[Docrwm]

Why do people misuse the word "hate" like that? Stating a disinclination to purchase the product and stating the reasons why hardly equates to "hate".

Thank you. I was a vocal critic of both the K-01 and Pentax when it was introduced, but I didn't hate an inanimate object. I own one and have found my criticisms to be valid but at $300 - the cost of the XS lens it is a useful tool. I'm sure that the MX-1 will have its fans and its detractors but "hate"....

[GeneV]

Thank you. I was a vocal critic of both the K-01 and Pentax when it was introduced, but I didn't hate an inanimate object. I own one and have found my criticisms to be valid but at $300 - the cost of the XS lens it is a useful tool. I'm sure that the MX-1 will have its fans and its detractors but "hate"....

I wasn't a particularly vocal critic of the K-01, but wasn't a fan, either. At $300, it was a steal and it has been fun. I agree that the issues many had with the camera reading about it are in fact true in its use. If the price of the MX-1 drops down by the same ratio as the K-01 did, there will be a lot of folks (like me) who have their doubts, but would see it as a good buy.

I also don't understand the over-reaction to legitimate concerns. "Hate," really? I see very little criticism of the MX-1 with language I would call "hateful." As Mike pointed out, not being inclined to buy something is not "hating" it. Saying one would buy something if it had x feature is not hating it.

[IchabodCrane]

I wasn't a particularly vocal critic of the K-01, but wasn't a fan, either. At $300, it was a steal and it has been fun. I agree that the issues many had with the camera reading about it are in fact true in its use. If the price of the MX-1 drops down by the same ratio as the K-01 did, there will be a lot of folks (like me) who have their doubts, but would see it as a good buy.

I also don't understand the over-reaction to legitimate concerns. "Hate," really? I see very little criticism of the MX-1 with language I would call "hateful." As Mike pointed out, not being inclined to buy something is not "hating" it. Saying one would buy something if it had x feature is not hating it.

I doubt we'll see an effective price drop that resembles the one for the K-01 for a couple of reasons: the MSRP on the MX-1 is reasonable and the current K-01 street price reflects what is quite possibly a liquidation (not sure on that one -- maybe Pentax just wants to be overly aggressive with it).

The MX-1 probably settles in at the prevailing XZ-2 price minus $75 or something like that.

[GeneV]

I doubt we'll see an effective price drop that resembles the one for the K-01 for a couple of reasons: the MSRP on the MX-1 is reasonable and the current K-01 street price reflects what is quite possibly a liquidation (not sure on that one -- maybe Pentax just wants to be overly aggressive with it).

The MX-1 probably settles in at the prevailing XZ-2 price minus $75 or something like that.

I suppose it all depends upon how the MX-1 sells. I doubt that Pentax intended to sell the K-01 at this price.

[Docrwm]

I suppose it all depends upon how the MX-1 sells. I doubt that Pentax intended to sell the K-01 at this price.

Absolutely. They spent a fortune on a high profile designer, and priced the K-01 accordingly, only to find that it was a waste of their time and money in most ways. It did garner them some attention from the artsy crowd but, honestly, how many cameras did that sell? Based on the number of K-01s being liquidated through a vast array of sources, not many.

[GeneV]

Absolutely. They spent a fortune on a high profile designer, and priced the K-01 accordingly, only to find that it was a waste of their time and money in most ways. It did garner them some attention from the artsy crowd but, honestly, how many cameras did that sell? Based on the number of K-01s being liquidated through a vast array of sources, not many.

True. The world economy probably did not help in selling a product at a designer premium, either.

However to the point Mike was making, a product I doubt I would buy a product that I "hated" even if it were on sale.

[mrNewt]

What I find funny is that people that "hated it" and got it (the K-01), they always find their reasoning in this similar line: " ... at this price it was a steal ...".

That to me shows that they understand the true value of the camera and they know damn well it should be more than the current price .
If you truly hated it, you won't buy it no matter what price will be at ... I know I wouldn't either.

[mecrox]

I rather like the MX-1 and am not worried about "missing" things since on a camera like this I doubt I would ever use them. I'd guess it will sell on price and clever marketing, neither of which have landed yet (beyond the manufacturer's recommends which I imagine are a topmost benchmark). And the MX-1 may make more sense looking back in 6-9 months, if the Pentax/Ricoh range is more fully fleshed out this year. For example, there might be a new and more sophisticated Ricoh-branded cam which includes all the "missing" bits and more besides, leaving the MX-1 as towards the bottom rung on for a company which sees its future more in upmarket products with a hefty dash of style. Goodbye Optios, we aren't sorry to see you go, etc.

I've always thought the K-01 was an excellent camera provided you stick to its intended uses. If you buy it and then complain that it won't do sports, birding and fast street action all that well, you don't need a new camera, you need a head transplant. I've got absolutely top results from mine used with the limited primes.

The notion that there is one camera which rules them all - if only Pentax could discover it - is a fantasy.

[Kunzite]

The notion that there is one camera which rules them all - if only Pentax could discover it - is a fantasy.

Well said.

However? Henri Cartier-Bresson was pretty much invisible with his Leica, there could be a secret behind the red dot brand... the invisible masters of photography, and people having strong attachments towards the brand, and the vintage Leicas suggesting it can only be destroyed by dropping it into a certain volcano...
Could any Leica owner throw his camera into the fire, and see if there is any inscription?

[monochrome]

Has anyone built a compact P&S zoom lens camera with an APS-C sensor? I can't think of one.

Guess the K-01 doesn't count

... that's not a P&S ...

I think that was his point. We seem to want a tiny MILC with all the features and IQ of a full-on APSc dSLR - without requiring an adapter! We also want it to look like a camera - nay, a classic camera - that we once used (or lusted after).

The K-01 came close on the features, missed on the (above defined) visual design - but it is too big to be a P&S.

[GeneV]

What I find funny is that people that "hated it" and got it (the K-01), they always find their reasoning in this similar line: " ... at this price it was a steal ...".

That to me shows that they understand the true value of the camera and they know damn well it should be more than the current price .
If you truly hated it, you won't buy it no matter what price will be at ... I know I wouldn't either.

What it says if one will buy at $300 but not at $740 is that buyer will gladly accept less functionality from a camera at a lesser price. This is neither advanced economics nor inconsistent with earlier criticisms nor particularly strange.

[Mike Cash]

The last time I bought a Pentax P&S was the Optio I-10 as a gift for my daughter. I don't think we ever got one decent photo out of it. She recently took it to a recycle shop and sold it.

So we have a situation in my house where I have dozens of cameras....and three other family members who don't care squat about cameras or spending ten minutes to learn even the most rudimentary points about using one. I won't spend money on a low-end P.O.S. camera just to have something they can use, and I'm not going to spend several hundred bucks to hand a brand-new higher quality camera to people who can't be bothered to learn anything.

So while the MX-1 might be a fine camera to hand the wife and kids, I would never spend that kind of money on something they would use two or three times a year and which I wouldn't care to use the rest of the time. I would be more likely to do a hand-me-down of my X10 to them and replace it with a new X20 for myself.

[gazonk]

So while the MX-1 might be a fine camera to hand the wife and kids, I would never spend that kind of money on something they would use two or three times a year and which I wouldn't care to use the rest of the time.

From that description, phone cameras should be more than enough for them. And sometimes phone cameras may spur an interest in more serious photography.

[ihasa]

I think that was his point. We seem to want a tiny MILC with all the features and IQ of a full-on APSc dSLR - without requiring an adapter! We also want it to look like a camera - nay, a classic camera - that we once used (or lusted after).

The K-01 came close on the features, missed on the (above defined) visual design - but it is too big to be a P&S.

I think to be honest it was the size which did for the K-01, rather than the visual design. Although the visual design didn't help - after all, if you're a fatty, you tend to wear black t-shirts to make yourself look slimmer or at least not draw attention to your bulk, not bright yellow ones! If you want a small MILC you need to pick your compromise - either that you're going to use an adapter to mount your K lenses, or accept the camera's going to be a porker.

The last time I bought a Pentax P&S was the Optio I-10 as a gift for my daughter. I don't think we ever got one decent photo out of it. She recently took it to a recycle shop and sold it.

The MX-1 looks wayyy better than the I-10, though.

[Mike Cash]

From that description, phone cameras should be more than enough for them. And sometimes phone cameras may spur an interest in more serious photography.

You know what? I keep forgetting that phones even have cameras. You're absolutely right.