Pentax MX-1 In-Depth Review

brelip · 03-04-2013, 09:16 PM - **1 Like**

Pentax is definitely late to the party (should have been released last year), but I don't necessarily think it's over priced. It's cheaper than RX100 by a good margin, $100 cheaper than G15, XZ-2, and X-20, about same price as P7700, slightly more expensive than LX7, if you factor into LX-7 close out pricing.

Fact is, every camera in this class has its strength and weakness. I don't like RX100 for its lens speed, I don't like LX-7 for its cheap construction, I don't like G series for its stupid viewfinder and menu system...

I, too, don't understand why people are asking for viewfinder. Hotshoe? Maybe. But Pentax flash system is nothing to rave about. And if you add a viewfinder like the one on G series, you add cost and size, and it's completely useless. So what's the point. EVF? I mean, seriously? Do you really expect Pentax to come out with an EVF just for the MX? The Q and K01 can't accept any EVF, unlike some Panasonic and Olympus cameras.

What we know is that it's got a proven sensor (DXO mark score 50 - same as X-10, much better DR, noise than last-gen 1/1.7), on par with competition, one of the fastest lens on compact, and a solid construction.

So TONIGHT I just bought an MX-1. I already have P7700 (DXO mark score 53!!) which is, IMO, the best of this serious compact group. I'll be doing some comparison.

brelip · 03-04-2013, 09:22 PM

BTW, after seeing X-20 samples, I've decided against the X-20. It was much worse than the X-10 I had previously. If MX-1's IQ comes close to P7700 (it's amazing), i would rate this camera better buy than X-20, despite lack of viewfinder.

Ratmagiclady · 03-05-2013, 12:50 AM

Originally posted by brelip

BTW, after seeing X-20 samples, I've decided against the X-20. It was much worse than the X-10 I had previously. If MX-1's IQ comes close to P7700 (it's amazing), i would rate this camera better buy than X-20, despite lack of viewfinder.

Hrm. I'm surprised there, actually. Fuji would have to have really goofed over the puppy if they did a bad job following up the X10. By all accounts a nice little piece of kit.

(also, after talking to Amoon, that's *one* thing that an articulated screen is very good for: if someone doesn't have full use of a limb, well, you might not need it if you can just tilt the screen up. After eyesight problems: not being able to raise both hands to eye level has to be the very most common issue for people having troiuble doing photo.

)

Jonathan Mac · 03-05-2013, 02:34 AM

For the same price, and the lens and sensor being the same, I'd take the Olympus XZ-2 just for the hotshoe. The lack of a hotshoe on a compact that wants to be taken seriously is unforgiveable, and is an obvious shortcoming when compared to the cameras it wants to compete against.

kshapero · 03-05-2013, 03:34 PM

The Image IQ on the MX-1 was really wonderful, but I needed the hot shoe.

jon404 · 03-07-2013, 03:24 AM

Just looked on Amazon -- the MX-1 is selling for a lot more than the K-01. Weird, since it's a lot less camera. Go figure!

photocat · 03-07-2013, 06:33 PM

Originally posted by jon404

Just looked on Amazon -- the MX-1 is selling for a lot more than the K-01. Weird, since it's a lot less camera. Go figure!

$100 more but if I wanted an interchangeable lens camera, I wouldn't be looking for a p&s or vice versa.

Wolfie · 03-08-2013, 02:51 AM

Originally posted by jon404

@JJJphoto -- am in TOTAL AGREEMENT with your post. But -- the first sticking point would be sensor cost. Then, you would need a larger medium-format lens to cover that larger sensor... fixed, like you said, but still a cost for anything really sharp from f/4 through f/11. The rest would be easy!

@Simonkit -- there is a fundamental ergonomic difference between cameras you can carry in a shirt pocket, and those you can't. Apples and oranges. Trade-offs. My Olympus XZ-1 has a sharp bright lens, but a small sensor... over ISO 400, watch out in low light! Your RX100 has a somewhat larger sensor, but a poorer lens... so you have a lot of pixels, but the images just aren't that sharp.

On the other hand, K-5 and the K-01 have wonderful sharp image quality, superb for low-light photography -- but -- they can't fit in our shirt pockets. If the best camera is always 'the one you have with you', then -- maybe someday -- Pentax will make an APS-C with a shirt-pocket form factor! (and a hotshoe!)

@Adam -- didn't the MX-1 just come out? I'll bet it will sell just fine to P&S people who want something that looks like a 'real' camera. Though for $500, I would have designed it with a cloisonné coat-of-arms crest as the Limited Edition Prince Rainier of Monaco model, something like that.

Neither apples nor oranges look good in a shirt pocket, in my experience. Depends on the impression you're trying to create, I suppose.

jon404 · 03-09-2013, 04:12 PM

Wolfie, it's about portability. Instant access. Look, if I have a small camera in my shirt pocket, I can go in a store -- in a bar -- and take a picture easily without a big camera on a strap around my neck. Just daydreaming, that's all -- that someday there will be a K-01 I can put in my pocket.

Here's an example. A year ago, we had this huge power blackout, all of San Diego County. Drove up the coast, thinking that the lights would be on in San Clemente. But no! Except for one place, a Marine bar with its own power generator, packed with guys who couldn't get back to their base at Camp Pendleton, the buses had stopped running. Now -- I would have felt -- uncomfortable -- going in there with a big camera. But in my pocket? No problem. Image quality? Don't go there. Priceless memento of a great evening? You bet!

**jmschrei** · 03-09-2013, 10:41 PM

I bought the MX-1 yesterday, my first ever digital compact. I really wanted a carry around camera without interchangeable lenses that could be an all purpose P&S but still be capable of taking satisfying shots in RAW when the need/opportunity arises. I took it out today on a very bright day with lots of glare off the snow. Honestly on occasion the LCD viewfinder was useless and I was shooting blind with just rough framing. Nonetheless I ended up with some sharp nicely exposed images all the same. I had the K-5 with me as well and quite frankly in bright conditions like today I really can't see very well through the viewfinder either!
It will take me a while to learn a fewer of the finer points of adjusting some of the functions on the go but I did have fun. The one thing I noted was that the colour was a little to the pink for my tastes (I typically use the neutral colour setting) so that will need a little experimental adjustment. Then again there isn't too much colour here at this time of the year. I love the close macro function and suspect I will be using that a lot.

Processed from RAW in Aperture with minor enhancement in Color Efex:

One of my favourite test subjects - spruce boughs and bokeh

For a camera that cost less than most of the individual lenses I own I am pleased with the results.

**EricBrown** · 04-16-2013, 03:40 AM

A good review from B&H.

You Tube

theperception2008 · 05-11-2013, 01:26 PM

Thanks for the review Adam. It just complicated things a little further for me. I am looking at the Ricoh GR and the MX-1. True they are different cameras, GR has the renowned 16 mp Exmor sensor, 28mm , f2.8 lens with tons of customization options. But the MX-1 has a useful lens and is about $300 cheaper, so more money stays in my pocket. Decisions, decisions!

Adam · 05-11-2013, 06:57 PM

Originally posted by theperception2008

Thanks for the review Adam. It just complicated things a little further for me. I am looking at the Ricoh GR and the MX-1. True they are different cameras, GR has the renowned 16 mp Exmor sensor, 28mm , f2.8 lens with tons of customization options. But the MX-1 has a useful lens and is about $300 cheaper, so more money stays in my pocket. Decisions, decisions!

Having used both cameras, I would definitely go for the GR.

The MX-1 offers a bit more versatility, but the GR is like having a DSLR in your pocket....

The only downside is that the lens is fixed.

jon404 · 05-11-2013, 07:30 PM

One thought. For snapshots, you may do better with a small-sensor camera like the MX-1. Its tiny lens will give you tremendous depth-of-field, for most pictures, at most apertures... even at most telephoto settings. Not bad at all!

The GR also gives you a lot of DOF with its fixed 28mm-equiv lens. What is it actually, 18mm? And at 16 MP, you have more room to crop, and the APS-C image you are cropping will be of better quality -- particularly if taken in in low light -- than that from the MX-1.

These are really two very different cameras. Me? To be quite honest, I'd probably get a Sony RX100, which I think is the best shirt-pocket snapshot camera ever. But they are all very good. And, when you get down to it... for pictures on the web, and prints up through 8" x 12", the MX-1 is way more than you'll ever need!

theperception2008 · 05-13-2013, 11:56 AM

Adam, Jon404, thank you for your thoughts. I thought about the Sony RX100 as well, but I heard the UI and the controls are not that friendly. The image quality is good and the sensor is great though. I'm selling all my equipment right now to raise some money for life, but when the dust settles, I will probably get a serious compact camera.

I love the UI and the customization of the Ricoh GR and I get to stay within the Pentax circle :-) if I get either the Mx-1 or the GR. I also have seen the GRD IV on eBay for about $250-$300 new so I might jump on that as well, sensor wise it's Mx-1 sized and if the lens is as sharp as everyone says, it will be more than sharp enough for me.

One thing that I find lacking on my Kr is external controls. I realize that I want two control dials, and not many compacts have that feature, except for the GRD's. Are there any other cameras that have two control dials?

03-05-2013, 12:50 AM	#33
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Originally posted by brelip BTW, after seeing X-20 samples, I've decided against the X-20. It was much worse than the X-10 I had previously. If MX-1's IQ comes close to P7700 (it's amazing), i would rate this camera better buy than X-20, despite lack of viewfinder. Hrm. I'm surprised there, actually. Fuji would have to have really goofed over the puppy if they did a bad job following up the X10. By all accounts a nice little piece of kit. (also, after talking to Amoon, that's one thing that an articulated screen is very good for: if someone doesn't have full use of a limb, well, you might not need it if you can just tilt the screen up. After eyesight problems: not being able to raise both hands to eye level has to be the very most common issue for people having troiuble doing photo. ) Last edited by Ratmagiclady; 03-05-2013 at 01:17 AM.

03-09-2013, 04:12 PM	#39
jon404 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 696	Wolfie, it's about portability. Instant access. Look, if I have a small camera in my shirt pocket, I can go in a store -- in a bar -- and take a picture easily without a big camera on a strap around my neck. Just daydreaming, that's all -- that someday there will be a K-01 I can put in my pocket. Here's an example. A year ago, we had this huge power blackout, all of San Diego County. Drove up the coast, thinking that the lights would be on in San Clemente. But no! Except for one place, a Marine bar with its own power generator, packed with guys who couldn't get back to their base at Camp Pendleton, the buses had stopped running. Now -- I would have felt -- uncomfortable -- going in there with a big camera. But in my pocket? No problem. Image quality? Don't go there. Priceless memento of a great evening? You bet! Attached Images

05-11-2013, 06:57 PM	#43
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,608 Original Poster	Originally posted by theperception2008 Thanks for the review Adam. It just complicated things a little further for me. I am looking at the Ricoh GR and the MX-1. True they are different cameras, GR has the renowned 16 mp Exmor sensor, 28mm , f2.8 lens with tons of customization options. But the MX-1 has a useful lens and is about $300 cheaper, so more money stays in my pocket. Decisions, decisions! Having used both cameras, I would definitely go for the GR. The MX-1 offers a bit more versatility, but the GR is like having a DSLR in your pocket.... The only downside is that the lens is fixed. 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:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax K-30 In-Depth Review by PentaxForums.com	Adam	Pentax K-30 & K-50	80	06-30-2021 08:48 PM
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

03-04-2013, 09:16 PM - 1 Like	#31
brelip Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Dallas, TX Photos: Albums Posts: 71	Pentax is definitely late to the party (should have been released last year), but I don't necessarily think it's over priced. It's cheaper than RX100 by a good margin, $100 cheaper than G15, XZ-2, and X-20, about same price as P7700, slightly more expensive than LX7, if you factor into LX-7 close out pricing. Fact is, every camera in this class has its strength and weakness. I don't like RX100 for its lens speed, I don't like LX-7 for its cheap construction, I don't like G series for its stupid viewfinder and menu system... I, too, don't understand why people are asking for viewfinder. Hotshoe? Maybe. But Pentax flash system is nothing to rave about. And if you add a viewfinder like the one on G series, you add cost and size, and it's completely useless. So what's the point. EVF? I mean, seriously? Do you really expect Pentax to come out with an EVF just for the MX? The Q and K01 can't accept any EVF, unlike some Panasonic and Olympus cameras. What we know is that it's got a proven sensor (DXO mark score 50 - same as X-10, much better DR, noise than last-gen 1/1.7), on par with competition, one of the fastest lens on compact, and a solid construction. So TONIGHT I just bought an MX-1. I already have P7700 (DXO mark score 53!!) which is, IMO, the best of this serious compact group. I'll be doing some comparison.

03-04-2013, 09:22 PM	#32
brelip Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Dallas, TX Photos: Albums Posts: 71	BTW, after seeing X-20 samples, I've decided against the X-20. It was much worse than the X-10 I had previously. If MX-1's IQ comes close to P7700 (it's amazing), i would rate this camera better buy than X-20, despite lack of viewfinder.

03-05-2013, 02:34 AM	#34
Jonathan Mac Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 10,911	For the same price, and the lens and sensor being the same, I'd take the Olympus XZ-2 just for the hotshoe. The lack of a hotshoe on a compact that wants to be taken seriously is unforgiveable, and is an obvious shortcoming when compared to the cameras it wants to compete against.

03-05-2013, 03:34 PM	#35
kshapero Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: South Florida, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 437	The Image IQ on the MX-1 was really wonderful, but I needed the hot shoe.

03-07-2013, 03:24 AM	#36
jon404 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 696	Just looked on Amazon -- the MX-1 is selling for a lot more than the K-01. Weird, since it's a lot less camera. Go figure!

03-07-2013, 06:33 PM	#37
photocat Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Virginia (USA) Posts: 48	Originally posted by jon404 Just looked on Amazon -- the MX-1 is selling for a lot more than the K-01. Weird, since it's a lot less camera. Go figure! $100 more but if I wanted an interchangeable lens camera, I wouldn't be looking for a p&s or vice versa.

03-08-2013, 02:51 AM	#38
Wolfie New Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: England Posts: 8	Originally posted by jon404 @JJJphoto -- am in TOTAL AGREEMENT with your post. But -- the first sticking point would be sensor cost. Then, you would need a larger medium-format lens to cover that larger sensor... fixed, like you said, but still a cost for anything really sharp from f/4 through f/11. The rest would be easy! @Simonkit -- there is a fundamental ergonomic difference between cameras you can carry in a shirt pocket, and those you can't. Apples and oranges. Trade-offs. My Olympus XZ-1 has a sharp bright lens, but a small sensor... over ISO 400, watch out in low light! Your RX100 has a somewhat larger sensor, but a poorer lens... so you have a lot of pixels, but the images just aren't that sharp. On the other hand, K-5 and the K-01 have wonderful sharp image quality, superb for low-light photography -- but -- they can't fit in our shirt pockets. If the best camera is always 'the one you have with you', then -- maybe someday -- Pentax will make an APS-C with a shirt-pocket form factor! (and a hotshoe!) @Adam -- didn't the MX-1 just come out? I'll bet it will sell just fine to P&S people who want something that looks like a 'real' camera. Though for $500, I would have designed it with a cloisonné coat-of-arms crest as the Limited Edition Prince Rainier of Monaco model, something like that. Neither apples nor oranges look good in a shirt pocket, in my experience. Depends on the impression you're trying to create, I suppose.

03-09-2013, 10:41 PM	#40
jmschrei Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Calgary, AB Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,884	I bought the MX-1 yesterday, my first ever digital compact. I really wanted a carry around camera without interchangeable lenses that could be an all purpose P&S but still be capable of taking satisfying shots in RAW when the need/opportunity arises. I took it out today on a very bright day with lots of glare off the snow. Honestly on occasion the LCD viewfinder was useless and I was shooting blind with just rough framing. Nonetheless I ended up with some sharp nicely exposed images all the same. I had the K-5 with me as well and quite frankly in bright conditions like today I really can't see very well through the viewfinder either! It will take me a while to learn a fewer of the finer points of adjusting some of the functions on the go but I did have fun. The one thing I noted was that the colour was a little to the pink for my tastes (I typically use the neutral colour setting) so that will need a little experimental adjustment. Then again there isn't too much colour here at this time of the year. I love the close macro function and suspect I will be using that a lot. Processed from RAW in Aperture with minor enhancement in Color Efex: One of my favourite test subjects - spruce boughs and bokeh For a camera that cost less than most of the individual lenses I own I am pleased with the results.

05-11-2013, 01:26 PM	#42
theperception2008 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Łódź, Poland and Riverside, California, U.S.A Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 488	Thanks for the review Adam. It just complicated things a little further for me. I am looking at the Ricoh GR and the MX-1. True they are different cameras, GR has the renowned 16 mp Exmor sensor, 28mm , f2.8 lens with tons of customization options. But the MX-1 has a useful lens and is about $300 cheaper, so more money stays in my pocket. Decisions, decisions!

05-11-2013, 07:30 PM	#44
jon404 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 696	One thought. For snapshots, you may do better with a small-sensor camera like the MX-1. Its tiny lens will give you tremendous depth-of-field, for most pictures, at most apertures... even at most telephoto settings. Not bad at all! The GR also gives you a lot of DOF with its fixed 28mm-equiv lens. What is it actually, 18mm? And at 16 MP, you have more room to crop, and the APS-C image you are cropping will be of better quality -- particularly if taken in in low light -- than that from the MX-1. These are really two very different cameras. Me? To be quite honest, I'd probably get a Sony RX100, which I think is the best shirt-pocket snapshot camera ever. But they are all very good. And, when you get down to it... for pictures on the web, and prints up through 8" x 12", the MX-1 is way more than you'll ever need!

05-13-2013, 11:56 AM	#45
theperception2008 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Łódź, Poland and Riverside, California, U.S.A Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 488	Adam, Jon404, thank you for your thoughts. I thought about the Sony RX100 as well, but I heard the UI and the controls are not that friendly. The image quality is good and the sensor is great though. I'm selling all my equipment right now to raise some money for life, but when the dust settles, I will probably get a serious compact camera. I love the UI and the customization of the Ricoh GR and I get to stay within the Pentax circle :-) if I get either the Mx-1 or the GR. I also have seen the GRD IV on eBay for about $250-$300 new so I might jump on that as well, sensor wise it's Mx-1 sized and if the lens is as sharp as everyone says, it will be more than sharp enough for me. One thing that I find lacking on my Kr is external controls. I realize that I want two control dials, and not many compacts have that feature, except for the GRD's. Are there any other cameras that have two control dials?