[Mistral75]

WHy allocate another 40-50% to Olympus and Panasonic? Is it a guess or do you have numbers showing that they each have ~20%?
I am not being snarky or argumentative, I am just ignorant and haven't seen those numbers.

I do not have numbers except for Japan:

- Olympus: 28.9%
- Sony: 26.5%
- Panasonic: 14.2%

Hence my "Allocate another 40 to 50 per cent. to Olympus and Panasonic."

Source: BCN Awards, Top 3 of the so-called 'Digital camera (mirror-less SLR)' category.

http://bcnranking.jp/award/section/hard/hard94.html

オリンパス = Olympus
ソニー = Sony
パナソニック = Panasonic

---

Last edited by Mistral75; 09-25-2014 at 09:58 AM.

[kadajawi]

What are you, his personal assistant ! lol

Yeah I looked him up on wikipedia before, but now you've got me interested because before the K-01, I had never heard of him. But at that point when the K-01 met me, and I learnt who the designer was, I realized he was (expletive).

So now you made me look up Marc Newson Ltd and look at his products webpage here: Marc Newson Ltd

And glancing over the designs, I feel that they are ........hmmmmm ....... some what (expetive) again ! It looks like he takes 1920's art deco and merges it with 1950's style, then tweaks it and budda-bing-budda-boom.......... pay me a million bucks ! Please, come on, his work looks like he was smoking crystal meth !

You couldn't get me to buy anything designed by Marc Newson - EVEN IF YOU PAYED ME A MILLION BUCKS ! lol

The guys a hack and he botched the K-01 project - end of story. Now us sorry Pentaxians have lost a mirrorless camera model, which had a great potential, and could take K-mount lenses - WE HAVE LOST A MODEL FROM OUR ALREADY SMALL PRODUCT RANGE TO CHOOSE FROM ! (sobbing). And now Fujifilm is running away with it.

Thank you very much marc newson, your name shall go down in infamy. He single handedly took pentax out of the APS-C mirrorless equation ! (Sobbing)

I think he has talent, and did a good job with the K-01. Did he botch it up? I don't think so. They were going for a crowd outside of regular DSLR buyers, and that made sense. I can even understand the thought behind keeping the proper K mount, but there are a few major issues with that. You need a new lens lineup. This concept only made sense had Pentax started churning out lenses that extend into the mirror box, and only work with the K-01. It could have meant wonderfully well balanced cameras that overall aren't bigger than what a comparable NEX including lens would be. But Pentax didn't do it. At least the 18-55 should have been modified, so that people see the genius behind the concept. Only keeping the old lenses, without new ones making advantage of the lack of a mirror, was a terrible idea. This concept does have the problem that you can't attach any other lens. The mFT system, as well as NEX cameras are "cheap whores". They do it with each and every lens out there, and that's a huge advantage. Finally, the K-01 just wasn't that good a mirrorless camera. It lagged in terms of video, for example. That the camera was pretty expensive at launch didn't help either.


Basically an interesting concept with a new, extravagant and (to some) attractive design, but too flawed to really have a chance. These days it would have been called the K-S01 or so. Part of their special, of their innovation program.


Personally I wish they'd hire a product designer with more of a photography background... say Karl Lagerfeld, if he were a proper product designer. Someone that puts ergonomy first, without being unable to think outside the box.


Also, how about a mirrorless camera with a proper, new mirrorless oriented mount, but the possibility of an attachment for the body that puts on a K mount, or F mount, or M42 mount, ...? Maybe even modular? You could swap the grip for one that is bigger, if you want it, and that has another battery inside (chargeable via USB).

[maleek]

Also, how about a mirrorless camera with a proper, new mirrorless oriented mount, but the possibility of an attachment for the body that puts on a K mount, or F mount, or M42 mount, ...? Maybe even modular? You could swap the grip for one that is bigger, if you want it, and that has another battery inside (chargeable via USB).

This would be innovative! I don't neccesarily think it would be wise to introduce another mount, but if it would be able to take k-mount lenses with an attachement, which is active, it could be great. Also look at what speedbooster is doing, they turn full frame lenses and increase their light capabilites by taking away the crop factor.

[zoolander]

That was not because of Newson, but because Pentax decided they could keep the dslr flange distance. The advantage is of course you don't need a new mount and lenses. The disadvantage is, that it has almost none of the advantages of mirrorless. More compact, lighter and small bright wide angle lenses. Pentax Should have developed a short flange system like everybody else and provide an adapter for K-mount so we can use our lenses. The K-01 was never a serious step to mirror less.

What is the first advantage of mirrorless ? No mirror slap - now thats a huge advantage !

On my K-5, to really get the highest performance out of the sensor, I have to mount it on a tripod, switch it to Mirror-lockup-remote-shooting. I gotta AF a scene, pop the mirror up, and wait a minimum of 5 seconds, and boom ! A really sharp image. Mirror slap takes away so much sharpness.

Before my K-5 I has a Sony SLT, and before that I had a NIkon DSLR. Switching to the SLT, my images were faaaaar better and sharper than on the previous Nikon. I had no mirror slap, and instant shutter response, as opposed to on the K-5 now waiting for the vibrations to dissipate over 5 seconds with mirror lock up.

I need a camera with instant shutter response, and no mirror slap.

The K-01 is a very good camera. Yes the AF might not be very fast. Yes its not all that compact. Yes there's no EVF. But there's no mirror slap, and there's the K-mount.

Yes i agree there should have been a new mount and a lens adapter, but Pentax is on a budget. But they blew out the budget on Marc Newson, a designer nobody has heard of, who make chairs with holes where your butt is supposed to go - as if here were designing for people with hemorrhoids. And people pay a million bucks for a hemorrhoids chair ! lol

The design brief for the K-01 was for it to be able to sit on a table on its base or side and take pictures. For that they needed it to be shaped like a brick. Newson was supposed to make a brick look good. Did it look good ? no !

When Ferrari gives a design brief to Pininfarina, you know its gonna look like sex-on-wheels. But it also has to serve its function, and thats what proves that Marc got it badly wrong ! It was not ergonomically designed. An industrial designer should have known better.

So I don't care what people say about him, or what awards he received, or the queen gave him an knighthood, or if the Nobel committee gave him an award. The K-01 was poorly designed, because Marc Newson is a bad designer ......PERIOD ! As can be seen by his own website. I mean the guy is taking the piss out of his clients, his interior design is like out of the Simpsons - they're caricatures. The K-01 is a caricature. His chairs are caricature. He should be working on the sidewalk doing caricatures of passers-by.

So the biggest mistake of Pentax in the K-01 was to throw away money on Marc. Instead, they should have used the money on the new lens mount, and designed it in house.

Marc made a fool of Pentax and Pentax's customers with his caricature camera.

What Pentax needs to do is throw its hat back in the ring of mirrorless. Build a K-02 with or without a new fill-angee (Sorry, Pheobe from "Friends" calls it a Fill-angee), and then its back on baby !

[shaolen]

What is the first advantage of mirrorless ? No mirror slap - now thats a huge advantage !

On my K-5, to really get the highest performance out of the sensor, I have to mount it on a tripod, switch it to Mirror-lockup-remote-shooting. I gotta AF a scene, pop the mirror up, and wait a minimum of 5 seconds, and boom ! A really sharp image. Mirror slap takes away so much sharpness.

Before my K-5 I has a Sony SLT, and before that I had a NIkon DSLR. Switching to the SLT, my images were faaaaar better and sharper than on the previous Nikon. I had no mirror slap, and instant shutter response, as opposed to on the K-5 now waiting for the vibrations to dissipate over 5 seconds with mirror lock up.

I need a camera with instant shutter response, and no mirror slap.

The K-01 is a very good camera. Yes the AF might not be very fast. Yes its not all that compact. Yes there's no EVF. But there's no mirror slap, and there's the K-mount.

Yes i agree there should have been a new mount and a lens adapter, but Pentax is on a budget. But they blew out the budget on Marc Newson, a designer nobody has heard of, who make chairs with holes where your butt is supposed to go - as if here were designing for people with hemorrhoids. And people pay a million bucks for a hemorrhoids chair ! lol

The design brief for the K-01 was for it to be able to sit on a table on its base or side and take pictures. For that they needed it to be shaped like a brick. Newson was supposed to make a brick look good. Did it look good ? no !

When Ferrari gives a design brief to Pininfarina, you know its gonna look like sex-on-wheels. But it also has to serve its function, and thats what proves that Marc got it badly wrong ! It was not ergonomically designed. An industrial designer should have known better.

So I don't care what people say about him, or what awards he received, or the queen gave him an knighthood, or if the Nobel committee gave him an award. The K-01 was poorly designed, because Marc Newson is a bad designer ......PERIOD ! As can be seen by his own website. I mean the guy is taking the piss out of his clients, his interior design is like out of the Simpsons - they're caricatures. The K-01 is a caricature. His chairs are caricature. He should be working on the sidewalk doing caricatures of passers-by.

So the biggest mistake of Pentax in the K-01 was to throw away money on Marc. Instead, they should have used the money on the new lens mount, and designed it in house.

Marc made a fool of Pentax and Pentax's customers with his caricature camera.

What Pentax needs to do is throw its hat back in the ring of mirrorless. Build a K-02 with or without a new fill-angee (Sorry, Pheobe from "Friends" calls it a Fill-angee), and then its back on baby !

I like the K-01's design. I think it looks nice and it actually feels great. I think its compact enough over other brands but no so small it hurts the hands. Literally the only thing it needed was phase detect AF. But honestly I'd love to buy a whole case of them

[gazonk]

The disadvantage is, that it has almost none of the advantages of mirrorless. More compact, lighter and small bright wide angle lenses.

Well, they had these ideas for K-01-only lenses. If they really were serious with the idea, they could have made a kit zoom that collapses into the empty mirror housing.

[kadajawi]

Well, they had these ideas for K-01-only lenses. If they really were serious with the idea, they could have made a kit zoom that collapses into the empty mirror housing.

Yup, and the pancake lens they released with it did make use of the lack of a mirror. But it wasn't wow enough to me to show off the concept, and not usable enough in real life for most people, who rather have a small kit lens. A kit lens that could even collapse into the camera when not in use would have been huge.

Maybe they had plans for something like that, but the way the K-01 was it failed too soon.

@zoolander: Design is subjective, who are you to decide what is good design and what isn't, on absolute terms? Obviously there are enough people who think he is good, otherwise he wouldn't be in the position he is in.

So you don't like mirror slap, fine. Then the K-01 was great for you. For me the advantage of mirrorless is noise (though many are louder than my K-5), weight, size, the camera being able to use pretty much any lens ever used, and eventually a EVF that would be good during video shoots and that tells me exactly what I am going to get. Then I might be willing to trade of the lag between what is happening in the real world and what the displays show. The K-01 was big, and didn't let me use any lens, and lacked really small and light lenses. Add to that the lack of an EVF and the poor video quality... But the design was, for me, a plus point. But not enough.

[ElJamoquio]

Yup, and the pancake lens they released with it did make use of the lack of a mirror.

The 40mm Pancake the released with the K-01 was usable on mirrored bodies. So by my definition, it did not make use of the lack of a mirror.

[lytrytyr]

Pentax decided they could keep the dslr flange distance. The advantage is of course you don't need a new mount and lenses. The disadvantage is, that it has almost none of the advantages of mirrorless. More compact, lighter and small bright wide angle lenses.

Which have horrendous distortion, vignetting, color shifts, and other problems
(concealed from casual users by the in-camera processing,
sometimes even on RAW with no choice offered).

Pentax Should have developed a short flange system like everybody else and provide an adapter for K-mount so we can use our lenses. The K-01 was never a serious step to mirror less.

Adapters degrade lens performance.
But I love the way a good lens like the A50/1.2 can be used on the K-01.

[D1N0]

Which have horrendous distortion, vignetting, color shifts, and other problems
(concealed from casual users by the in-camera processing,
sometimes even on RAW with no choice offered).



Adapters degrade lens performance.
But I love the way a good lens like the A50/1.2 can be used on the K-01.

Great blanket statements but not very accurate. The fact is that the K-01 failed where Fuji and Olympus and Sony and Panasonic and Samsung succeeded. People wanted a compact system with lenses designed for it. Not a me too product with lack of commitment.

[monochrome]

Great blanket statements but not very accurate. The fact is that the K-01 failed where Fuji and Olympus and Sony and Panasonic and Samsung succeeded. People wanted a compact system with lenses designed for it. Not a me too product with lack of commitment.

The people who bought Fuji and Olympus and Sony and Panasonic and Samsung wanted a compact system with lenses designed for it.

I wanted a K-01. I bought a K-01 full-price. I strongly dislike tiny, shiny hipster plates that lose any compact advantage as soon as a LENS is attached, such as those made by Fuji and Olympus and Sony and Panasonic.

Please refrain from blanket statements on behalf of 'People' which cannot include me.



P.S. - if your product was received the way the K-01 was received, would you remain 'committed' to it? From what I read today current users think it is a wonderful camera. I think all the other guys got together and bullied poor Pentax since they knew it was already down anyway.

[D1N0]

The people who bought Fuji and Olympus and Sony and Panasonic and Samsung wanted a compact system with lenses designed for it.

I wanted a K-01. I bought a K-01 full-price. I strongly dislike tiny, shiny hipster plates that lose any compact advantage as soon as a LENS is attached, such as those made by Fuji and Olympus and Sony and Panasonic.

Please refrain from blanket statements on behalf of 'People' which cannot include me.



P.S. - if your product was received the way the K-01 was received, would you remain 'committed' to it? From what I read today current users think it is a wonderful camera. I think all the other guys got together and bullied poor Pentax since they knew it was already down anyway.

I am not saying the K-01 is a bad product. It should have had an evf. But that's it. It has a very nice design, It's a great second camera for those already shooting Pentax. But that does not make a successful mirror less in today's marketplace. There is no long term vision behind it and no commitment. Just like Canon and Nikon, who are also only half heartedly into mirror less.

[kadajawi]

The people who bought Fuji and Olympus and Sony and Panasonic and Samsung wanted a compact system with lenses designed for it.

I wanted a K-01. I bought a K-01 full-price. I strongly dislike tiny, shiny hipster plates that lose any compact advantage as soon as a LENS is attached, such as those made by Fuji and Olympus and Sony and Panasonic.

Please refrain from blanket statements on behalf of 'People' which cannot include me.



P.S. - if your product was received the way the K-01 was received, would you remain 'committed' to it? From what I read today current users think it is a wonderful camera. I think all the other guys got together and bullied poor Pentax since they knew it was already down anyway.

Lose their compact advantage as soon as a lens is attached?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-q7FsQ21hU0A/UbDCQMSg7AI/AAAAAAAAGgE/UeN-De-KS34/s1...umix%20gf3.jpg


What's that, then? They look quite a bit smaller than the 18-55 for example, despite the rather similar range.


Some fans of the K-01 like it. But I do think that many more people like the A7 series for example. Or the Panasonic GH series.

[monochrome]

Lose their compact advantage as soon as a lens is attached?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-q7FsQ21hU0A/UbDCQMSg7AI/AAAAAAAAGgE/UeN-De-KS34/s1...umix%20gf3.jpg


What's that, then? They look quite a bit smaller than the 18-55 for example, despite the rather similar range.


Some fans of the K-01 like it. But I do think that many more people like the A7 series for example. Or the Panasonic GH series.

Uhhhmmmmm - K-01 has been out of production for two years.

Let it rest in peace. Pentax apparently isn't going to do mirrorless. They don't believe in it. At least so said the CEO.

[JPT]

Having just tested out the K-S1 and found that it focuses in CDAF every bit as quickly and decisively as it does in PDAF mode, I can't help feel that a pure mirrorless K-mount camera will resurface some time in future. However, the OVF is lovely too.

I wonder what the reaction would have been if Marc Newson had applied the same design style to a smaller camera like a Q-mount camera or the MX-1 (which I personally feel is a tacky pastiche of a retro camera). I think he got a tough design brief - something like "We've made this giant brick that takes photos. Decorate it for us!" Certainly Newson did not make the decision to omit an EVF or base the camera on K-mount, which are the main decisions the defined its shape.