Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-04-2013, 08:00 AM   #46
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 136
Hmm... well I don't remember my Olympus XZ-1 having responsiveness problems as bad as this when shooting raw, and that camera is a generation behind this one (though that doesn't mean it didn't; my memory is pathetic). I personally think that in this age of my phone having more computing power than a laptop from 5 years ago, there's really no reason for a camera to have these responsiveness issues.
I think it's great if you enjoy using the camera in its current state. I'm sure lots of people will. However that doesn't mean that excuses should be made for an issue that is easily solved with a faster processor or better engineering or both. Why would I want to buy a less responsive XZ-2? Sure, it's prettier, and if you're concerned solely with how your camera looks, then MX-1 is your bag. But, as pointed out in the review, the cameras essentially share the same sensor and lens, and both have a tiltable screen. Sure the Oly is more expensive (definitely too expensive), but there's still no reason a camera in the MX-1's price range and sporting the MX-1's feature set, should have these issues.

Just because it's a compact camera doesn't mean it shouldn't be incredibly responsive.

03-04-2013, 08:06 AM   #47
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 136
By the way, I'm mostly being a gadfly here. I love the looks of the MX-1 as much as the next guy (except I agree with Adam that the screen does ruin it quite a bit), and am still incredibly interested in this camera. But, and perhaps I'm not in a large group in this, I shoot raw with my compacts, and want them to perform reasonably well when doing so.
03-04-2013, 09:41 AM   #48
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,126
QuoteOriginally posted by zdwagner Quote
Hmm... well I don't remember my Olympus XZ-1 having responsiveness problems as bad as this when shooting raw, and that camera is a generation behind this one (though that doesn't mean it didn't; my memory is pathetic). I personally think that in this age of my phone having more computing power than a laptop from 5 years ago, there's really no reason for a camera to have these responsiveness issues.
I think it's great if you enjoy using the camera in its current state. I'm sure lots of people will. However that doesn't mean that excuses should be made for an issue that is easily solved with a faster processor or better engineering or both. Why would I want to buy a less responsive XZ-2? Sure, it's prettier, and if you're concerned solely with how your camera looks, then MX-1 is your bag. But, as pointed out in the review, the cameras essentially share the same sensor and lens, and both have a tiltable screen. Sure the Oly is more expensive (definitely too expensive), but there's still no reason a camera in the MX-1's price range and sporting the MX-1's feature set, should have these issues.

Just because it's a compact camera doesn't mean it shouldn't be incredibly responsive.
You need a) to check comparisons across a few sites to make sure the MX-1 really is significantly less responsive and b) bear in mind that beefier imaging processors cost more so the sticker price tends to increase. If the sticker price increases too much, sales are bound to suffer. For myself, I don't think I am making excuses - I took about 100 RAW shots this morning and did not feel an issue with responsiveness but then I am a one-by-one person and don't expect instant action from a compact camera. However, I did not buy this cam intending to use it for RAW only but for RAW occasionally and my guess would be that the majority of buyers would think the same. Some would not want RAW at all, perhaps not even know what it is. It's possible, too, that a firmware update will improve things, if they need improving.

My main feeling about the reaction to the MX-1 and the several similar cameras on the web - absolutely not to your measured comments, I emphasize - is incredulity at the crassness of so many of the remarks, that these cameras are missing features compacts as a class were never intended to have and that $499 doesn't get you the features and performance of a high-end full-frame, etc.

If I wanted a high-end compact and could afford it I would buy a Sony RX1 without a second thought. But back in the world most of us can actually afford, the MX-1 strikes me as fine to be getting on with as a lightweight, go-anywhere item along with my two main Pentax cams.

I'm hoping that Pentax will issue a new Ricoh camera or two later this year, a GRD V for example. If so, those cameras may be really blazing in all ways and the best of their breed for some kinds of photography but for a lot more money.

Last edited by mecrox; 03-04-2013 at 09:48 AM.
03-04-2013, 09:55 AM   #49
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 136
This is all fair enough, mecrox. I wouldn't disagree with a word of it. And it's worth remembering that our inflated views of how things 'should work' is well kept in view. I do still think that technology has gotten to the point where we can expect exceptional performance from compact cameras. We live in a camera world now where cameras such as the Olympus E-PM2 exist (a camera which is roughly the same size as the MX-1, if not smaller, albeit sans tilty screen), which provide exceptional performance in a very compact body, for exactly the same price with a 14-42mm kit lens. Sure, the lens is a lot less complex (and bigger) and has to do less, but we're not really talking about the lens, are we? AND that camera sports a much larger sensor.
So while I wouldn't necessarily disagree with what you're saying, I would offer that there's a reason consumers can and should expect a higher level of responsiveness and quality from their compact cameras. And that reason is that this is the climate the manufacturers have created, and it is the camera world in which we live. If Pentax can't keep up with that, then it's really too bad.

That all said, I appreciate your point of view, and as I said, I'm still very excited about the camera. I do hope they are able to maybe speed things up a bit with firmware, but even if not I'd still be interested. But probably not for $500.

03-04-2013, 11:45 AM   #50
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 165
almost

This is almost a must have camera.

As with the Q (I own 2 of them) and the K-01, usability is compromised by the lack of an eye-level EVF. If the MX1 has a small mock Pentaprism housing containing an EVF, the MX1 would look like a fixed lens digital MX and would be close to perfect.

I would also like to see a focus ring around the lens barrel.

This is possible. The RX1 has the focus ring (and an aperture ring). The RX100 has a ring that is either a zoom ring or manual focus ring. The LX5 and LX7 have a clip on EVF. So does the Olympus XZ1 and XZ2.
03-04-2013, 12:38 PM   #51
Veteran Member
mrNewt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON, RH
Posts: 2,170
Hmmm ... might sound silly but you think MX-1 will sell that good considering that the K-01 is still around selling at such a low price, with a bigger sensor and a flash shoe (a big minus on the MX-1 for some people)!?

I like the MX-1, but putting the looks aside (for those who don't like the looks of the K-01), I really can't find any reasons to pick one up (considering I already have K-01). I guess the only benefit is that is more pocket-able and it has one extending lens.
The K-01 is the only thing that keeps me from not getting the MX-1, especially at the current price. Maybe when prices are lower - how lower could they go in the next year!?

Maybe an improved MX-2 with similar sensor in the K-01 - if they don't plan to scrape this project as they did with the K-01!?

Last edited by mrNewt; 03-04-2013 at 12:54 PM.
03-04-2013, 02:06 PM   #52
Pentaxian
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,347
QuoteOriginally posted by mrNewt Quote
Hmmm ... might sound silly but you think MX-1 will sell that good considering that the K-01 is still around selling at such a low price, with a bigger sensor and a flash shoe (a big minus on the MX-1 for some people)!?

I like the MX-1, but putting the looks aside (for those who don't like the looks of the K-01), I really can't find any reasons to pick one up (considering I already have K-01). I guess the only benefit is that is more pocket-able and it has one extending lens.
The K-01 is the only thing that keeps me from not getting the MX-1, especially at the current price. Maybe when prices are lower - how lower could they go in the next year!?

Maybe an improved MX-2 with similar sensor in the K-01 - if they don't plan to scrape this project as they did with the K-01!?
You also have the Panasonic LX-7, with a hot shoe, provisions for a viewfinder, with a wider and faster lens for $399 ($100 cheaper than the MX-1).
Now, me personally, i would rather have the tilting screen than the EVF, and I don't need a hotshoe either. But it seems to be a deal breaker for a lot of people out there. I also prefer the wider lens (for me a wider lens is a lot more important than the extra reach, but that is just my preference) of the LX-7.

Last edited by cali92rs; 03-04-2013 at 02:14 PM.
03-04-2013, 06:00 PM   #53
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Virginia (USA)
Posts: 48
QuoteOriginally posted by zdwagner Quote
By the way, I'm mostly being a gadfly here. I love the looks of the MX-1 as much as the next guy (except I agree with Adam that the screen does ruin it quite a bit), and am still incredibly interested in this camera. But, and perhaps I'm not in a large group in this, I shoot raw with my compacts, and want them to perform reasonably well when doing so.
Hey ZD -- if that is the only thing stopping you, you should definitely give it a whirl and see for yourself. I shoot RAW too and yes it takes a couple of seconds when I hit the "chimp" key It really isn't a huge deal. That said, I've never been a rapid fire shooter with my p&s (and rarely with my K-5).

03-04-2013, 06:06 PM   #54
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Virginia (USA)
Posts: 48
QuoteOriginally posted by mrNewt Quote
Hmmm ... might sound silly but you think MX-1 will sell that good considering that the K-01 is still around selling at such a low price, with a bigger sensor and a flash shoe (a big minus on the MX-1 for some people)!?

I like the MX-1, but putting the looks aside (for those who don't like the looks of the K-01), I really can't find any reasons to pick one up (considering I already have K-01). I guess the only benefit is that is more pocket-able and it has one extending lens.
The K-01 is the only thing that keeps me from not getting the MX-1, especially at the current price. Maybe when prices are lower - how lower could they go in the next year!?

Maybe an improved MX-2 with similar sensor in the K-01 - if they don't plan to scrape this project as they did with the K-01!?

You know I always wondered the reverse. Why spend the money on a K-01 when you can get the K-5? They are more comparable in size/wt and then there is the whole interchangeable lens thing. Most people who want / need p&s or bridge cams usually don't want the hassle of carrying around and changing lenses.
03-04-2013, 06:35 PM   #55
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,720
QuoteOriginally posted by photocat Quote
You know I always wondered the reverse. Why spend the money on a K-01 when you can get the K-5? They are more comparable in size/wt and then there is the whole interchangeable lens thing. Most people who want / need p&s or bridge cams usually don't want the hassle of carrying around and changing lenses.
I'd guess that for most of us, the K-01 is not our only K-mount body. I have DSLR's. I want the K-01 because it's not a DSLR.

Bridge cam, no thanks. I like DSLR IQ.

Last edited by audiobomber; 03-04-2013 at 09:10 PM.
03-04-2013, 08:54 PM   #56
Veteran Member
mrNewt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON, RH
Posts: 2,170
QuoteOriginally posted by photocat Quote
You know I always wondered the reverse. Why spend the money on a K-01 when you can get the K-5? They are more comparable in size/wt and then there is the whole interchangeable lens thing. Most people who want / need p&s or bridge cams usually don't want the hassle of carrying around and changing lenses.
I have the K-5 too ... K-01 is just the companion of it ...
03-04-2013, 09:31 PM   #57
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Dallas, TX
Photos: Albums
Posts: 71
Existence of the Q and K01 does not make MX-1 a bad camera. I don't think MX1 is designed to replace the two. It's more for new photog's who don't currently own pentax, or possibly wanting a small F1.8-2.5 package.
03-04-2013, 11:41 PM   #58
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 43,668
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by brelip Quote
Existence of the Q and K01 does not make MX-1 a bad camera. I don't think MX1 is designed to replace the two. It's more for new photog's who don't currently own pentax, or possibly wanting a small F1.8-2.5 package.
I agree. And while I would never use the Q for any reason (except with adapter tele lenses), I would certainly consider carrying around the MX-1 instead of my DSLRs for casual shooting.

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:

03-05-2013, 05:38 AM   #59
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Virginia (USA)
Posts: 48
QuoteOriginally posted by mrNewt Quote
I have the K-5 too ... K-01 is just the companion of it ...
Not to derail this too much but I'm genuinely curious as to what the K-01 offers over the K-5? And when do you prefer the K-01 over the K-5, in what situations?

I have the K-5 and I can't figure out why I'd ever choose it over the K-5 in any given circumstance. It isn't much smaller or lighter. It doesn't have the viewfinder (of which the mx-1 is being raked over the coals for not having either?!) and I'd still have to fiddle with either a big zoom or a fixed lens if I didn't want to bring multiple lenses.

Just really curious. I have nothing against the K-01 at all, just never quite understood when it would be a preferred choice over the full monty (K-5)
03-05-2013, 06:42 AM   #60
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
QuoteOriginally posted by cali92rs Quote
You also have the Panasonic LX-7, with a hot shoe, provisions for a viewfinder, with a wider and faster lens for $399 ($100 cheaper than the MX-1).
Now, me personally, i would rather have the tilting screen than the EVF, and I don't need a hotshoe either. But it seems to be a deal breaker for a lot of people out there. I also prefer the wider lens (for me a wider lens is a lot more important than the extra reach, but that is just my preference) of the LX-7.
A few weeks ago, the LX7 was on sale for $300. I am one for whom the hot shoe was important, but the MX-1 lack of a hot shoe plus the price was a deal breaker outweighing the tilting screen. My wife (for whom I was interested in this kind of camera) is very happy with the LX7. I am blown away with the performance at F/1.4, and she won't let her little white LX7 out of her sight.
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 10:47 AM. | 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