philo123: Calm down guys! there's a lot of animosity out there towards this camera. I thought we bought cameras based on our needs? I bought a K5 because it fitted my need better than anything on the market. I live in a rainy part of the UK and wanted a weather resistant camera with top build quality and a decent set of good priced lenses. Nothing came close to the K5 with those credentials. If the K-01 is not to your tastes don't buy it- simple. I won't be buying as it's not what I'm looking for but the sensor and IQ of Pentax is superb and the prime lenses are sublime.(check out the review on digitalrev of their pancake 40mm against the opposition http://www.digitalrev.com/article/pancake-day-pancake-lens-test/OTM4NjE0NQ_A_A). Saying that I'd prefer the K-01 with a limited prime than those silly looking long lenses on the SONY NEX series ;-)
Excellent comments there philo123. A shame there are not more sensible people like you writing comments here. I don't know why some people get so stressed out by manufacturers coming out with designs they don't like. As I've always said, if you don't like it - don't buy it. People are going on about this cameras size, that it's not much smaller than a K5. A K5 in itself is a small camera. I would like to know how it compares with the likes of a good 'ol OM1 or the larger K1000. That will give a better impression of how big or small the K01 really is, not these minature mirrorless cameras. Umm, also, when you say... "I live in a rainy part of the UK" hm hmm, well, nah, I won't say any more ;-)
(unknown member): To all the "analysts" - since you have no info regarding the personnel and the exact management structure of the re-engineered subsidiary - all further "info", conclusions and attacks are just pure speculations.
ENicolas, if only that were the case here in New Zealand. The K5 retails at over $2500 for the body alone, which is out of the range for most of us on a working wage. The Kr is about $1500 with the two kit lens', which, at three weeks wages, is still stretching the budget but is at least reasonably affordable.
vegwolff: I don't know why people get so nasty and up in arms when a manufacturer brings out a new camera whose design they do not like. I thought it quite simple really. If you don't like it don't buy it, stop the snide remarks and go away. This camera may be chunky, but some people don't have minature hands and need some decent real-estate to grip on to. Compared to the K5 it is somewhat smaller, but then again the K5 is a small camera in its own right. The green and red buttons will make life easier with those of us with declining vision. This has all the bells and whistles as well as access to the absolutely massive range of lens' and accessories throughout the life time of Asahi-Pentax. That is extraordinary in this day and age. I have to say though, that the ribbed outer skin reminds me of the old Zenith E camera.
Mmmm, don't really see how it could be as, or more stable, unless you were to hold your breath prior to and during exposure.
I should mention though, that I still prefer SLR's. Why? they give much better, three point stabilisation when being held. Viewfinderless cameras require you to hold the unit away from your body in order to view the screen, and that means loss of stability, especially with larger lens' attached. Even with image stabilisation built in, it's pushing it. After checking out the UK Pentax website and reading the specs, the list of functions available on the K01 are extensive and out weigh most other viewfinderless/mirrorless cameras. Anyway, we should just hold our horses on petty comments until dpreview have a chance to do a full test once production begins.
I don't know why people get so nasty and up in arms when a manufacturer brings out a new camera whose design they do not like. I thought it quite simple really. If you don't like it don't buy it, stop the snide remarks and go away. This camera may be chunky, but some people don't have minature hands and need some decent real-estate to grip on to. Compared to the K5 it is somewhat smaller, but then again the K5 is a small camera in its own right. The green and red buttons will make life easier with those of us with declining vision. This has all the bells and whistles as well as access to the absolutely massive range of lens' and accessories throughout the life time of Asahi-Pentax. That is extraordinary in this day and age. I have to say though, that the ribbed outer skin reminds me of the old Zenith E camera.
Robbster: Why K-01?
+I want APS-C sensor (lots of options)+In smallish body (mirrorless Sony, Samsung..)+With image stabilization on on the sensor for greater low light/DOF flexibility from ALL my lenses and +a range of high quality lens options from established lens design/manufacturer.
Leaves me with one choice, the K-01
SO, I see some pretty basic enthusiast camera logic that would lead you to a K-01.
Of course, we'll need to see performance in the real world and some reviews and user comments to understand the rest of the trade-offs, but I'm just saying that the choice of specs is actually UNIQUE and is NOT just for P&S upgraders.
I use both DSLR (Nikon) and Mirrorless (Panasonic GH1). Nikon too big, Pany sensor too small. What I want is a blend of the two, taking the APS-C sensor from the Nikon and the convenience/superior video of the Pany without the lens/IS tradeoffs of Sony and Samsung.
K-01 at least specs the right way to meet these needs. Food for thought...
Why not the K5 instead? Well, here in New Zealand a K5 retails for around $2499 for the body alone. A K7 is in excess of $3500. The K01 price of $749US equates to about $900NZ at current exchange rates. That's a massive price difference. Size wise the K5 is a small camera in its own right, and without the Pentaprism the K01 appears a tad smaller still, in height anway. It is, however, quite chunky in regards to it's depth, which is somewhat dissapointing. Not really my cuppa tea, but then I can't can't afford to spend five weeks wages on the camera I really want, being the K5.
I've just noticed too, it's a different bus, one can tell by looking at both the colour of their front grills and advertising on their sides, and of course one has passengers alighting while the other is in motion along the carriageway. Therefore, how can it be copyright if much of what is in the photo/artwork is so different? Apart from a not too disimilar composition, in that Big-Ben and the Houses of Parliament are the backdrop to a red, albiet different, omnibus, it is the touch up techniques that are therefore in question. If this is the case, as it seems from the judgement, then dear oh dear, oh dear oh dear oh dear, dear dear me. It is a slippery slope upon which they slide which such a ruling.
vegwolff: I have an idea for a competition. No prizes though. How many of you can take a similar shot, using similar techniques? I'm sure the court system would love to be clogged up with similar lawsuites being filed. Everything just seems so similar these days. On a similar note, I'm surprised that Lieca hasn't filed a similar (copyright) law suite against Fuji, (M9 V's X-Pro 1.) A black camera, with interchangeable lens', a viewfinder, image sensor, shutter speed dial, aperture ring. Mind you, apart from the image sensor and interchangeable lens', that is a similar description of many similar film range-finder cameras from yesteryear. Anyone got any similar ideas? If so, then sorry, you can't publish them here, those ideas are now copyright on my behalf.
:-) Very good.
I have an idea for a competition. No prizes though. How many of you can take a similar shot, using similar techniques? I'm sure the court system would love to be clogged up with similar lawsuites being filed. Everything just seems so similar these days. On a similar note, I'm surprised that Lieca hasn't filed a similar (copyright) law suite against Fuji, (M9 V's X-Pro 1.) A black camera, with interchangeable lens', a viewfinder, image sensor, shutter speed dial, aperture ring. Mind you, apart from the image sensor and interchangeable lens', that is a similar description of many similar film range-finder cameras from yesteryear. Anyone got any similar ideas? If so, then sorry, you can't publish them here, those ideas are now copyright on my behalf.
DecisiveMoment: Nikon has lost it's way with these toy cameras. I have been a Nikon equipment user for 40 years and was never disappointed in Nikon quality and design. In my current search to downsize and have more portability but high quality I found nirvana with the launch of the Sony NEX-7. I had never considered a Sony camera probably because of my perception of what makes a great camera and who were the major players. When you realize that Sony makes some of the best pro video cameras on the planet and Sony makes sensors for other brand manufacturers my perception of Sony changed. I have the Sony NEX-7 on order because it has everything I wanted, quality, large sensor, 100% viewfinder, perfect ergonomic design and I can use any brand lens I want. Brilliant.
Remember, Sony SLR's are, in reality, Konica/Minolta.
Whinge, whinge. Whinge whinge whinge. Well, eveyone else is, well, in here at least. If there wasn't a market for it, then Nikon wouldn't have made it. If there wasn't a potential market for the Q, then Pentax wouldn't have spent a lot of money developing it. I get brassed off when people whinge and go on about cameras they have no intention of buying. I guess if the internet were around when Pentax released the 110 SLR in the eighties there would have been a lot of the same types of boorish comments as we see here, but it would have sold well anyway, as in reality it did.
Hamish Gill: The definition of news is 'new' information. this is new information, therefore it is news.who cares for the why's, if its of interest then read it, if its not then why bother commenting?Im only commenting now, as the comments on this website have got so negative that i actually wrote about them on my own forum!im not going to respond to anyone who will no doubt attack me here, but really have people not got more interesting things to do with their time than moan at each other on the internet?you can read more about this, including my appreciation of the irony in me even giving this this sort of thing the time of day here http://bit.ly/rrN0uza shameless plug im sure you will agree ;)
All the best to Richard Franiec and his products! if a bit of coverage on here helps him make a success of it should be encouraged not frowned upon... everyone deserves a break!
why not just think before you spout negative stuff on the internet... a bit of positivity costs nothing!
Yes, I agree. Everytime I read personal comments in dpreview, after an item has been released, those comments are pretty negative. If someone doesn't like a product, then he or she should go on to something they do like, and stop leaving negative, inflammatory, or just downright uninformed comments here. It's becoming more than just a bore. If you don't like a small sensor on a certain camera, you don't like the lack of a humungous grip on another, or you don't like the position of a certain button, then fine, have your say, but don't go on and on about it. Make positive suggestions for sure, but stop the negativity in this forum. My goodness gracious me.
tkbslc: I wish these companies would quit making so many worthless products and versions that serve no purpose other than to overload our landfills.
Yes, but... there are how many people in the world?! Camera manufacturers could never build enough cameras to supply the market of the average person who wants to just take snaps every now and then.
On all my digi cameras, including dslr, I've never used the RAW setting. This camera is, I imagine, more for the tourist trade and anyone just wanting a camera at the ready. People who don't want to be weighed down by lots of technical options that they'd probably never use, let alone understand. I've got an FZ30 (with external flash) sitting in it's bag gathering dust because I use a TZ7 (for everday,) FT3 (for work) and an E410 with lens' and external flash units.
I think what I was trying to say was... These are two innovative companies with long histories in camera production. Let's hope both the Pentax and Ricoh names continue well in to the future.
At one stage in the eighties, Ricoh had a substantial SLR camera system. The system included six SLRs, (Pentax K-mount,) which included two with solar panels to recharge the batteries. There were fifteen lens', including the first interchangable auto focus 50mm, a bellows unit, various adaptors and teleconverters, and also two auto flash units, plus other attachments. That was of course in the days of film, when cameras worked for us, unlike now, when one just about needs a masters degree to work them. Ricoh was innovative and, in many ways, ahead of it's time. In this day of computerised cameras, and electronics companies moving in to the photographic realm, tradition still does have a place, albiet continually shrinking. I can only hope Ricoh will look at their, and Pentax's history and learn from it, while at the same time using the innovation they they once had (and may still do?) to advance positively into the future with sensible, ergonomic and usable design.
GreatOceanSoftware: Why is everyone surprised? I see this as a digital Minox. Very niche. I wouldn't run out and buy it, but I applaud bringing back lots of knobs with direct access to important functions. Wish more manufacturers would get away from touch screens and menus and bring back the knurly knobs!
Totaly agree with you about the lack of knobs on todays digital cameras. So many push buttons, command dials and menu screens. Control is so much easier (for everyday basic, but highly important settings) when a camera has a shutter speed dial, aperture ring and ASA, oops, ISO ring/dial. That's where cameras like the X100 and M9 come in, but they are extraordinarily expensive. A digital version of the Pentax MX or Olympus OM1 or 2, now that would be something worth waiting for.
Deary me, I don't understand why people are getting so upset about this new camera system. If you don't like it, don't buy it and go elsewhere. An aweful lot of speculation with no substance due to there being no production as yet. Sheesh, so much horror happening in the world these days, and people complain about a camera they're probably never going to use. I used to have a number of SLR's in the days of proper cameras, along with a rangefinder or two. I also had the Pentax 110 SLR, until they stopped making 110 film. Small, grainy film that couldn't be enlarged terribly well, but it did what it was supposed to do in the field it was designed for.