Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-04-2013, 02:50 PM   #16
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,468
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote

Say this had a hotshoe and optional viewfinder. Say it had something close in size to an APS-C sensor. Say it had interchangeable lenses. Then it would still be waaaay behind what Micro Four Thirds offers. Sad.
Well, then it would be trying to be something besides a high-end P&S. I think part of the problem here is expectations in that regard. Personally, if I had unlimited funds, I don't think I'd *want* a MILC for the purposes I wouldn't just use a DSLR for. If Pentax did want to make one, I'd say go right ahead and imitate that Olympus OM-D in APS-C. If I'm going to swap lenses around, I'm probably carrying a lot of film stuff anyway and the tiny-ness there reaches diminishing returns real quick if I want to pop an old Canon SSC lens on there or something. If I want a pocket camera, I want a pocket camera.

I do think that when things get to be pricey, it's possible that Pentax designers shouldn't be making too many presumptions like 'You don't need a flash/finder shoe.' People spending that kind of money may not be as willing to live with the lack of some feature or other. Still, comparing a P&S to other than a P&S isn't terribly productive.

03-04-2013, 03:08 PM   #17
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
Well, then it would be trying to be something besides a high-end P&S.
So, you really think this camera is a good high-end P&S? Honestly? It's a poor clone of the Olympus XZ-2.

On the other hand, if it's trying to appeal to the enthusiast retro crowd, then it needs to actually look the part. Which it doesn't. Or more precisely does in only half its aspect -- which is worse than having a consistent design (whatever that might be). It also needs to offer quality features that will appeal to those people who are fixated on range-finders. But instead it is rather dumbed down. (No hot-shoe, no control wheel, small sensor.) It would have made more sense to price it higher and fill out the feature set properly.

So, no, I am not trying to compare this to something it isn't trying to be. But since Pentax themselves apparently have no idea what this camera is trying to be, it makes the process more complicated. ;-)

I call this a fail, like I called the K-01. Because buyers in a market flooded with competitors are simply not this stupid.
03-04-2013, 03:12 PM   #18
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,078
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
Here's the Pentax Forums in-depth review of the Pentax MX-1:

[snip]

Overall the MX-1 is a solid camera, but the tilting LCD ruins the elegance of classic design. It delivers great image quality and has lots of built-in features, but nothing about it really says "wow" to push it ahead of the competition apart from the low $499 pricetag.

IMO if you own a Q and don't have the K-mount adapter, then you may want to consider upgrading to the MX-1, as it's better for pointing and shooting and allows for 1-handed operation!
I'm finding it a perfectly OK compact camera with some nice tricks, reasonably familiar Pentax-style controls and menus and image quality as good as any comparable camera (price/sensor, market, etc.). I like things like panorama, autostitching, a candid (silent) setting, spirit level, two levels of macro, a fast and pretty good all-in-one lens, the many filters and effects, and much besides. It's fine on its own terms. I don't need the things it doesn't have. This isn't intended to be some kind of mould-shattering ubercamera, just a decent and reasonably stylish compact camera better built than most. Can't see a problem here, tbh, and certainly can't understand the sudden outbreak of gloom and doom it seems to have provoked.

Below is a shot I took this morning - three shots in RAW using the autobracket setting so only one shutter press was needed, pulled together in Photomatix and sorted in Lightroom. Yes, you can see this is the product of a small sensor but again, on its own terms, there's nothing wrong with a result like this which isn't caused by the person behind the camera. In a month or two, chances are there'll be a Lightroom profile for the MX-1 and perhaps a lens profile for it too in which case the slightly wonky lines in this pic (I guesstimated using Lightroom's perspective control) may be cleared up too.



oxford-3-040413
03-04-2013, 03:14 PM   #19
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by jon404 Quote
@rparmar -- beauty is in the eye of the beholder though, isn't it? And my K-01 sure went from ugly to gorgeous when the price dropped, and I'm very glad I bought it, because once you actually hold it and use it, it is just great.
You are confusing ugly with cheap. No matter how cheap the K-01 is, it is always ugly. And it is cheap only because it failed on the market. Which I believe is proving my point...

But the world needs less negativity so, my point being made, I will grit my teeth in Pentax-generated disappointment (yet again) and move on.

03-04-2013, 03:21 PM   #20
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,308
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
I don't know if you can call it a failure right off considering what market it's really entering. I think they ought to consider other variants for the line as it evolves, but it looks like a good platform to start. I wouldn't be too nervous considering this is Ricoh, not Hoya, running this show. They can make nice compact cameras: I bet it'll be more a matter of their design choices and price targets than *ability* to make things to whatever specs suit.
Perhaps "failure" wasn't the right word. What I meant is that this camera isn't going to make a big name for Pentax in the high-end P&S world. I do agree, however, that it's a solid offering considering that it's their first attempt. What's not kosher is the fact that it's so similar (and identical in many ways) to the Olympus XZ-2, but I'm not going to comment on that any further, as it could be that Pentax put in just as much R&D effort as Olympus!

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:

03-04-2013, 03:49 PM   #21
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,197
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
It's been available for almost a month in the US now, and nobody has even posted any pics from it on the forum yet. That's not a good sign IMO!
I looked at it when it was announced and thought, "Meh." They could have used the MX legacy for a more robust camera than this. The camera might be great but it doesn't grab me. And apparently Pentax America isn't helping.

If this camera really isn't available yet in B&M Box stores (not on Target or Best Buy websites, either) then what on earth is PRIAC doing? I haven't seen any hot talk here about the 3 WG-3's yet, either, and they offer more interesting advances. The WG-3's are at least in the PentaxImaging scrolling header with the K-30, the Q10 and the Ricoh GXR and GR,

Just like the K-01, which took them six weeks to even post to the Website, the MX-1 isn't in the scrolling Featured Header, At the time of the K-01 introduction I made a researched post on the major regional distributors' participation in K-01 marketing. Canada and all 3 European regions had the K-01 featured in the Banner Head the day it was announced. Japan was a later release date, but featured it Day 1, Australia's (commercial) distributor had it. China had it. It appears Pentax USA isn't supporting marketing this camera at all - at least not yet, just like they ignored the K-01, so why should I be interested?

Yet I'll assume it is a fine enthusiast compact. Reading the number of "New User" posts from new Q "Deal-Price" buyers and new K-01 "Deal-Price" buyers, my guess is the discretionary / impulse camera money went to those two. The strategic camera money went to K-5II/IIs and K-30. I suspect some members are raising cash by culling disused items and saving money for the K-3 and/or the rumored FF.

For $500 I got 2 Q's and the 02 ZOOM. For another $95 I got the 01 PRIME. Then I spent real money ($300) for the Q > K Adapter and the Tripod Foot rather than getting the Fotodiox adapter. Together I will have MUCH more fun and flexibility with those items than with an MX-1, for just a bit more money. And I bet the QIQ is very close to the MX-1.

I imagine it is a wonderful camera but it competes with its own company's products and, it appears, doesn't seem to get a lot of support in the USA.

Last edited by monochrome; 03-04-2013 at 06:28 PM.
03-04-2013, 03:59 PM   #22
Pentaxian
bbluesman's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,615
I've got to say for me-as much as I love my Pentax DSLR and lenses why would I want to use an inferior product to comparable cameras on the market place? If it accepted the PK mount lenses ok would have to give some more thought, but why stay married to the brand if it is not offering the best bang for the buck? So many Micro 4/3 choices and the Fuji's much sexier...just saying
03-04-2013, 04:31 PM   #23
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,468
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
So, you really think this camera is a good high-end P&S? Honestly? It's a poor clone of the Olympus XZ-2.
I honestly haven't made the comparison with Olympus. (Haven't seen that one, actually, since I'm not actually shopping there. ) If I got to that point, I don't know which I would choose. I sure wouldn't cry if I *had* one, mind you. As I mentioned, there's a certain advantage for me in a P&S that operates similarly to my DSLR, just because if I'm using one in the first place, there's a good possibility that fatigue is a factor, I pull one of those out, I don't want to have to remember how it works when I want to do something with it. Frankly, I'm kind of in love with the Fuji offerings. But the simple fact it's Pentax might outweigh several vices for me. I get set in my ways. Not always as mentally agile as I used to be that way, so as for RML's Rule #1: Get The Shot, ...that counts.


QuoteQuote:
On the other hand, if it's trying to appeal to the enthusiast retro crowd, then it needs to actually look the part. Which it doesn't. Or more precisely does in only half its aspect -- which is worse than having a consistent design (whatever that might be). It also needs to offer quality features that will appeal to those people who are fixated on range-finders. But instead it is rather dumbed down. (No hot-shoe, no control wheel, small sensor.) It would have made more sense to price it higher and fill out the feature set properly.
I suppose my sunnier attitude on this isn't that it's a 'dumbed down Fuji' but that it's something they could build up from in a similar direction. Maybe it won't be an optical VF, but I think EVFs are non-laggy enough these days that that's not a huge issue. It's a *big* sensor for a compact, and it *has* two dontrol wheels, (Though I'd rather they just had a front dial than the exposure comp one: I've usually got my K20D set up just like that, Seems to be the fastest way to tell him what to do, put him in Av and use the front dial for corrections.) But I just like more controls, and ones I can touch. Still analog that way.


QuoteQuote:
So, no, I am not trying to compare this to something it isn't trying to be. But since Pentax themselves apparently have no idea what this camera is trying to be, it makes the process more complicated. ;-)

I call this a fail, like I called the K-01. Because buyers in a market flooded with competitors are simply not this stupid.
The way I see it, I think they're trying to appeal to a broader base for this sort of thing. It's not 'just right' in terms of what I'd prioritize, but it's nice. I wouldn't have gone for the articulated screen, myself: my little old bridge camera's LCD is still quite visible even at arm's length over my head, so I don't see the need for the bulk and complexity: as for the 'retro' of it, to be honest, the first thing I said 'To Pentax' when I unpacked my K20D was "Perfect. Now put this in met-al.' (And that's pretty much what they did next, part of why I like this company. )

Frankly, what's liable to happen, like with the K-01, will be people in love with the things will buy them, then the price will plummet and maybe this MX-1 will cost a couple hundred bucks or less in a year or two. Maybe I'll have that money at the time. Put that thing in my pocket. For who knows how long. I don't think anyone was really psyched about the K-01 apart from 'At least this shows they aren't mad enough to ditch the K-mount. Anyway, this is the pattern for Pentax stuff. Early adopters pay a good deal more, the rest of us know we've got an upgrade path we can reach.


Anyway, I'm not calling this a 'fail,' I'm calling it a decent start at this segment. I'm not saying that if I had that kind of money for that kind of thing as a priority, that I'd choose this one among all the possibilities. Also not saying I mightn't end up doing that, all other things considered. Familiarity's a big feature for me personally. If I suddenly hit the lottery, it could even be a deciding factor, since I'd otherwise be so busy. I'd have other things to do than try to get a whole new UI into my head. (I'd still be lookin for a viewfinder, though. )

I do think it'd just make sense to make one without that plastic LCD hanging off it, then you got a metal pocket camera.

03-04-2013, 04:35 PM   #24
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,468
QuoteOriginally posted by bbluesman Quote
I've got to say for me-as much as I love my Pentax DSLR and lenses why would I want to use an inferior product to comparable cameras on the market place? If it accepted the PK mount lenses ok would have to give some more thought, but why stay married to the brand if it is not offering the best bang for the buck? So many Micro 4/3 choices and the Fuji's much sexier...just saying

Eh, there's truth there. I don't think MILCs are the same league, mind you. I was just saying that I think I'd rather have the Fuji for what they are, (And frankly, I love Lumix color renderings) and maybe Pentax should make a variant more like that Fuji, ...but the simple fact it's a Pentax isn't a negligible matter for those of us looking for a pocket companion camera. The simple fact that it runs the same way and you don't need to think about a switch in UI to shoot a pocket camera to potential counts for a lot more in practice than spec sheets may indicate.

The very purpose of a camera like that, namely, 'Stuff it in your pocket and go' commends itself to something you don't need to develop a whole other handling set for. So as a companion, even as is, it might be a more logical purchase than comparison shopping in the abstract may make you think.


(It's actually a minor niceness about the WG-series compacts when it comes to me wanting one for my sweetie. Apart from them being bloody *perfect* for my dear botanist other half, (Passable macro ring lights, colorfulness and relative indestructibility? Sold! ) ...there was something very appealing about not having to remember how like a little Samsung (Or even my once so-familiar old bridge camera) works when taking late night calls about 'How do I do blah.' )

Last edited by Ratmagiclady; 03-04-2013 at 04:49 PM.
03-04-2013, 04:56 PM   #25
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 79
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
I...then you may want to consider upgrading to the MX-1, as it's better for pointing and shooting and allows for 1-handed operation!
I like the looks of it. I like the fact that it has a good ISO performance, "which was the best score among compact cameras selling for less than $500", according to DxOMark.

AND as I have a physical problem with my left arm, I love it can be operated with just one hand

Time will tell if the MX-1 was a good or bad move for Pentax.
03-04-2013, 05:49 PM - 2 Likes   #26
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Virginia (USA)
Posts: 48
I say this as an Oly XZ-1 owner. The camera took very nice photos. The menu system of the XZ-1 was horrible and confusing and there was little ease of use with that camera. The MX-1 menu system is a breeze - very easy to use and remember. The Oly XZ-1 was lens heavy and not very well balanced in the hand and has the same lack of compactness as many of these enthusiast p&s cameras. The MX-1 is very well balanced. The Oly XZ-1 lasted me 20 months of fairly light use before completely dieing on me ... time will tell on the MX-1. The Oly-X2 is $100 more than the MX-1.

Unlike many, I speak from experience as a MX-1 owner and not just from looking a spec sheet. There are many things that look great on paper and don't meet expectation and vice versa. And I have had the MX-1 now for a couple of weeks and have posted a few pics but quite honestly, I don't post many photos to forums regardless of how long I've had the camera.

For what it is worth, I'm quite enjoying the camera and it fits my purpose beautifully (a competent p&s when I don't want to lug around the dslr / lenses).

sue
03-04-2013, 06:01 PM   #27
Pentaxian
jimH's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: South Central Nebraska - USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,415
Reasonable little camera

QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
I do think a variant with a viewfinder, maybe sans the tilting LCD, would go over pretty big. Not having to use the LCD all the time also saves battery power, come to think of it, (and one of the things that space the articulated screen takes up could be.. more battery capacity. Which is good for a backup camera because you don't want to be thinking about it. )

I suppose if I were in the market for that sort of camera, I'd be considering those anyway, but I often simply can't see an LCD when it's bright out. I could actually see some use for a pocket camera these days, and having pretty much the same controls and UI as my DSLRs (That's actually kind of big for me: when fatigue is a factor, especially.) would be something I'd want to weigh against, say, the benefits of those little Fuji's finders/accepting lens hoods, not to mention price differences.



(And I like the metal bodies, either way: I'd expect to keep that for years and years and all, and it might actually see more surface wear than my gear usually gets. There's actually a bit of an appeal factor to having that layer of brass under there, in case the black actually wears away. Theoretically it could actually happen. )

From here it looks like this isn't such a bad entry into a field that already has had some of the best compact cameras out there for several generations.




I don't know if you can call it a failure right off considering what market it's really entering. I think they ought to consider other variants for the line as it evolves, but it looks like a good platform to start. I wouldn't be too nervous considering this is Ricoh, not Hoya, running this show. They can make nice compact cameras: I bet it'll be more a matter of their design choices and price targets than *ability* to make things to whatever specs suit.
I'd have to agree. There are a lot of things about this little camera that are desirable. I have a K-10 and a K-01 and I like features of both of them. For the traditional DSLR feel, I like the K-10, and for the image factor I like the k-01. There are things about both that I don't like but in balance, both cameras have their strengths and weaknesses. I think that Ricoh can take this technology to a new level and really make something good happen with it. I currently am a fan of the k-01 and have seen some of the reviews about it. Most of them revolve around the lack of a view finder. I think that it is a great little "brick" camera. It has a great sensor, it handles well, It accepts all of Pentax's lenses and I like it with the the old Pentax lenses as well as with the newer lenses. Ricoh just needs to continue down this path and I think it will be successful.
03-04-2013, 07:05 PM   #28
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,468
QuoteOriginally posted by Amoon Quote
I like the looks of it. I like the fact that it has a good ISO performance, "which was the best score among compact cameras selling for less than $500", according to DxOMark.

AND as I have a physical problem with my left arm, I love it can be operated with just one hand

Time will tell if the MX-1 was a good or bad move for Pentax.
I didn't know about the high-ISO thing. That's actually big with me. For the same reasons I get kind of dayblind in the bright, I do like pulling stuff out of the dark. (Also depending on what your issue is with your left arm, it's possible I can help there with a little bracketry. Technology advanced to the point where a little sideline I was trying to develop has become redundant, but it used to be *lots* of people wanted things to hold onto little cameras with. Especiallly in the very cold place I was living. I did some thinking on these things, though, and have a few designs for thingies. If I can be of help and you need any. )
03-04-2013, 07:32 PM   #29
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 79
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
I didn't know about the high-ISO thing. That's actually big with me. For the same reasons I get kind of dayblind in the bright, I do like pulling stuff out of the dark. (Also depending on what your issue is with your left arm, it's possible I can help there with a little bracketry. Technology advanced to the point where a little sideline I was trying to develop has become redundant, but it used to be *lots* of people wanted things to hold onto little cameras with. Especiallly in the very cold place I was living. I did some thinking on these things, though, and have a few designs for thingies. If I can be of help and you need any. )
Thank you Ratmagiclady!
I will PM you
03-04-2013, 09:15 PM   #30
Veteran Member
kshapero's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: South Florida, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 384
I bought the MX-1 and then went on an airboat ride deep into the Everglades. It was a clear sunny day here in South Florida and the LCD screen was useless. I amped up the brightness and it still did not help. I know the sun here is super bright so others might do just fine. At least with my Q I can put an OVF on the hot shoe. MX-1 was returned.
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!
bag, bit, camera, charger, cord, digital camera, in-depth, lens, mx-1, pack, pentax, pentax cameras, point and shoot, review, wall
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax K-30 In-Depth Review by PentaxForums.com Adam Pentax K-30 & K-50 79 05-21-2013 11:00 AM
DA* 50-135mm in-depth review Adam Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 02-18-2013 11:28 PM
Pentax Optio WG-2 In-Depth Video Review Adam Pentax Compact Cameras 16 11-09-2012 06:22 AM
Another in-depth review Dachiko Pentax K-30 & K-50 22 07-27-2012 10:10 AM
Pentax 50-200mm WR in-depth review Adam Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 01-19-2011 06:40 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:10 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