[johnmflores]

The new interface is not designed to be used just like a smartphone; but to be more familiar (than a "classic" DSLR) and less intimidating so it won't turn people away. It appears quite intuitive, too. It's not like Pentax had to go all the way and launch another Android failure-of-a camera.

Exactly. And when you take a step back and think about it, a mode dial on the top of a camera without a top LCD display doesn't make a whole lot of sense, it's just that we've all gotten use to it there.

... and no AA filter + anti A in-bodied.


I agree with those who do think this product has quite not the same target as K-50, actually it compares barely :
- K50 is for enthusiasts / experts using the Advanced ergonomy with either need of WR, + eventually they like strong colours on traditionnal-shaped SLR (actualy i do believe this isea to colour the K50 was not so sucessfull)
- K-S1 is less experts and for younger / more feminine users that will appreciate the new design and interface, in a more "urban" environment.

True, and that's not to say that the K-S1 won't be used to take serious photos as the specs look quite promising and up to the task. After all, my publisher never asks me whether or not I use a black DSLR or a fancy-pants one. They just want publishable results, like this, taken with the K-01:



If I didn't have a K-5 to back up my K-3, the K-S1 would certainly be a contender for second camera.

[asw66]

This camera is meant to attract cell phone shooters, so let's talk about what would attract cell phone shooters to upgrade, and what wouldn't. My contention is that a dedicated SLR should do everything a cell phone camera does, and better. But that's not always the case, is it?

When I was travelling a few months ago, there were a few occasions where I shot a panorama with my K30, but then shot another with my iPhone as a backup. Until Pentax cameras have a panorama function, they'll always seem a little bit hobbled compared to a humble cell phone, at least in this respect.

Moreover, I'm no fan of Instagram, but many many others are. More powerful filters with the ability to customise and save them would also add to the user experience.

[monochrome]

I think this camera is designed to appeal to people who want to move beyond a cell phone. Apple and Samsung have pretty much figured out that user experience.

[K-9]

After spending the last week playing around as a mentor (and a photographer) during a student orientation week I can see way more people buying the K-S1 simplicity and cutting edge design rather than my big advanced K-5's. Most people don't take photos to make a photography career, most do it to encapsulate wonderful memories with the people they love around them.

I'm not a selfie person but most of the people around me are. Most students only takes pics of themselves or of themselves in a group of friends and got no real joy photographing random people or things around them. One of the main questions I got when shooting during the week was "Do you have any pics of yourself? Should I take one of you?" because that is how people view photography, the joy of keeping memories of yourself in fun situations.

I on the other hand get more joy from documenting and observing external things and others than myself, so for me it's not a problem not to be in a picture. But the trend is going away from that and most don't view photography as a tool to capture the external, they view it as a tool to capture themselves and their friends.

This camera is meant to attract cell phone shooters, so let's talk about what would attract cell phone shooters to upgrade, and what wouldn't. My contention is that a dedicated SLR should do everything a cell phone camera does, and better. But that's not always the case, is it?

When I was travelling a few months ago, there were a few occasions where I shot a panorama with my K30, but then shot another with my iPhone as a backup. Until Pentax cameras have a panorama function, they'll always seem a little bit hobbled compared to a humble cell phone, at least in this respect.

Moreover, I'm no fan of Instagram, but many many others are. More powerful filters with the ability to customise and save them would also add to the user experience.

Selfies? Attract cell phone users? How is this possible when people who are used to taking selfies and want to upgrade from their phones will not be able to take selfies easily enough with this camera, as it does not have a swivel and tilt out LCD. If that is Pentax/Ricoh's intention, they've failed. Also, if they are used to instantly posting their pics to social media, which was accesible with the press of a button on their phones, they cannot do it with this camera, as there is no wi-fi.

Flip out LCDs and Wi-Fi have become standard for years on non-pro cameras in this price range, so excluding that is a huge mistake. The first rule of selling, especially for a hurting brand, is not to eliminate customers. Well, they've just done this.

Does anyone know if they finally have HDMI out on this camera, as they've excluded on so many previous bodies?

[Kunzite]

Smartphones don't have swivel and tilt out LCDs...

[mee]

The same points are being repeated over and over in this thread, yet no one is listening...

This seems to be the dumping ground of thoughts.

[johnmflores]

I think this camera is designed to appeal to people who want to move beyond a cell phone. Apple and Samsung have pretty much figured out that user experience.

Exactly. And the people buying this camera aren't getting rid of their iPhones. They will still use it but there must be situations where they wish they had something better - zoomier, megapicklier, ISOier, etc...

[GibbyTheMole]

DSLR is for enthusiasts... Trying to target non Photography enthusiasts is a waste of time , targeting enthusiasts should be the primary goal .
That means building a camera enthusiasts would want to own ...

That distills it quite well, I think. If you're not an enthusiast, you're not going to invest in a DSLR or MILC.

FWIW, I'm not a complainer. in fact, I think Pentax has done quite well with most of their ILC designs. I don't have a problem with cameras in assorted colors. Some I even find quite attractive. (The red & blue K-30, for instance.) Change is good when it's for a logical reason. Most of the changes made to this new model look like they're at the expense of ergonomics, though. I don't think this an awful design... just not a very good one.

I'm not worried about it, though. Just about every company has a swing-and-a-miss product once in awhile, and my guess is that this is one of them. They'll probably try to flog it for awhile and then it'll be discontinued in a year (or less) and they'll be on to the next thing. What would concern me is if they keep coming up with one goofball design after another until they bankrupt the company.

I think if they could come up with a couple of solid, sensibly designed DSLRs (even in assorted colors) with an articulated screen at a good price, and put them in more stores where people could actually see and touch them, it would be good for them. It makes sense to me that is where they should concentrate their efforts.

[boriscleto]

Exactly. And the people buying this camera aren't getting rid of their iPhones. They will still use it but there must be situations where they wish they had something better - zoomier, megapicklier, ISOier, etc...

They want a camera that make people say, "Oh, you have a camera that takes good pictures".

[Kunzite]

Trying to target non Photography enthusiasts is a waste of time , targeting enthusiasts should be the primary goal .
That means building a camera enthusiasts would want to own ...

Or building new enthusiasts
Let's think about it: people who might want to get more involved into photography, but are intimidated by DSLRs. At worst, they would stay with their phones. At best, they would choose a MILC or something. Now, there's an alternative - a very capable DSLR with a nice design and friendly interface.

[JimC1101]

True. but based on what others think here, the Q was a swing and a miss. I had one for a minute and it was cool and fun....until my wife took it so much that I never get a chance to use it. For some reason, mostly the Asian market, the Q continues to keep going and evolves, even though it has a P&S sensor and no VF. Sometimes we don't have a clue when we talk here because we, or a lot of the forum group here say "I don't want that, I think it has failed because it did not give me what I want". Those here who can see the logic behind why certain releases are sent out, even thought we would never buy one of them, they need to look past their own wants and think more of what others will like. Entry level shooters are usually new users, most likely put in Auto mode, and get a kit lens and that is it. For those people, Pentax needs to Keep it simple (stupid). Now when these entry level guy or gal take a few more pics and spends more time on composition, DOF, etc....which they are never going to really try to do with a smartphone (Helllo ?.....they spend all of their pics on selfies) they will think that Pentax K-S1 was kinda cool, but I want to move up to the next level, be it the K-50, K-5II(s), K-3 or what ever comes out next. That is when they will look more into what others are talking about here now, the "S1 doesn't do this or that or looks bad" because they are just starting out and don't know what they really want or need. Give them, all a chance to see if they really want to be more into photography that isn't just a snapshot. Once the user does that, they (Pentax) will have them hooked into a system, and that is what we all up end up doing for the most part anyways when we want to take more pics than just snapshots. Smart move by Pentax.

[monochrome]

I think if they could come up with a couple of solid, sensibly designed DSLRs (even in assorted colors) with an articulated screen at a good price, and put them in more stores where people could actually see and touch them, it would be good for them. It makes sense to me that is where they should concentrate their efforts.

Yeah, and RIAC has been soooooo successful putting the previous 'good' cameras in more stores where people could actually see and touch them. In St. Louis RIAC just lost their distribution in a 9-store highly profitable chain. The K500 showed up in how many box stores again? Wasn't that the point of the downgrade?

RIAC got nuthin' and Ricoh just doesn't care any more. We better hope and pray a FF Pentax doesn't need American sales to become a reality, because if that is the reality and this is how we respond to Ricoh brand-differentiating ideas they'll pull out of the US altogether.

[Zygonyx]

Exactly. And the people buying this camera aren't getting rid of their iPhones. They will still use it but there must be situations where they wish they had something better - zoomier, megapicklier, ISOier, etc...

+1, and nice mecanical K-01 pict

[jatrax]

"I don't want that, I think it has failed because it did not give me what I want". Those here who can see the logic behind why certain releases are sent out, even thought we would never buy one of them, they need to look past their own wants and think more of what others will like.

When I was a retail buyer one of the hardest lessons to be learned was that I was NOT buying what I wanted but buying what other people would want. It is very difficult to put yourself into the mind of other shoppers and say "I hate this, but we are sell to the heck out of it." Just trying to say that if we assume the majority of PF posters are 'enthusiasts' and they hate this camera, then I suspect Ricoh is going to "sell the heck out of it". Because this camera is most definitely not for them.

Yeah, and RIAC has been soooooo successful putting the previous 'good' cameras in more stores where people could actually see and touch them.

Retailers have limited inventory budget, limited shelf space and limited employee training time. So if you have 3 black cameras on the shelf in three price points and a salesperson comes in with the latest and greatest black Pentax DSLR the story has to be very, very compelling to put another black, boring DSLR on the shelf that employees will have to learn about and then try to sell to customers. Much easier to say, "no" we already have 3 black cameras on the shelf at 3 price points, I do not need another one.

But show them something truly different and striking, with shiny LEDS and a new look and maybe, just maybe they will find a spot on the shelf for it. Ricoh is fighting for shelf space. At this point what the customer wants is immaterial. What retailers with shelf space want is the only thing that matters. I keep hearing Ricoh has no retail presence, which is true. You do not get retail presence by showing the store buyer another 'me too' black DSLR that is not essentially different from the ones already on the shelf. This is a long term battle, and the small wins now are at levels the consumer will never notice.

Just another example of Ricoh breaking the mold, being where the other guys are not.

[ElJamoquio]

Shelf space?

What % of DSLR sales are at a physical retailer?
What % of beginner DSLR sales are at a physical retailer?
What % of beginner DSLR sales to whoever this-target-market-is are at a physical retailer?


Seems like those %'s are low and getting lower, but I could be wrong. I'm lucky, there's a Pentax retailer in San Jose. The one retailer in San Francisco closed. That's one in the SFBay area, population 8 million or so, and if you live in San Francisco (where perhaps this target market is), you have to drive an hour (if there's no traffic) to get to a retailer.

Who is going to do that when Amazon has such a great return policy?

Ricoh and Pentax have been pushing for physical retail spots lately, and if this camera is a good enough value, they might be able to do it... but so far I haven't seen their effort succeeding in ILC's.