[asw66]

I really honestly cannot grasp the idea. How does a coloured tool help me do my job? I understand how better IQ does that, better AF performance, lenses, flashes, etc. But colours? Apply it to any other tool and it becomes obvious how strange this really is. I've never entered a hardware store to see walls filled with all the same types of hammers, but with different colours.

In social settings or street shooting, a brightly coloured camera may well have the advantage of attracting friendly curiosity.

[jogiba]

The top selling colored camera is the iPhone.

[utak]

I'm shocked by these posts as I wrongly thought the Pentax brand had clear market leadership on...camera colors

PRIC (sic) urgently need to repaint legacy lenses using RETRO COLORS, starting with the excellent Takumar/K-series 55mm 1.8

[Aristophanes]

IMHO, it was not the size that killed the K-01 .... it was the fact that it did not have an articulating screen and no provision for a EVF !

+1

The K-01 was 'crippled' compared to other mirrorless options in the market. It should have had an EVF option, articulating rear LCD, excellent video, and a a Pentax-made slew of alternative lens mount adapters.

The camera itself, including its Newsom design and colours, is intriguing. There's a dull, me-too same-same in camera design and it's certainly not helping sales or brand differentiation.

What the K-01 emphasizes for users on this board is how Pentax has a problem with specs and features one *should* expect on a product, but are not there for reasons one can only assume are near-sighted bean-counters.

[monochrome]

What the K-01 emphasizes for users on this board is how Pentax has a problem with specs and features one *should* expect on a product, but are not there for reasons one can only assume are near-sighted bean-counters.

Though I like my K-01 I've always been disappointed they chose to equip it with the mid-range button placement and Menu choices (e.g. TAv buried under M) instead of the K-5 Menu. The K-01 could have been a real competitor even with the visual design issues but Pentax (one hopes Hoya) made some truly inexplicable feature choices.

[Aristophanes]

Though I like my K-01 I've always been disappointed they chose to equip it with the mid-range button placement and Menu choices (e.g. TAv buried under M) instead of the K-5 Menu. The K-01 could have been a real competitor even with the visual design issues but Pentax (one hopes Hoya) made some truly inexplicable feature choices.

Deeper than that, it should have not been released with such mediocre AF. That's what killed it in reviews, along with the lack of an EVF and adequate video.

Pentax should not have seen the K-01 as a place to put basic K-mount sunk cost tech, but as a place to innovate. If the K-01 had the Nikon 1 series AF plus a Sony or Olympus style EVF, and near-Sony video controls, it would have made a substantially better impression beyond just appearances. It became doubly easy to hammer away at its unorthodox appearance in a very conservative market when under the hood was a mixed bag of lousy performance latched to a stellar sensor IQ.

[tzrenz0]

[Deesquared]

I've had my black and white K-01 for about four weeks now and I just love it. I haven't noticed any AF issues. To me it seems fast and accurate. It's certainly no where near as "quirky" (nice word for slow with issues) as the Fuji X100. I had that camera for two years and loved a lot of things about it - image quality, view finder, looks/design and flash were all great but the focus - don't even think about being pleased on a regular basis with focus if you were trying to photograph anything that moved. It also had quirky issues with its movie mode. I love the K-01 so far. I do wish it had an option for an EVF and that it had continuous focus in movie mode (EVF more so than movie mode as my eyes aren't what they used to be) but those are just small things IMO for me. I actually just bought the K-01 because of its looks and the discounted price I got but since then I have been absolutely thrilled with the images and features. So many fun features and beautiful jpgs SOOC! So, if Pentax/Ricoh is trying to expand their market by introducing their cameras to new users with colors and design, it worked for me. Of course, colors can bring in a new customer, but quality, etc. will keep them coming back. I am so pleasantly surprised by my little brick! I like the K-01 so much that I'm wondering if I'll get the same beautiful images from a K-30 or K-50 as it would be a great one to take on our beach vacations. (I could get the WR and a view finder.)

[tzrenz0]

K-50 and you can choose lots of colors.

[eliallan]

I would agree that it wasn't looks that killed the k01, but a muddled feature set. I'm enjoying mine, but its primary use is to back up my k5 and k7. As a single camera solution its not enough. However I think it would have been a resounding success had they had half the ambition of this little brick Blackmagic Design: Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera

If it had an evf port and clean HDMI that could have been enough to get some attention. I wouldn't be surprised to find that Panasonic sold more gh2's to videographers than photographers. Its a serious market and Pentax is in a great position to go after it without compromising other products the way Panny, Sony, Canon, etc have to.

[monochrome]

If it had an evf port and clean HDMI that could have been enough to get some attention. I wouldn't be surprised to find that Panasonic sold more gh2's to videographers than photographers. Its a serious market and Pentax is in a great position to go after it without compromising other products the way Panny, Sony, Canon, etc have to.

I'm usually pretty positive about Pentax - but in reality Pentax was a bunch of cautious old men who weren't about to take risk. Ricoh may be different - but even Jim Malcolm said it took him longer to break the Pentax culture and integrate the engineering teams than he thought it would.

[EDIT: Reviewing my notes, he said it took longet to integrate the teams than he thought it would. I don't believe he actually said there was infighting. That was my personal inference at the time.]

I wiouldn't be surprised to eventually learn that Pentax engineers dug in their heels and refused to change - and that's why there's nothing new for 30 months. Wouldn't be surprised at all.

[mrNewt]

IMHO, it was not the size that killed the K-01 .... it was the fact that it did not have an articulating screen and no provision for a EVF !

Says who!?





There are a lot options... is only a matter of stop complaining and be willing to find them...

What put this camera down was the people that did nothing but complain and the fact that they refused to open their minds to the possibilities...
Don't blame the tool in your hands...

[beholder3]

[deleted]

[Uluru]

I'm usually pretty positive about Pentax - but in reality Pentax was a bunch of cautious old men who weren't about to take risk. Ricoh may be different - but even Jim Malcolm said it took him longer to break the Pentax culture and integrate the engineering teams than he thought it would.

Was Jim more specific about the Pentax culture being cautious? I mean, those guys at Pentax did design the Q concept 6-7 years ago, right? And who persuaded them to add colours to the Kx before Ricoh came on stage?
There is always more behind such claims.

I wiouldn't be surprised to eventually learn that Pentax engineers dug in their heels and refused to change - and that's why there's nothing new for 30 months. Wouldn't be surprised at all.

Well, I wouldn't assume that based on Jim's words without further evidence. They may be cautious, and even overly suspicious. Why wouldn't they? That was a third disruption in a row, with a possibility of a total annihilation of a brand name and values. Maybe they wanted constant reassurances along the way.

Also,how many third party experts that act as a buffer, negotiators and translators of cultural values Ricoh brought into merger? How many brand consultants so that they could have pointed out that a P.R.I.C. initial from the new company's name is a serious sloppiness?

There are many ways to express caution — but I think smart people know they must act too. And being old (what that means anyway, are Pentax engineers old as you say? they all have gandchildren and grandgrandclildren?) and experienced, also means they can act efficiently, without typical sloppiness and desire to show off of an upstart or a boastful company.

I have a privilege to document daily work of many engineers and their work environment and those old ones, gosh, they are something. It's the experience you cannot buy. And you'd be surprised to know how some of their ideas and insights make ideas of their younger colleagues look like a conservative joke.

I personally think Ricoh didn't have a large enough mouth to swallow so much Pentax brand history and achievement and perhaps they have misunderstood a few things along the way. Ricoh's optical division wasn't as vast or comprehensive as former Asahi's and it might be they were totally unprepared. I mean, they didn't swallow another small copier brand, after all.

[monochrome]

@Uluru: Everything you write is likely true and I am aware of the value of history, experience and wisdom. We should recall that Hoya had already cleared many of the most senior (highest paid) engineers and managers from the payroll, leaving only the lower cost (presumably younger) staff, so many of the "wise old engineers" and "cautious old men" were already gone. What struck Malcolm was the intractability of both teams, who he said in an online interview were simply unwilling to listen to each other.

From my own experience, it has taken 4 1/2 years for my company to right itself after being taken over - and that only happened after virtually all of our senior people and most of the next level were replaced by the acquiring Firm's people - and the name of my Firm (formerly jointly in the public marketing material) was banished forever. Strangely, we were much larger, more advanced, more profitable and had better people than the acquiring company, but our parent company had gotten itself upside down in the financial crisis. The new company bought us, then finally dismantled us and installed their own processes and managers, mainly because ours couldn't accept that we had been bought and were no longer the control people. They just couldn't manage us. We simply wouldn't do what the new guys wanted.

This merger seems to be playing out just as so many before it have. At least this time Ricoh seems committed to making cameras.