[Adam]

I thought my K-S2 was bad enough with its AUTO / SCN / A-HDR / U1 / U2 / B / M / TAv / Av / Tv / Sv / P dial. Then Pentax hit us wit the K-1 and its smart dial. Then we got the KP that has multiple dials with cryptical markings, including a dial that controls another dial. This looks to me like a descent into madness. Again, contrast with Fujifilm. . . Numbered ISO dial, numbered shutter speed dial, aperture ring on the lens. Anybody who's been exposed to photographic principles can pick it up and understand it.

Frankly, I think Pentax's modern control scheme is far more user-friendly. Having to click through all those settings (shutter speed, ISO) on a mechanical dial is slow, hard to see in the dark, and may require you to look away from the VF.

As for the settings dial, the nice thing about it is that it's a supplement to the standard two e-dials. Once you understand the different functions, it can come in very handy. That said, a large top LCD would probably be better for me as the (customizable) control panel is fast enough for my needs.

At the end of the day every camera has a different interface and there will be some sort of a learning curve, more for some brands and less for others.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[RobA_Oz]

That word "retro" is so overworked that using it has become "retro" in itself, to the point where it's become pretty much meaningless.

So, what's "retro"? Is it the faux Tuscan styling of the McMansion style of architecture (I use the word loosely), or the rebodied VW Golf/Beetle, or a Leica M6?

Seriously, you can reference the past with a few styling cues (which isn't "retro", in my view), or you can seek to reproduce it to a substantial degree of accuracy (which is). Personally, I think the KP sits more comfortably with the former, while the various Fuji DSLR-style MILCs and the Nikon Df are more aptly described by the latter.

[Foxbat]

The "smart dial". Dial with cryptic markings that controls what the other, unmarked, dial does?

I thought my K-S2 was bad enough with its AUTO / SCN / A-HDR / U1 / U2 / B / M / TAv / Av / Tv / Sv / P dial. Then Pentax hit us wit the K-1 and its smart dial. Then we got the KP that has multiple dials with cryptical markings, including a dial that controls another dial. This looks to me like a descent into madness.

Again, contrast with Fujifilm. . . Numbered ISO dial, numbered shutter speed dial, aperture ring on the lens. Anybody who's been exposed to photographic principles can pick it up and understand it.

So instead of changing my shutter, aperture, iso and exposure compensation values while looking into viewfinder, just by rolling two (or three) dials conveniently located under my index finger and thumb, I'll have to take my right hand of the grip to change shutter speed or use left hand to change ISO value located on the top plate of the camera? Doesn't sound convenient to me.

[Rondec]

I think retro is less convenient to change settings. Pentax has used the same interface since the K10. Having two control wheels is really all you need when you use modes like Av, Tv and TAv. Front dial adjusts shutter speed, rear dial adjusts aperture. You can do the whole thing with your eye on the viewfinder and adjust shutter speed very quickly.

You don't have to use the buttons on the camera body if you don't want to, but things like pixel shift, multiple exposure, and different drive mode/white balance settings are very easy to access through these. I do wonder how easy it is to put your Fuji camera into multiple exposure and set the spacing of the images.

The biggest problem to me with the retro way of doing things is that it is different. Pentax has tweaked things over time, but they actually have left most things the same between generations of camera. Meaning that if you have used a K5 and pick up a K-1 you can use it without looking at the manual in ten seconds. Your hand will have to learn some new muscle memory techniques as buttons are slightly different with regard to placement, but they are still there and function the same way between generations of the cameras.

[GateCityRadio]

Having to click through all those settings (shutter speed, ISO) on a mechanical dial is slow, hard to see in the dark, and may require you to look away from the VF.

My Panasonic LX100 has mechanical dials and honestly I rather control the aperture from the ring on the lens because my hand is going to be there anyway. Its nice to have definitive clicks when changing aperture. If I' shooting from the VF I don't have to look away because the info is in the viewfinder. That's why I'm not understanding where the issue of the top LCD being gone is such a big deal. If your eye is to the VF the info is all there, if you are shooting live view the info is all there. If you are the shoot from the hip type chances are you are in manual mode and have everything set already for zone focusing.

I guess its just different tastes for different people. I find it refreshing to have direct control when shooting my old film cameras. No need to dive into menus or feel for buttons all over the body. The LX100 brought that to me in digital form and while there are still the rare times I have to dive into a menu for something, it still feels more natural to me.

But judging from the response from people on here just about how the KP looks, I doubt there are very many people wanting mechanical controls. The "pentax is doomed" crowd doesn't seem to like change much. I'm betting most of the people who want a mechanical control layout already have a fuji camera as a second body or have jumped ship entirely.

[ffking]

The "pentax is doomed" crowd doesn't seem to like change much.

well you have to try to make sure your prophesies come true, don't you?

[totsmuyco]

I like the way thus camera looks. I like having corners and edges like the older cameras. However, I really can't say as to functionality. But I guess I have to learn and modify my technique if I were to get this camera. Honestly, if I didn't get a k-3II a year and a half ago, I'd be considering this baby. It's really a good looking camera.

[plooksta]

That word "retro" is so overworked that using it has become "retro" in itself, to the point where it's become pretty much meaningless.

So, what's "retro"? Is it the faux Tuscan styling of the McMansion style of architecture (I use the word loosely), or the rebodied VW Golf/Beetle, or a Leica M6?

Seriously, you can reference the past with a few styling cues (which isn't "retro", in my view), or you can seek to reproduce it to a substantial degree of accuracy (which is). Personally, I think the KP sits more comfortably with the former, while the various Fuji DSLR-style MILCs and the Nikon Df are more aptly described by the latter.

As I tried to elucidate, retro, for me, is a control interface which does not overcomplicate or get in the way. We basically need only 3 controls on a camera: an ISO, a speed and an aperture. Everything else is cake decoration and tricks. I couldn't care less what a camera looks like if it gives me these three controls in an uncomplicated way. As it happens though, cameras that work this way tend to look good anyway.

---------- Post added 01-28-17 at 05:57 AM ----------

The "smart dial". Dial with cryptic markings that controls what the other, unmarked, dial does?

I thought my K-S2 was bad enough with its AUTO / SCN / A-HDR / U1 / U2 / B / M / TAv / Av / Tv / Sv / P dial. Then Pentax hit us wit the K-1 and its smart dial. Then we got the KP that has multiple dials with cryptical markings, including a dial that controls another dial. This looks to me like a descent into madness.

Again, contrast with Fujifilm. . . Numbered ISO dial, numbered shutter speed dial, aperture ring on the lens. Anybody who's been exposed to photographic principles can pick it up and understand it.

You've got it. What is really nice with a Fuji is I know how the camera is set up, even when it's switched off. You don't even need to look away to change things, as you can do it all by physical feel, just like we all used to.

---------- Post added 01-28-17 at 06:01 AM ----------

Each manufacturer has to carve out their own niche in a shrinking market whilst simultaneously not alienating its installed user base (a conservative one in the case of Pentax) and attract both new users and crossover users from other systems.
Looks and design are ultimately subjective.
Manufacturers have a very fine line to walk and have to make careful trade-offs and compromises to please the most possible people.

Anyway I would argue that the K-7/K-5/K-3 line has far more retro design cues than any of its Nikon or Canon counterparts. Are they like Fuji's, no? But how big is the market for full retro cameras? and is it a bit of a temporary fad?

Erm, no, not a fad. It wasn't a fad in the 1920s when the first 35mm cameras came out was it? Look at how Fujifilm is doing in this market. Skyrocketing. Check out the new GFX model and tell me it's a fad.

---------- Post added 01-28-17 at 06:03 AM ----------

I think it finds a balance between traditional looks and the Pentax UI. I don't want to have two pentax cameras that work in different ways. I also appreciate the styling cues of the K1 carrying across and I think we can get a good idea where the K3 succesor is going.

One of the huge positives about the Pentax ecosystem is that if (or when) I buy the K3 successor I will have a medium format, full frame and APS-C camera that all have similar and familiar user interfaces and operations that all share batteries and flashes. A full retro camera would end up being a niche camera. Pentax is already niche why would they make an even more niche camera?

The problem with the KP (fine camera though it undoubtedly is) is that it is exactly already that - a niche camera. It is a sidestep from the current range. An alternative that is the same thing, packaged slightly differently.

But not enough of a difference to make it a worthwhile niche. If Pentax keeps on making mid-range advanced DSLRs and doesn't diversify it won't have success.
If you're going to go niche, don't remould a K-70 - provide an alternative approach, one that attracts a new market. That's what I'm saying.

---------- Post added 01-28-17 at 06:06 AM ----------

Are you wanting a K-1 in a MX body?

Ain't gonna happen. You'd need a smaller battery, get rid of the space wasting SR mechanism, GPS, larger mirror and near 100% viewfinder (smaller pentaprism), no onboard flash, get rid of motor drive/continuous mode (smaller motor and mirror mechanism) and so for.

Maybe you'd end up with the intro FF camera that some people are screaming for but I doubt even they would buy it.

That's a lovely idea! I'd settle for a digital LX.

---------- Post added 01-28-17 at 06:14 AM ----------

I think the retro ship has sailed. Classic looks are nice, but not at the expense of functionality or handling (which is usually where the compromise lies).

That said, a full-blown manual FF DSLR like the K1000 would be very very interesting, but maybe it's not feasible from a business standpoint.

But Adam, there is nothing simpler and more natural than an old-style interface. The way Fuji implements it is ideal. You have all your shutter speeds and an A setting. You have all your apertures and an A setting. All your ISOs and an A setting. So you get the same functionality i.e.. M, A, S, P, etc. by choosing which A(s) you want to set. I don't see any downside. You get to see what your camera is thinking even when it's switched off. You have no cryptic symbols and dial/button combinations to worry about, no screens to read. Other automatic functions can still be accessed via a menu or buttons. I know full well Pentax could do this, because they did it on film SLRs for 40 years.

I am not saying all their products should adopt this approach, but I'm saying if you're going to churn out a slightly modified alternative to your existing range, go all in and do something differently. The niche for the KP as I see it, is existing Pentax users with slightly smaller hands (!)

---------- Post added 01-28-17 at 06:19 AM ----------

The Pentax Q-S1 wasn't retro enough for you?

No!?? You miss the point. I am talking about retro control, styling is secondary.

[mohb]

Anybody who's been exposed to photographic principles can pick it up and understand it.

A wheel when turned alters a number - hasn't this been a photo technique/principle for a number of years?

[plooksta]

Full retro seemed such a great idea to the Nikon Df's designers! Wonder whether they still work for the company?

I agree. Once again, the problem with the Df was that they didn't go full retro. They tried to cram in too many functions of their existing cameras into it, and it ends up being a bit of a frankenstein.

If they had: taken out the AF and the more abstruse automatic features, scaled it down to fit into the original FM style body, then I'd probably be out there shooting with it now, not writing to you!

[photoptimist]

I've got no nostalgia for retro -- those old designs with marked dials reflect the limitations faced by camera designers of old and the limited ranges of performance of old cameras. Dials with markings were fine back when primitive cameras could only do 1/1000 -> 1 sec and film typically ranged from ASA 25 to 3200.

I'd hate to have a camera with unreadable dials for 1/24000->30 sec and ISO 100 to 819,200. And controlling these dials in 1/2 or 1/3 stop increments would simply be frustrating. Then there's having to turn the dial 12 to 20 clicks to get from a normal manual setting to the "Auto" position (and having to set multiple dials to auto if one is in a shooting scenario where P mode is useful). And how would the Pentax' brilliant green button work -- little motors to spin the labelled dials???? No thanks!

I, for one, am happy to have e-dials. My only wish is that each dial could have a tiny display on top showing the dial's function and current setting. That would be the best of both worlds -- annotated controls, large type, and software control of the settings and dial functionality.

Why should Pentax copy each niche move of every other camera maker? It seems like a fool's game to go head-to-head with another camera maker just to divide a niche in a shrinking market for sophisticated cameras. Pentax makes awesome cameras for photographers who want much more sophisticated control of the image making process than old mechanical cameras were ever capable of providing.

[plooksta]

I've got no nostalgia for retro -- those old designs with marked dials reflect the limitations faced by camera designers of old and the limited ranges of performance of old cameras. Dials with markings were fine back when primitive cameras could only do 1/1000 -> 1 sec and film typically ranged from ASA 25 to 3200.

I'd hate to have a camera with unreadable dials for 1/24000->30 sec and ISO 100 to 819,200. And controlling these dials in 1/2 or 1/3 stop increments would simply be frustrating. Then there's having to turn the dial 12 to 20 clicks to get from a normal manual setting to the "Auto" position (and having to set multiple dials to auto if one is in a shooting scenario where P mode is useful). And how would the Pentax' brilliant green button work -- little motors to spin the labelled dials???? No thanks!

I, for one, am happy to have e-dials. My only wish is that each dial could have a tiny display on top showing the dial's function and current setting. That would be the best of both worlds -- annotated controls, large type, and software control of the settings and dial functionality.

Why should Pentax copy each niche move of every other camera maker? It seems like a fool's game to go head-to-head with another camera maker just to divide a niche in a shrinking market for sophisticated cameras. Pentax makes awesome cameras for photographers who want much more sophisticated control of the image making process than old mechanical cameras were ever capable of providing.

What you're calling a niche move is rather large. All camera manufacturers have imitated and embellished each others' technology. That is the nature of market forces and technology. Why did Nikon adopt that damned new-fangled autofocus niche thing? Why are Sony now using that silly fad IBIS system? Why this silly pixel shift thing copied from Hasselblad? We use other peoples' ideas when they are good and the market wants them.

My contention is that the market would want a sideline "niche" camera with retro controls more than it wants another "variations on the same theme" camera, which the KP seems to be.

PS the KP does not go to 1/24000 shutter speeds. You have nothing to fear there.

[victormeldrew]

What would be the point in going 'full retro just like Fuji' when you can already buy a Fuji?

They should go 'full Pentax like Pentax' because nobody else does that.

[plooksta]

What would be the point in going 'full retro just like Fuji' when you can already buy a Fuji?

They should go 'full Pentax like Pentax' because nobody else does that.

I can't believe you just said that. Why make cameras at all? Canon make plenty....

---------- Post added 01-28-17 at 08:49 AM ----------

Erm, I quite like the smart dial. I use it to reach functions otherwise only available via menus (like wifi or bracketing) . Saves time. Or not, if you want a manual dial for each function, maybe we will see a camera with 38 marked dials for each function of the camera, who knows. You see numbers for shutter/aperture/iso etc in the ovf, live view screen, and the lcd screen up top. Unless you shoot without looking at the camera at all you simply cannot avoid it, although if you're not looking at the camera, how would you see the marked vintage dials? Anyway, it's a matter of preference and I guess personal experience.

The point you are missing is that this does not replace the whole product line. It's an alternative, in parallel. You can still keep your k-3 ii or your K-1. They're yours. You can still go out and get a K-70 if you prefer. But if you want something different, well...

[monochrome]

The "smart dial". Dial with cryptic markings that controls what the other, unmarked, dial does?

I thought my K-S2 was bad enough with its AUTO / SCN / A-HDR / U1 / U2 / B / M / TAv / Av / Tv / Sv / P dial. Then Pentax hit us wit the K-1 and its smart dial. Then we got the KP that has multiple dials with cryptical markings, including a dial that controls another dial. This looks to me like a descent into madness.

Again, contrast with Fujifilm. . . Numbered ISO dial, numbered shutter speed dial, aperture ring on the lens. Anybody who's been exposed to photographic principles can pick it up and understand it.

When I have a jones for retro I shoot film cameras. About as retro as you can get.

Then again, film is in Fuji's name.