[monochrome]

They're not covered when using the self-timer or the camera turned around for a "selfie". The primary function of the lights is for the self-timer function and face recognition counts in "selfies".

Yes, we know that - the implication was the secondary uses were not initially design features.

[kadajawi]

Well if you think that double the juice and versatility is overrated, that's an opinion that I do not share (for what it's worth).

Personally I don't care all that much about AAs but then I don't understand why they are not using D-Li190 instead of D-Li109. Li90 has almost twice the density of the 109...

I'm coming from the D-Li90, which has enough juice. If the 109 is half that, I can understand the complaints. The D-Li90 maybe didn't find enough space in the grip? I don't know. 4 AAs take up significantly more space than a D-Li90, don't they? Am I right in the assumption that the D-Li109 slot of the K-30 and 50 was quite a bit bigger than the battery itself, cut out to fit AAs? Maybe the K-S2 has only enough space for only the 109, and not even the 90? They could have made the grip bigger, but maybe they didn't think it was worth it? In any case, USB charging would be useful. It wouldn't replace the lack of AA, but it could help out in many situations, including some where AA's would also not help. And it can be done without a bigger camera, I suppose...

[monochrome]

Asahiman has indicated that the hinged LCD like on the 645Z will most likely be used on the FF camera, too.

I believe the actual post was along the lines of, "what do you think of the (645z) LCD? It is possible. Hah Hah."

[THoog]

I think the K-S1's primary design goal was to see how small they could make a K-mount camera, and that squeezed out a lot of other features, including integrated WiFi. I think the sort of "selfie" the designers had in mind was the age-old timed family/group portrait. The K-S2 may have had arm's length "selfies" more in mind, as a natural progression from the reversible LCD. In that sense, the K-S1 is a more traditional DSLR than the K-S2.

---------- Post added 02-11-15 at 01:47 PM ----------

I'm coming from the D-Li90, which has enough juice. If the 109 is half that, I can understand the complaints. The D-Li90 maybe didn't find enough space in the grip? I don't know. 4 AAs take up significantly more space than a D-Li90, don't they? Am I right in the assumption that the D-Li109 slot of the K-30 and 50 was quite a bit bigger than the battery itself, cut out to fit AAs? Maybe the K-S2 has only enough space for only the 109, and not even the 90? They could have made the grip bigger, but maybe they didn't think it was worth it? In any case, USB charging would be useful. It wouldn't replace the lack of AA, but it could help out in many situations, including some where AA's would also not help. And it can be done without a bigger camera, I suppose...

The spaces around the Li-109 in the K-r/30/50/500 are nearly as big as the battery itself, so the AA or Li-90 would require about twice the volume in the body, over the Li-109. The tilt/flip LCD pocket placed a new demand on volume that may have squeezed out the AA capability.

[Marktax]

The tilt/flip LCD pocket placed a new demand on volume that may have squeezed out the AA capability.

Thinking about the internal constraints of design is very correct. K-S1 indeed might have been an exercise in that regard. If there is one thing paramount in the Pentax heritage, it is compactness of form and internal space efficiencies to get there. That's why the bodies always feel like robust little tanks. People claim they play catch-up with canikons, but in this area Pentax has had to take second place to none.

[kadajawi]

Thinking about the internal constraints of design is very correct. K-S1 indeed might have been an exercise in that regard. If there is one thing paramount in the Pentax heritage, it is compactness of form and internal space efficiencies to get there. That's why the bodies always feel like robust little tanks. People claim they play catch-up with canikons, but in this area Pentax has had to take second place to none.

That is until Canon released the 100D. Damn is that thing TINY. Of course the viewfinder is a bit rubbish (as to be expected of Canon), but apart from that it seems to be a nice camera, and not a trade off. It doesn't feel as bad as a 1x00D series camera for example, more like 2 or 3 digit Canons.



Wasn't the K-S2 significantly smaller than the K-50? That may explain why they had to drop AA. The flippy screen is more of an issue in terms of thickness I think, as in the screen assembly takes up more space from the point where the sensor is (that being said there are smartphones that are less than 5mm thick and still pack a punch... decent CPU, there's a battery in there, and a screen, 2 cameras, and a layer of glass...). I doubt that there are big display related components in the grip, where the battery would sit.

[THoog]

Thinking about the internal constraints of design is very correct. K-S1 indeed might have been an exercise in that regard. If there is one thing paramount in the Pentax heritage, it is compactness of form and internal space efficiencies to get there. That's why the bodies always feel like robust little tanks. People claim they play catch-up with canikons, but in this area Pentax has had to take second place to none.

During the later stages of the K-01 Wars, I argued that the K-01, already blasted for being too large, could not have a tilt/flip LCD without being even larger, BUT a normal-sized DSLR body with the circuitry squeezed to the right like the K-01 would be able to do it. Two years later, here it is. The LCD may be a little overbuilt, but that's not surprising for "new" technology. (New to Pentax DSLR designers, at least.)

[ZeljkoS]

Flip screen is not hard to put on a camera, but a WR flip sreen requires some serious engineering. At least I think so

[Docrwm]

You might have a hard time convincing Adam of that. He once wrote that when hands-on reviewers saw the K-S1 prototype they pointed out that the LED's on the grip would be covered up by the hand holding the camera. The (outside contract) designers apparently said something like, "Oh. <insert long pause> We didn't think of that."

Another example of non-photographers trying to design a tool when they don't actually have a clue. Sad, really, really sad.

[THoog]

Wasn't the K-S2 significantly smaller than the K-50? That may explain why they had to drop AA. The flippy screen is more of an issue in terms of thickness I think, as in the screen assembly takes up more space from the point where the sensor is (that being said there are smartphones that are less than 5mm thick and still pack a punch... decent CPU, there's a battery in there, and a screen, 2 cameras, and a layer of glass...). I doubt that there are big display related components in the grip, where the battery would sit.

It's not much smaller than the K-50 - they straightened some curves and flattened some bulges on the ends, but the corners are about the same. In previous Pentax DSLRs, the main circuit board ran all the way across the back between the LCD and the SR chassis, with the battery on the end. The K-01 moved all the electronics to the right, and shifted the battery forward, but turned left-to-right. The K-S2 seems to follow that, but with the battery oriented front-to-rear.

EDIT K-50: 129x96.5x70 K-S2: 122.5x91x72.5



---------- Post added 02-11-15 at 02:54 PM ----------

Another example of non-photographers trying to design a tool when they don't actually have a clue. Sad, really, really sad.

Well, clearly there were some non-photographers involved on the K-S1, or they wouldn't have screwed up the AF/MF switch. All they had to do was turn it 90 degrees counter-clockwise (like the K-S2), and it would have been fine. (Although I still think the countdown LEDs are a clever and more intuitive way to do it than blink-blink-blink.)

[monochrome]

Another example of non-photographers trying to design a tool when they don't actually have a clue. Sad, really, really sad.

Actually, I thought it rather funny in a tragic sort of way.Two hipster guys and a tall, cool woman are over the top excited about their neato eye-catching design and, and, and . . . . . .

Oh. <heartbeat, heartbeat, heartbeat> Didn't think of that.

Well, clearly there were some non-photographers involved on the K-S1, or they wouldn't have screwed up the AF/MF switch. All they had to do was turn it 90 degrees counter-clockwise (like the K-S2), and it would have been fine. (Although I still think the countdown LEDs are a clever and more intuitive way to do it than blink-blink-blink.)

So do I - and I like that they're marketed as such better than if they were featured as disco lights.

But the story is nearly heartbreaking.

[UlrichSchiegg]

It's not much smaller than the K-50 - they straightened some curves and flattened some bulges on the ends, but the corners are about the same. In previous Pentax DSLRs, the main circuit board ran all the way across the back between the LCD and the SR chassis, with the battery on the end. The K-01 moved all the electronics to the right, and shifted the battery forward, but turned left-to-right. The K-S2 seems to follow that, but with the battery oriented front-to-rear.

EDIT K-50: 129x96.5x70 K-S2: 122.5x91x72.5



---------- Post added 02-11-15 at 02:54 PM ----------

Well, clearly there were some non-photographers involved on the K-S1, or they wouldn't have screwed up the AF/MF switch. All they had to do was turn it 90 degrees counter-clockwise (like the K-S2), and it would have been fine. (Although I still think the countdown LEDs are a clever and more intuitive way to do it than blink-blink-blink.)

Well, it is certainly closer to the K-S1 than it is to the K-50, no? The depth I don't care too much, since the largest part with a given image circle & bajonett is driven by the lens.

Dimensions (WxHxD)
K-S2: 122.5 x 91.0 x 72.5 mm
K-S1: 120 x 92.5 x 69.5 mm
K-50: 129 x 96.5 x 70 mm

[THoog]

Well, it is certainly closer to the K-S1 than it is to the K-50, no?

I'd say no, despite what the numbers say.



I think the given width for the K-S1 includes the metal strap lug.

[jules]

K-S2: This model is equipped with a dedicated button for self portraits. At least they don't actually call it a selfie!
Take self portraits
If you point the lens toward yourself, swivel the LCD monitor, and switch to Live View shooting, the new self portrait shutter button light begins to glow. Then you can use the other button which is in a position where it is easier to press, and you can shoot holding the camera with one hand.
Actually quite an interesting way of doing it, might be of interest to street shooters?
I like the look of the over engineered flip screen, I always thought I was going to tear the one off my Sony A77, it went every which way but one which was always the way I'd try to turn it! As long as they have not made all the buttons on the right too cramped, it looks fine to me, actually quite excited to try one out.
I'd like a 645Z type tilt screen for anything above K-S2 for robustness and let me put an acmaxx protector on it as I'm kind of OCD about that!

[IchabodCrane]

Ok. Who says it has to be either/or? One vs. another? Not every thing is an opposing battle.

And AA batteries is a top tier feature for me. Higher than flippy screen or even improved battery life.

While they've offered it as an option for many camera bodies... I suspect they didn't do this because they wanted to waste money on an unnecessary feature. No, probably more so because they saw the usefulness/desirability of such a feature and gave users another option.

Of course none of us, presumably, know exactly what the battery arrangement is in the K-S2. However, on the K30/50, the dual (Li-ion, AA) battery capability requires the use of a smaller Li-ion stock battery (Li109). The AA battery option is nice but it comes at the expense of needing a much smaller stock battery. Had they given that up, it's likely the bigger Li90 battery could have been used.