[anthony mazzeri]

Finally got time to put up some photos taken by this little beauty, you guys might wanna take a look here:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-compact-digital-film-cameras/21172...-1-camera.html

Great pics. Interesting EXIF:

Make: PENTAX RICOH IMAGING
Model: RICOH MX-1

It's a pre-release model, as you say, so maybe they'll change that.

[Mike Cash]

Pentax really hasn't offered a serious P&S camera other than the WG series waterproof models. Everything was a "me too" camera and probably outsourced. This looks like a good addition to the camera lineup. I'm looking at small camera options by spring when I roll the Motorcycle out of the garage and this is one more option to look at if it's available by then.

This strikes me as very much a "me too" (and sadly, a "not quite") of the Fujifilm X10. Except the X10 has a hotshoe, an optical viewfinder as well as an LCD, and zooming on the lens barrel rather than by an annoying switch around the shutter button. The new upgraded X20 is going to have focus and exposure information viewable in the optical viewfinder. Price? About the same as this new offering from Pentax.

I also wanted something compact to take with me on my motorcycle, and I wanted to be able to do off-camera flash as well. The X10 having a hot shoe made that possible. A travel tripod, a gorillapod, an old AF200T flash, triggers, and a collapsible 5-way reflector diffuser combine to make a remarkably compact and motorcycle-friendly kit:

All
Fujifilm X10
Pentax AF200T

The MX-1 lacking a hot shoe, or even a PC port from what I can tell, severely limits the usefulness of the camera. I don't mind a few compromises when I choose compactness and convenience, but that doesn't mean I want a camera as crippled as this thing is. Splendid idea, poorly executed.

[Ash]

What makes the MX-1 a 'me too' camera at all? It seems to me to be a digital MX - but only it's a P&S camera - no more. And it wasn't intended for more. So the target market is unlikely one that will look for more than simple flash. If a photographer wanted more for flash work, they wouldn't be going for the MX-1 in the first place. Perhaps it is that we, as a bunch of enthusiasts, have higher expectations for P&S cameras and as such want there to be high-end camera capability in lower end models? Although this may be considered a high-end P&S, there's no doubt the RRP (and street value) will be considerably less than the release price in the not too distant future.

[Mike Cash]

Frankly I was hoping that a Pentax digital camera with the letters MX, especially in that magic outline, would have slightly different specs. To wit:

Full-frame sensor.
TTL optical viewfinder.
K-mount.
A shutter-speed dial.
Flash hotshoe.
Self-timer/DOF preview combo lever.

Yes, the rest of the octagonal case, the brass and all that is nice. But on balance this leaves me cold, if not uncomfortable.

Maybe I'm just stoopid, but how could it have a through-the-lens optical viewfinder without being an SLR?

[IchabodCrane]

This strikes me as very much a "me too" (and sadly, a "not quite") of the Fujifilm X10. Except the X10 has a hotshoe, an optical viewfinder as well as an LCD, and zooming on the lens barrel rather than by an annoying switch around the shutter button. The new upgraded X20 is going to have focus and exposure information viewable in the optical viewfinder. Price? About the same as this new offering from Pentax.

I also wanted something compact to take with me on my motorcycle, and I wanted to be able to do off-camera flash as well. The X10 having a hot shoe made that possible. A travel tripod, a gorillapod, an old AF200T flash, triggers, and a collapsible 5-way reflector diffuser combine to make a remarkably compact and motorcycle-friendly kit:

All
Fujifilm X10
Pentax AF200T

The MX-1 lacking a hot shoe, or even a PC port from what I can tell, severely limits the usefulness of the camera. I don't mind a few compromises when I choose compactness and convenience, but that doesn't mean I want a camera as crippled as this thing is. Splendid idea, poorly executed.

Here's my take on the MX-1:

1) Pentax believes it's strongest market for the MX-1 will be current Pentax DSLR owners looking for a small camera.
2) Pentax determined that advanced P&S camera owners rarely, if ever, utilized the hot shoe (only my guess) and so decided it's a waste of most people's money to include it.
3) Pentax doesn't have a bolt-on EVF so why include an accessory port?

Here are the two selling features of the MX-1 as I see it, besides styling which is always subjective:

1) The excellent menus system will make any current Pentax owner feel right at home. It's also probably better than Panasonic, Sony, and others for non-Pentax owners, too.
2) Arguably, Pentax have an IQ advantage over Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, and maybe Canon. Probably on par with Nikon and Olympus.

[ElJamoquio]

Maybe I'm just stoopid, but how could it have a through-the-lens optical viewfinder without being an SLR?

That was the point - a MX should be a (D)SLR.

[Ash]

That was the point - a MX should be a (D)SLR.

It's a P&S, aimed at customers looking for a fine CSC. There are dSLRs in the pipeline to whet our appetite soon.

[ElJamoquio]

It's a P&S, aimed at customers looking for a fine CSC. There are dSLRs in the pipeline to whet our appetite soon.

On the upset-ness scale, naming a P&S after a flagship SLR barely registers for me. I was explaining the (understandable) position of someone else.

[Mike Cash]

What makes the MX-1 a 'me too' camera at all? It seems to me to be a digital MX - but only it's a P&S camera - no more. And it wasn't intended for more. So the target market is unlikely one that will look for more than simple flash. If a photographer wanted more for flash work, they wouldn't be going for the MX-1 in the first place. Perhaps it is that we, as a bunch of enthusiasts, have higher expectations for P&S cameras and as such want there to be high-end camera capability in lower end models? Although this may be considered a high-end P&S, there's no doubt the RRP (and street value) will be considerably less than the release price in the not too distant future.

My comments were in the nature of a specific reply to reeftool rather than a general observation. We have in common that we are a bit more discerning than the general target audience of P&S cameras and we have a need for something both compact and capable for carrying around on our motorcycle outings. I want to retain some of the more advanced shooting options I get with a DSLR.....specifically the ability to use off-camera flash....while vastly reducing bulk. I also absolutely demand some sort of optical viewfinder. It is pure curmudgeounliness on my part, but no OVF = "no, thank you" in my book. I suppose someday I'll be tempted by some high-end EVF, but having my only option being to hold the camera out and look at an LCD screen? Ain't happening.

I realize I'm not the target market for this camera and that it is probably quite true that 99% of the people who use compact cameras don't give a hang about viewfinders or hot shoes. I hope Pentax sells a zillion of these things to them. I'm all in favor of everybody having whatever sort of camera appeals to them and suits their particular needs.

[Ash]

It is pure curmudgeounliness on my part, but no OVF = "no, thank you" in my book. I suppose someday I'll be tempted by some high-end EVF, but having my only option being to hold the camera out and look at an LCD screen? Ain't happening.

I've been debating this with others in this thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/general-photography-industry/211471-pros-cons-evf-ovf.html

I realize I'm not the target market for this camera and that it is probably quite true that 99% of the people who use compact cameras don't give a hang about viewfinders or hot shoes. I hope Pentax sells a zillion of these things to them. I'm all in favor of everybody having whatever sort of camera appeals to them and suits their particular needs.

+1
Much the same with me.

On the upset-ness scale, naming a P&S after a flagship SLR barely registers for me. I was explaining the (understandable) position of someone else.

Yep, +1 for me also.
But you gotta admit that the MX-1 looks pretty cool for any kind of camera (as well as being unique).

[reeftool]

I've seriously considered the Fuji X 10 also. One of the electronics stores in the area has them in stock and I came close to buying one. I'll probably still bring my K5 along on the bike but a small camera like the X10 will fit in my jacket pocket. It has the benefit of a real viewfinder too. This past year, my quick, handy camera was my Droid X2 cellphone and on a few occasions, it performed better than I expected. I would love to stay with Pentax and have also considered a Q. I'm planning a trip down to the city later this winter and will do the very dangerous trip to B&H (dangerous to my budget) where they should have all these cameras in stock and I can check them all out.

[Adam]

I was on the B&H facebook page earlier today, and they asked users what their favorite thing from CES was. I was surprised to see one person mention the MX-1, who said he liked it because of the brass plates.

So who knows, this camera might actually end up selling surprisingly-well in the mainstream market, even though Sony beats its specs and Olympus has one that's nearly identical to it.

[SonDa5]

I just feel like Pentax is holding back on innovation in terms of sensor technology and software technology. Its like Pentax is just trying to make money selling older cheaper sensors with cruddy software packaged in a wanabe hip and retro design. I really think Pentax has to step up to their roots and history in building cameras that are capable of taking amazing photos. Pentax needs new tech and substance instead of focusing on appearance. I really don't think Pentax is going to be able to compete with the competition.

[zosxavius]

As I already got ILC system, I will got with the smallest and cheapest one.

This might better show the difference in size.
Compact Camera Meter.

And as OMD use a 2 stops slower kit lens, it will not have much low light advantage over MX1.

True, but the OMD also has a 2 stop advantage (probably more) in high iso as well. They also make lenses for m4/3 that are faster. I'm just making the statement that size isn't everything. To some I guess it is.

[Ash]

Pentax don't seem like the kind of company that would have the resources or the specialist staff to create new sensors for in-house use. Sony is a big player in electronics and have a strong foundation in leading sensor technology. There's nothing wrong with relying on them to provide sensors for their cameras, but you would expect to leave third party buyers of your hardware to sign an agreement not to use the sensor until the manufacturer decides, so as to give themselves a chance to sell their own cameras with the sensor. So there would be a lag period that Pentax can't get around. But as long as their product sells, then at least it will not be a failure.