Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-19-2013, 07:47 AM   #16
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 136
QuoteOriginally posted by JPT Quote
From what I saw at CP+, I had the same impression as Adam. The screen looks a bit strange with the retro design and I would rather they had made the back plate out of metal. They were showing an "aged" black model with the brass showing and the plastic screen housing looked even more incongruous with that. As a feature though, it is definitely something I'd use. They are great when you want to shoot above a crowd, for example. I also felt is was vey responsive and screen was very bright, with a good refresh rate.
I completely agree with this. It may not quite sync with the retro design, but it was one of the things I loved the most about my OM-D. It was super handy for a multitude of uses (makes odd-angle macro a breeze, low shots, high shots, etc.). I prefer it to the articulating screens that flip out on other cameras, and think if you're more of a stills shooter than video, it makes more sense. I'd prefer to have it than not and was glad to see they implemented it on the MX-1; definitely a selling point for me.

02-19-2013, 11:50 AM   #17
Veteran Member
kshapero's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: South Florida, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 384
Send mine back. Could not get comfy with the zoom switch. Just moved too erratic for me.
02-19-2013, 12:54 PM   #18
Site Supporter
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,297
QuoteOriginally posted by kivis Quote
Send mine back. Could not get comfy with the zoom switch. Just moved too erratic for me.

Interesting, your previous posts indivated that you really liked it...that is discouraging.
02-19-2013, 05:05 PM   #19
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 41,628
Original Poster
If I have time, I will do the video portion of my in-depth review of the MX-1 today. It is a nice camera, but it's not as perfect as I had hoped it would be. However, if you're looking for good IQ in a versatile compact, then the MX-1 won't disappoint.

My first digital point and shoot (which I bought in 2004) has the same sized sensor and the same basic features (PASM and video) as the MX-1, so I would say that Pentax is a bit late to the game with their enthusiast point and shoot. And the LCD screen completely ruins the appeal of the retro design for me...


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



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

02-19-2013, 06:19 PM   #20
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Virginia (USA)
Posts: 48
I'll throw in my .02 cents for what it is worth

Personally, I love the camera. Is it perfect? No, I have yet to find a camera that is at any price point (if one exists though, please someone tell me!). The nod to the past is nice but is just that in my opinion, a nod. I don't find fault with it because it isn't the spitting image of the MX. At this time, I don't really care about the ability to tilt the LCD though I'm told it will come in handy (this is the first camera I've had that has this feature, so time will tell). Certainly not a deal breaker either way. I haven't experienced any erratic issues with the zoom switch. And the ability to tilt the pop up flash? Well let's just say that never occurred to me to even be a feature to look for in a p&s (heck even my k-5 doesn't offer that in its pop up flash) and that just sounds like something very likely to break. A nice to have maybe but again not a deal breaker.

The size and handling are far better than I had imagined. My biggest fear was getting something too heavy and brick-like which some folks have expressed. I'm a petite female and find the size and handling superb - not too heavy or brick-like at all. It is very comfortable and very well balanced.

Most importantly for me is the usability. The menu just makes sense. I spent a couple of hours with it and can easily navigate and apply the settings I want. I had my Oly XZ-1 for a year and a half and barely took it out out of auto mode b/c the menu system didn't resonate with me and I could never remember how to get to what I needed quickly and without trial and error. My Oly XZ-1 also officially bit the dust the day after my MX-1 arrived. The sporadic LCD problems turned into a completely dead LCD/camera. First camera I've ever had to completely die on me. At least it made me feel significantly less guilty in buying the MX-1.

So far I'm very impressed with the MX-1. While I'm not a pixel peeper, I think given its specs it performs very well and is quite user friendly.

sue
Attached Images
   
02-20-2013, 06:48 AM   #21
Loyal Site Supporter
LeRolls's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: PSL, FL
Posts: 3,524
Nice! Good macro capability.
02-20-2013, 08:58 AM   #22
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 136
Thanks for the pics, photocat! Very nice. I was wondering if you could speak to the raw files of these shots. Meaning, how sharp are they really? The second one looks not bad (though not exactly fabulous), but the first looks kinda blurry. How do the originals look? Is it capable of taking truly sharp macros?
02-20-2013, 07:12 PM   #23
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Virginia (USA)
Posts: 48
Hi zdwagner -- For the daisy shot I applied one filter (a warm color one, can't remember now the name) in Nik and compressed the raw file to this size jpeg. For the lily (2nd shot) I applied one filter in LR3 (punch) and compressed to jpeg. They look plenty sharp, especially the last one, for me. I had moved the flowers to the floor by our sliding glass door. It was cloudy and snowy so the light was even but not very bright and I was squatting while hand holding the camera -- i.e. not exactly tripod/remote steady one would normally take for tack-sharp macros.

All that said, I believe the photographer plays a big part in getting really tack sharp photos and I was just playing around with the camera. So factoring in a p&s camera, lighting, and my lack of photo technique (and not much post processing either), I think these came out pretty well and more than satisfies my needs. I'm sure a better photographer could get much more impressive shots.

I will post more as I'm able. Sadly no time this week (gotta keep the day job to pay the bills) but perhaps this weekend!

sue

02-20-2013, 07:41 PM   #24
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Virginia (USA)
Posts: 48
Not sure how to really make a 100% crop in LR but I cropped the daisy photo from the RAW file, no adjustments, resized for uploading here. The dof is very shallow but for my not so perfect eyes, the very center is acceptably sharp, of course YMMV!

Edit: Still looks a wee bit sharper on my computer than when uploaded here. Again, probably my error. Not a big difference but a bit.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX MX-1  Photo 

Last edited by photocat; 02-20-2013 at 07:47 PM. Reason: added edit comment
02-20-2013, 09:23 PM   #25
Site Supporter
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,297
The bottom shot looks tack sharp...but both look underexposed.
02-22-2013, 10:28 AM   #26
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 42
Photocat, thanks for posting your very informative opinion of the MX-1. I also feel usability is very important when it comes to cameras, and it is a big reason why I am not very fond of an Olympus EPL-2 that I have, even though it takes quite decent photos. Another issue is with reliability. These days, new models come to market every 6-12 months, and no one seems to care if a camera doesn't last much beyond the next new model, particularly when it comes to compacts. I had a Panasonic zs-3 p&s that I really liked, but the LCD screen spontaneously cracked and the camera was basically non-functional after barely one year of light use, a similar fate as your Oly xz-1. Considering the price of some of these premium compacts, I would hope they would have better quality in both build and performance! Also, I think your posted photos are fine. I am not a pixel peeper either, and would like to hear more of your user experience with the MX-1.
02-22-2013, 02:46 PM   #27
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 136
This review is a bit of a bummer:
Pentax MX-1 Review & Rating | PCMag.com

The gist:

QuoteQuote:
Pros

Gorgeous design with brass construction. Excellent control layout. Tilting rear display. Fast lens. Raw shooting support. Low noise through ISO 1600.
Cons
Very soft edges at widest angle. Heavy distortion when shooting Raw. Unresponsive for a few seconds after taking a photo. No hot shoe or EVF option.
Bottom Line

The Pentax MX-1 is a beautifully designed camera, but some issues with image quality and performance prevent it from living up to its potential.
(Edit) That didn't paste very well, sorry.

That doesn't sound great. Hopefully firmware will deal with the lag between shots... that sounds horrible.
02-22-2013, 04:10 PM   #28
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Virginia (USA)
Posts: 48
Thanks Kiwibird! I hope to have some more time with it this weekend and will report back

Thanks for the link zdwagner. I'm not sure a pc mag is the best source of camera reviews but that is subjective.

"Very soft edge at widest angle" - I don't know, I'll have to go back and see if I agree with that. I shot several at the widest angle and nothing jumped out at me but then again as I mentioned earlier, I'm not exactly a pixel peeper so I don't scrutinize to that level unless it is really noticeable.

"Heavy Distortion when shooting Raw" -- I don't even know what that really means. I was quite pleased with my RAW images and didn't see any distortion.

"Unresponsive for a few seconds" - sort of. You can continue taking photos with no delay. The unresponsiveness comes when you go back to "chimp" and see the image on the lcd. For quite literally 1 second (maybe 2 seconds max) you will see "image being recorded" message then the photo shows on the lcd. Are we really a society who cannot wait 1-2 seconds? If this was a high-end dslr being used for sporting / professional use, absolutely get it. But this is a p&s, I can manage to wait 1 to 2 seconds. If that is the only fault with this camera, personally I'd be thrilled with that.

"No hot shoe / EVF" -- I would never use a hot shoe for flash or evf on a p&s so lack of these features was of no concern to me whatsoever. Of course for others who like those capabilities, it is something to factor into the decision making process.

I plan to spend more time with the camera this weekend, though our rainy forecast doesn't give me much hope. My initial impressions still hold true and love the camera. But being fair, if I do find issue with it as I use it more, I will definitely bring that up here as well.
02-22-2013, 04:43 PM   #29
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 136
QuoteOriginally posted by photocat Quote
I'm not sure a pc mag is the best source of camera reviews
Probably true.

The RAW files would likely not be corrected in camera, is what they mean. Though your experience seems to disagree with this. Perhaps to their tests consider a much lower level of distortion an issue than that which you find acceptable or even perceptible. This could be a real issue for some, but I really doubt it's that big a deal in a compact p&s camera such as this one. However, it is $500 (or thereabouts).

I don't mind the lack of a hot shoe either. I do think it's a nice feature to have though, and there are other cameras in the same price vicinity that have them.

The unresponsiveness is where you and I differ. I find it pretty annoying when a camera is slow or unresponsive, in much the same way I get annoyed with a cell phone that is slow or unresponsive. In this day and age, with the technology available, I personally think it's inexcusable to produce an unresponsive camera, especially one priced at $500. I don't think there's any reason it needs to be unresponsive, and so why is it?
My K-5 IIs, by way of example, is slower than other dslrs I've used in some ways (the lack of UHS compatibility is a bit obnoxious, and again, why?), but I certainly wouldn't ever refer to it as 'unresponsive'. I understand if you fire off a burst, then the camera needs to catch up so you can't view files for a moment, but for each shot? I think that's a bit much.

But yes, much of this is personal preference, and I'm still very interested in the camera. I think it has a lot going for it. It would be sad if the lens wasn't quite so great, but the reality is that you shouldn't necessarily be trying to get edge-to-edge sharp landscape shots with a p&s either.
However, by way of comparison I found the lens on the Olympus XZ-1 quite good. One hopes it's at least in the same league as that one. =)
02-22-2013, 05:49 PM   #30
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Virginia (USA)
Posts: 48
QuoteOriginally posted by zdwagner Quote

The unresponsiveness is where you and I differ. I find it pretty annoying when a camera is slow or unresponsive, in much the same way I get annoyed with a cell phone that is slow or unresponsive. In this day and age, with the technology available, I personally think it's inexcusable to produce an unresponsive camera, especially one priced at $500. I don't think there's any reason it needs to be unresponsive, and so why is it?
My K-5 IIs, by way of example, is slower than other dslrs I've used in some ways (the lack of UHS compatibility is a bit obnoxious, and again, why?), but I certainly wouldn't ever refer to it as 'unresponsive'. I understand if you fire off a burst, then the camera needs to catch up so you can't view files for a moment, but for each shot? I think that's a bit much.

But yes, much of this is personal preference, and I'm still very interested in the camera. I think it has a lot going for it. It would be sad if the lens wasn't quite so great, but the reality is that you shouldn't necessarily be trying to get edge-to-edge sharp landscape shots with a p&s either.
However, by way of comparison I found the lens on the Olympus XZ-1 quite good. One hopes it's at least in the same league as that one. =)

I definitely get what you are saying about the "unresponsiveness" I guess for me though I wouldn't even label the 2 seconds it takes to write to the card as "unresponsive." Having it instant would be the ideal, agreed, but a couple of seconds for the type of shooting I do, is really no big deal for me all things considered.

I have (had?) the Oly XZ-1. I would say the lenses are indeed in the same league, same ballpark, same team The MX-1 body actually balances the lens much better than slimmer Oly body (in my opinion). My Oly only lasting 20 months of fairly light use however detracts greatly from its appeal -- well at least to me. For fun I brought out my Fuji F31 which had a a good 3 years or more of heavy use, including an unprotected trip to Niagara Falls and it still works great. Hope to say the same about the MX-1 in a few years too - time will tell!
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
bit, button, camera, digital camera, focus, impressions, info, lens, mode, pentax, pentax cameras, point and shoot, review
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Metz 52 AF-1 first impressions mattdm Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 24 03-15-2013 02:28 AM
Misc First shots with my first film SLR, Pentax MX and M 50 1.7 LeDave Post Your Photos! 6 10-06-2012 05:18 PM
K5 first impressions an3ony Pentax K-5 8 08-29-2011 12:10 PM
first manual lens. first impressions. wehavenowaves! Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 03-07-2011 07:02 PM
Metz 48 AF-1: first impressions mattdm Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 29 06-02-2009 03:37 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:12 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top