What the Pentax KP should have looked like

adjutant · 01-28-2017, 01:53 PM

In my most humble opinion, this is objectively the truth.

The thing that I hate about ALL modern DSLRs is how ugly the pentaprism housings look. Everytime I see a Pentax camera with a tiny limited lens, it looks absolutely hideous. The nameplate being so high makes it look like it has a humongous forehead. Worse yet, they stick out so far to the front (no one notices how ugly this looks?!). Yet no one ever points this out, and I'm scared to point it out lest my vanity be revealed to the world. However, the Pentax KP nearly hit the nail on the head design-wise and it has inspired me to make a small edit in MS PAINT. I trust the Japanese, with their unique sense of aesthetic, will come around to the same design choices! Who doesn't want a baby 67?!

Thank you for reading.

Last edited by adjutant; 02-04-2017 at 06:49 PM.

plooksta · 01-28-2017, 02:28 PM

Funny thing about the pentaprisms on digital cameras is you can make them almost any shape you want, esp. if there is no flash. The actual prisms inside are tiny compared to the bump.

bobmaxja · 01-28-2017, 02:35 PM - **3 Likes**

Sorry , but , you will have problem mounting lens on the first one. You need space up

lightbox · 01-28-2017, 03:14 PM

Between the two images, it seems to me that the edited one actually emphasizes the pyramid shape up top even more.

reh321 · 01-28-2017, 04:41 PM

The front view looks nice, but a practical design would have to provide

(1) adequate clearance above the mount

(2) a flatish area on top for the hot shoe

(3) mechanism to hold the OnBoard Flash

Kenn100D · 01-28-2017, 05:28 PM - **3 Likes**

Design wise, FWIW I think Ricoh-Pentax did a great job for the KP. Now what a I need is 1100 USD to get it. Will see by May.

**patrick9** · 01-28-2017, 07:33 PM

Originally posted by Kenn100D

Design wise, FWIW I think Ricoh-Pentax did a great job for the KP. Now what a I need is 1100 USD to get it. Will see by May.

Agreed
I haven't want a camera this bad since the K-30 was introduced.

automorphism · 01-28-2017, 11:20 PM

I kind of more sad that the grip doesn't have that overhang any more. I think it's pretty comfy.

MrB1 · 01-28-2017, 11:42 PM

It's really just a matter of personal preference but, for me, the flat-top shape of the pentaprism housing (when viewed from front or rear) of the K-S2 and K-70 looks better than the angular top of the KP.

I presume a larger than perhaps necessary size of the pentaprism housing also gives a taller on-board flash unit, so that its illumination gets past the bigger lenses.

Philip

Tan68 · 01-29-2017, 07:15 AM

Originally posted by adjutant

... The nameplate being so high makes it look like it has a humongous forehead. ...

Rather than a big forehead, I see a surprised look; the camera's eyebrow is raised in shock. I like the look of your drawing.

Sigma don't want to make lenses for us so it don't matter if they lenses fit or not. I say lower the brow. :^)

Onaside note, I have read the KP is only a little smaller than the K3 and this is true with respect to strict measurement. However, there is less camera under the mount of the KP so any camera bit equaling the height of the K3 is only the pointy K head.

I wonder if they could have reduced the size of the point on top and had a noticeably different height.. perhaps, but maybe they thought it was more important to continue the style of the K-1. Either way, I think the KP is still practically smaller than K-3

adjutant · 01-29-2017, 09:35 AM

Originally posted by bobmaxja

Sorry , but , you will have problem mounting lens on the first one. You need space up

As long as it does not protrude far to the front, there's no problem. Why do modern DSLR pentaprism housings stick out so far to the front? Clearly it's not entirely necessary since the Nikon Df is the only DSLR I know where it doesn't stick out over the lens like an awning. Do people actually like how that looks?

That slope sticking out right above the lens mount is more offensive to lens mounting considerations than a lowered nameplate.

bobmaxja · 01-29-2017, 09:46 AM

Their a standard for K lenses of minimum clearance . This was discuss before . Your for sure is not meeting the minimum. If you dont meet that minimum , your drawing is wort nothing.

Tan68 · 01-29-2017, 09:52 AM

Originally posted by adjutant

... stick out over the lens like an awning. ...

So the flash can stick up higher, maybe.
But the cameras with no flash still have the cro-magnon brow...

Originally posted by adjutant

... That slope sticking out right above the lens mount is more offensive to lens mounting considerations than a lowered nameplate.

I imagine so.

plooksta · 01-29-2017, 10:51 AM

Or like this...

Phooaaar, I almost had an accident....

Tan68 · 01-29-2017, 11:01 AM

Originally posted by plooksta

Or like this...

Phooaaar, I almost had an accident....

Now, this is a good idea!

I do admit the top of the camera looks nice with the retro dials and the two traditional command dials remain so it is a simple matter to ignore both the full stops only shutter speed dial and the ISO dial that requires a shift of the grip for it to be used.

rippin' !! :^)

+ of course, the retro dials will still serve a purpose.. they can be twiddled to set exposure mode. then, the user can get to business with the two command dials. this really is a good combo of retro look [& setting mode] + practicality [adjusting exposure without shifting grip]

01-28-2017, 01:53 PM	#1
adjutant Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 100	What the Pentax KP should have looked like In my most humble opinion, this is objectively the truth. The thing that I hate about ALL modern DSLRs is how ugly the pentaprism housings look. Everytime I see a Pentax camera with a tiny limited lens, it looks absolutely hideous. The nameplate being so high makes it look like it has a humongous forehead. Worse yet, they stick out so far to the front (no one notices how ugly this looks?!). Yet no one ever points this out, and I'm scared to point it out lest my vanity be revealed to the world. However, the Pentax KP nearly hit the nail on the head design-wise and it has inspired me to make a small edit in MS PAINT. I trust the Japanese, with their unique sense of aesthetic, will come around to the same design choices! Who doesn't want a baby 67?! Thank you for reading. Last edited by adjutant; 02-04-2017 at 06:49 PM.

01-28-2017, 11:42 PM	#9
MrB1 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2013 Location: Hertfordshire, England Posts: 845	It's really just a matter of personal preference but, for me, the flat-top shape of the pentaprism housing (when viewed from front or rear) of the K-S2 and K-70 looks better than the angular top of the KP. I presume a larger than perhaps necessary size of the pentaprism housing also gives a taller on-board flash unit, so that its illumination gets past the bigger lenses. Philip Last edited by MrB1; 01-28-2017 at 11:48 PM.

01-29-2017, 10:51 AM	#14
plooksta Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 158	Or like this... Phooaaar, I almost had an accident.... Attached Images

01-29-2017, 11:01 AM	#15
Tan68 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 501	Originally posted by plooksta Or like this... Phooaaar, I almost had an accident.... Now, this is a good idea! I do admit the top of the camera looks nice with the retro dials and the two traditional command dials remain so it is a simple matter to ignore both the full stops only shutter speed dial and the ISO dial that requires a shift of the grip for it to be used. rippin' !! :^) + of course, the retro dials will still serve a purpose.. they can be twiddled to set exposure mode. then, the user can get to business with the two command dials. this really is a good combo of retro look [& setting mode] + practicality [adjusting exposure without shifting grip] Last edited by Tan68; 01-29-2017 at 11:07 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Your vehicle: what do you have, why do you like it, and what do you not like?	Auzzie-Phoenix	General Talk	2980	6 Days Ago 05:06 PM
should I have looked for a M mount/ K mount lens before I jumped into the m42 river?	enyaw	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	15	10-19-2016 05:49 PM
What if the Q-S1 looked like this...	pjalves	Pentax Mirrorless Cameras	17	12-05-2015 07:40 PM
Sony A7ii -- what Pentax FF should look like?	MJSfoto1956	Pentax DSLR Discussion	59	11-25-2014 03:09 PM
This is what a 5MB hard drive looked like in 1956 (note: required a forklift).	jogiba	General Talk	3	12-28-2011 04:57 PM

01-28-2017, 02:28 PM	#2
plooksta Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 158	Funny thing about the pentaprisms on digital cameras is you can make them almost any shape you want, esp. if there is no flash. The actual prisms inside are tiny compared to the bump.

01-28-2017, 02:35 PM - 3 Likes	#3
bobmaxja Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Laval, Quebec Canada Posts: 2,171	Sorry , but , you will have problem mounting lens on the first one. You need space up

01-28-2017, 03:14 PM	#4
lightbox Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 599	Between the two images, it seems to me that the edited one actually emphasizes the pyramid shape up top even more.

01-28-2017, 04:41 PM	#5
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,177	The front view looks nice, but a practical design would have to provide (1) adequate clearance above the mount (2) a flatish area on top for the hot shoe (3) mechanism to hold the OnBoard Flash

01-28-2017, 05:28 PM - 3 Likes	#6
Kenn100D Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Paranaque City, Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 697	Design wise, FWIW I think Ricoh-Pentax did a great job for the KP. Now what a I need is 1100 USD to get it. Will see by May.

01-28-2017, 07:33 PM	#7
patrick9 Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Murfreesboro Tennessee Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,458	Originally posted by Kenn100D Design wise, FWIW I think Ricoh-Pentax did a great job for the KP. Now what a I need is 1100 USD to get it. Will see by May. Agreed I haven't want a camera this bad since the K-30 was introduced.

01-28-2017, 11:20 PM	#8
automorphism Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Ontario, Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 791	I kind of more sad that the grip doesn't have that overhang any more. I think it's pretty comfy.

01-29-2017, 07:15 AM	#10
Tan68 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 501	Originally posted by adjutant ... The nameplate being so high makes it look like it has a humongous forehead. ... Rather than a big forehead, I see a surprised look; the camera's eyebrow is raised in shock. I like the look of your drawing. Sigma don't want to make lenses for us so it don't matter if they lenses fit or not. I say lower the brow. :^) Onaside note, I have read the KP is only a little smaller than the K3 and this is true with respect to strict measurement. However, there is less camera under the mount of the KP so any camera bit equaling the height of the K3 is only the pointy K head. I wonder if they could have reduced the size of the point on top and had a noticeably different height.. perhaps, but maybe they thought it was more important to continue the style of the K-1. Either way, I think the KP is still practically smaller than K-3

01-29-2017, 09:35 AM	#11
adjutant Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 100 Original Poster	Originally posted by bobmaxja Sorry , but , you will have problem mounting lens on the first one. You need space up As long as it does not protrude far to the front, there's no problem. Why do modern DSLR pentaprism housings stick out so far to the front? Clearly it's not entirely necessary since the Nikon Df is the only DSLR I know where it doesn't stick out over the lens like an awning. Do people actually like how that looks? That slope sticking out right above the lens mount is more offensive to lens mounting considerations than a lowered nameplate.

01-29-2017, 09:46 AM	#12
bobmaxja Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Laval, Quebec Canada Posts: 2,171	Their a standard for K lenses of minimum clearance . This was discuss before . Your for sure is not meeting the minimum. If you dont meet that minimum , your drawing is wort nothing.

01-29-2017, 09:52 AM	#13
Tan68 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 501	Originally posted by adjutant ... stick out over the lens like an awning. ... So the flash can stick up higher, maybe. But the cameras with no flash still have the cro-magnon brow... Originally posted by adjutant ... That slope sticking out right above the lens mount is more offensive to lens mounting considerations than a lowered nameplate. I imagine so.