[johnmflores]

Let's look at a more recent automobile... the Pontiac Aztek. Had General Motors kept selling the thing, it still wouldn't have looked any better no matter how many years they gave it.

Granted, some designs take time to become a new standard of sorts. Some designs are just bad and should be abandoned. I wouldn't put the K-01 in either of those categories.

In my experience, the only people that don't like the K-01 design are the kinds of photographers that spend way too much time on forums like this. To a person, non photographers that I have met have really liked the K-01 design. To them, dSLRs look boring. And you know what? They're right.

[ElJamoquio]

In my experience, the only people that don't like the K-01 design are the kinds of photographers that spend way too much time on forums like this. To a person, non photographers that I have met have really liked the K-01 design. To them, dSLRs look boring. And you know what? They're right.

How many of them bought a K-01?

[soled]

When we get a ff, i will buy a K-01 and Q with adapter...immediately.

[philbaum]

One of the best summaries of the K-01, IMHO. Pentax made the K-01 an aesthetic design exercise based on their DSLRs. Instead, a true engineering redesign exercise to produce a MILC would have been the better approach. But... nothing ventured, nothing gained and Pentax knows more about the market now than they did before the K-01 appeared.

As i remember, Pentax reps said something about there weren't going to be any more upgrade models to the K01. They didn't say that Pentax was never going to come out with another mirrorless camera.

I don't want to disparage the K01, because those that have them, enjoy them. But when i first say the K01, it lacked some of the DSLR features that i wish had been carried into K01. For example:

a. K01 can only be remotely activated from a IR on the front side of the camera with no ports to plug in a cable controller or use a backside IR port. That disappointed me because i was hopeing to use the K01 on a tripod for long exposures, beyond 30 sec. But i later bought a Nex 5n, as it was also being sold off, and it had the same limitations as the K01.

b. K01 lacks a fold out LCD screen like the Nex series and several other compact cameras.

c. K01's mount design, makes it far less adaptable to a large variety of lens from other manufacturers. Something that owners love about the Nex series.

I just realized that Ricoh/Pentax did build another mirrorless camera, and that is the GR And i hasten to add that GR seems to be very well received. It seems to matter to some people, but frankly i don't care whether miirorless models are labeled as Ricoh or Pentax.

[ivanvernon]

Let's look at a more recent automobile... the Pontiac Aztek. Had General Motors kept selling the thing, it still wouldn't have looked any better no matter how many years they gave it.

Granted, some designs take time to become a new standard of sorts. Some designs are just bad and should be abandoned. I wouldn't put the K-01 in either of those categories.

Oh, yeah. The Aztek is so ugly that I find myself glncing at the driver to see who would be caught driving one of them!

[johnmflores]

How many of them bought a K-01?

Good question. I have no idea. I'm speaking strictly to the aesthetics. In my experience the only people that object to the looks are those that have very rigid ideas about what a camera "should" look like, which apparently is most of the people that post on camera forums. It's such ashamed really, photography is supposed to be creative and expressive. All this judging and dismissing is the opposite of that.

[Zygonyx]

Most mainstreamers are by imitation also conformists...
"You should use this to do that" guys, and so on.
Just boring.

[quarc]

Good question. I have no idea. I'm speaking strictly to the aesthetics. In my experience the only people that object to the looks are those that have very rigid ideas about what a camera "should" look like, which apparently is most of the people that post on camera forums. It's such ashamed really, photography is supposed to be creative and expressive. All this judging and dismissing is the opposite of that.

I love the design, but I hate the ergonomics. One of the main resons I shoot Pentax is the superios ergonomics of the cameras, so the K-01 does not fit in. If they could manage to make different design (like the K-01) feel good in the hands, I am sure it would be a success as a camera, but now it is mostly just a piece of art :-)

[ElJamoquio]

Good question. I have no idea. I'm speaking strictly to the aesthetics. In my experience the only people that object to the looks are those that have very rigid ideas about what a camera "should" look like, which apparently is most of the people that post on camera forums. It's such ashamed really, photography is supposed to be creative and expressive. All this judging and dismissing is the opposite of that.

To me, it seems like the customers of the camera-makers don't want something with the ergonomics/aesthetics of the K-01.

[Smeggypants]

In my experience, the only people that don't like the K-01 design are the kinds of photographers that spend way too much time on forums like this. To a person, non photographers that I have met have really liked the K-01 design. To them, dSLRs look boring. And you know what? They're right.

What on earth does how much someone frequents forums have to do with their aesthetic taste in camera desiqn? Answer: Absolutely nothing. You might as well say people who regularly use fruit forums are the only one's who like the taste of apples.

No matter how many nonsense reasons are dreamt up for why people don't like the look of something ( whether that's non membership of the elite club of modern design students or having a forum usage that's too much for the likes of the poster above ), the simple fact is people do and do not like the look of things. There's no reason, it just happens. Why can't people accept that? One man's meat is another man's poison as the saying goes.

[johnmflores]

What on earth does how much someone frequents forums have to do with their aesthetic taste in camera desiqn? Answer: Absolutely nothing. You might as well say people who regularly use fruit forums are the only one's who like the taste of apples.

No matter how many nonsense reasons are dreamt up for why people don't like the look of something ( whether that's non membership of the elite club of modern design students or having a forum usage that's too much for the likes of the poster above ), the simple fact is people do and do not like the look of things. There's no reason, it just happens. Why can't people accept that? One man's meat is another man's poison as the saying goes.

I'm using camera forum folks as a proxy for camera enthusiasts, i.e., people that like cameras and buy them and use them and seek out other people that like cameras and talk about them. They have a very different knowledge base of cameras, more considered opinions, deeper experiences, and thus a set of expectations as to what a camera is, what it should do, how it should look, etc,....than the general public at large. My observations are that camera enthusiasts as a whole judge the K-01 differently than non-camera enthusiasts. Sure, individuals make their own decisions, and there are a number of camera enthusiasts that like the K-01, but that doesn't mean their aren't trends or patterns in the aggregate of those decisions.

I'm not invalidating anything you are saying, just noting my observations.

[Smeggypants]

Good question. I have no idea. I'm speaking strictly to the aesthetics. In my experience the only people that object to the looks are those that have very rigid ideas about what a camera "should" look like, which apparently is most of the people that post on camera forums. It's such ashamed really, photography is supposed to be creative and expressive. All this judging and dismissing is the opposite of that.

And you're still finding excuses for the K-01 .. I'm very creative and expressive. I have NO fixed ideas upon what a camera should look like. I welcome diverse designs in anything. I just find the damn thing ugly.

All this judging and dismissing is the opposite of that.

ironically you are the one doing the judging and dismissing.

[johnmflores]

And you're still finding excuses for the K-01 .. I'm very creative and expressive. I have NO fixed ideas upon what a camera should look like. I welcome diverse designs in anything. I just find the damn thing ugly.



ironically you are the one doing the judging and dismissing.

Your right, maybe I'm being a little defensive and dismissive, but I'd say that's in response to a lot of the dismissiveness heaped upon the K-01 since its launch. And if you consider yourself creative and expressive and think that the K-01 is ugly, that's fine too. I'm sorry if you took my observations personally. I'm just trying to take a big step back and am trying to make sense of the overall response to the K-01 both inside and outside the camera enthusiast community.

[Smeggypants]

I'm using camera forum folks as a proxy for camera enthusiasts, i.e., people that like cameras and buy them and use them and seek out other people that like cameras and talk about them. They have a very different knowledge base of cameras, more considered opinions, deeper experiences, and thus a set of expectations as to what a camera is, what it should do, how it should look, etc,....than the general public at large. My observations are that camera enthusiasts as a whole judge the K-01 differently than non-camera enthusiasts. Sure, individuals make their own decisions, and there are a number of camera enthusiasts that like the K-01, but that doesn't mean their aren't trends or patterns in the aggregate of those decisions.

I'm not invalidating anything you are saying, just noting my observations.

This is just nonsense. You can't make any claims that enthusiast photographers generalise how a camera should look any more than the general public. Why do you think camera icons for the general public look like a traditional camera? It's so they can recognise it as a camera.

The K-01 doesn't depart from the general layout of a traditional camera anyway, it still has the all the traditional features in all the usual places. It's just, in some people's eyes ( and not others of course ) and ugly version.

why not just accept the K-01 has an aesthetic design that isn't liked my many? After all does it reallty matter as long as you like yours?

[Smeggypants]

Your right, maybe I'm being a little defensive and dismissive, but I'd say that's in response to a lot of the dismissiveness heaped upon the K-01 since its launch. And if you consider yourself creative and expressive and think that the K-01 is ugly, that's fine too. I'm sorry if you took my observations personally. I'm just trying to take a big step back and am trying to make sense of the overall response to the K-01 both inside and outside the camera enthusiast community.

No you're not. All you are doing is trying to find objective reasons as to why there's a particularly diverse range of subjective opinions about the K-01. I'm not personally offended by your remarks, I just find them nothing more then a pointless defence of the K-01s design. There's NOTHING to defend. Just enjoy your camera