera looks pretty good to me. The 'retro' look is no workup of the OM-D - it is hardly in any similar class to be compared with it. This camera is a digital redo of the MX, only it's not an ILC. Pentax already has the Q. This one will be a novel and small compact for the discerning point & shooter to sink their teeth into. Although I personally have little interest in this camera and won't be buying it, I think it's a great idea.