Current main kit:K2000Zenitar 16FA35/2F50/1.7Rokunar 90/2.5 MacroK135/2.5Sigma 17-70K45-125/4DAL50-200
ogl: The IQ from ACR is really junk. Compare with the best cameras in terms of IQ - K-5IIs, NEX-7 in RAW. Gold award - funny....Rather slow camera with very mediocre IQ.
Yes. The K 01 Raw results were significantly better and I believe they used an antiquated 50/1.4 with it as well. The 40 that comes with it will beat any of the 50s.
JoeDaBassPlayer: I call B_. The K 01 is every bit as good. The Fuji is half again as much with kit lens.
Ergonomics are actually very good. AF is decent with the firware upgrade. Focus peaking will allow much better MF performance as well.
The body may be thicker, but the lenses are thinner. The K 01 with 40mm and 21mm primes is formidable, especially shooting DNG. Ihave been shooting with a K 01 for a year now. It is has world class IQ in a much smaller package than most.
I call B_. The K 01 is every bit as good. The Fuji is half again as much with kit lens.
Looks like an expensive K 01.
Ale1210: A not-so-compact Nikon mirroless for DX lenses. Something like a Fuji X-Pro1, but fully compliant with the whole Nikon system I have.
Pentax came out with such a camera. The reviewers were very unkind because it was not tiny. The Green button was not where they wanted it either.
It's a Full Frame K 01. Nice!
herebedragons: Nice try Fujifilm, Sony, Pentax, Panasonic, etc. ... these are toys ... upgraded point-n-shoot cameras that are made to appeal to someone that wishes to carry around a smaller, more compact form factor. When I shoot casually, I grab my Nikon D7000 w/ a small prime 50mm f/1.4G, but when I shoot to capture the moment, I grab my Nikon D4 or if I'm shoot landscapes, my Nikon D800. Maybe someday these mirror less cameras will come to mature into something more than a hobbyist's toy but for now, it's just that - a toy!
The K 01 is a wolf in sheep's clothing. IQ is fantastic but its small size does not call attention to itself That last aspect makes it a fail to the gearhead - large DSLR market.
belnan: OK that is one ugly camera, I would like to see a shoot out between this and the Pentax K-01, a bit homely as well. One cost a thousand dollars more and also has slowish autofocus. Stop comparing this to the leica, they made it look like a leica so you would do that, smarten up dpreview. Shootout vs K-01 lets see it. Show us what you get for 1700 bucks!
That is not going to happen. The K 01 was far too good for its price to begin with so they brought in a flawed review from the outside. They will never compare it to something even more expensive.
BTW - the photos from the K 01 and 40mm prime are beautiful.
The touch screen is nice. I like the ability to focus during video as well. Those would be nice additions on my K 01. However, image quality is somewhere between M43 and P&S. If that floats your boat, fine. If not, Nikon and Pentax with the better Sony sensors deliver the tonality. No IBIS nor focus peaking either. Too bad.
It is not so much that it is a recycled review but one that had some obvious out of the ordinary issues. As a result, the original is tainted and should not have been chosen to be reused.
DPR also admits it is the only review of a serious camera to be outsourced. Why make an exception and then use a flawed review as that exception.
Having shot with it at indoor events, in lower light, it is comparable in speed to a sub pro canikon DSLR. However, it always gets the AF right.
When things get too dark for AF, it will still MF accurately due to focus peaking. Meanwhile, a DSLR is out of luck. The OVF will be too dark to get an accurate MF. This is not just my experience. Ask anyone who owns one.
DanK7: The lack of a view finder is a fatal flaw, sorry Pentax. I like the fact that Pentax thinks a bit outside the box, but this camera is more about design than taking photographs. The cart is definitely in front of the horse.
I have the smallest Pentax DSLR and the K 01 is smaller.
jonikon: The 69% review score is a gift for this deeply flawed camera.No viewfinder and slow and dodgy auto-focus in a $900 camera?Pentax, what were you thinking?
The Nikon 1 with kit lens compacted is every bit as thick as the K 01 and XS40. AF is fast but IQ is bad in comparison.
JoeDaBassPlayer: Jeff had some issues with bad lenses. I do not know if it was QC or shipping damage. Either way, his experience was not the norm. However, DPR chose to use this outlier review as their own. That should be a red flag.
Having owned one for a while, I know it is smaller than a DSLR. I also know the usability is very good.
AF performance is complicated. In bright light, it is slower than a DSLR. As the light goes down, it maintains its speed. At medium low light, it is competitive with a DSLR. It's AF will cease to be usable before that of a better DSLR. However, in really low light, focus peaking allows accurate MF while a DSLR would be hopeless.
For product shots, macro, street, and creative shooting, it is a fantastic tool. Go check out the Pentax DSLR forum. there are some great shots done with this camera. The people who use it do understand the camera and what it can do. It is not a sports camera but it does make a less expensive alternative to an M9 or Pro 1.
It is a joy to use for street shooting. It is amazing what you can do with a very high quality camera that is no longer attached to your face. There is a lot more capability as far as framing and perspective. One is also far less conspicuous as well. I can get more, good shots taken due to its form factor. Plus, the images are fantastic.
tkbslc: I applaud Pentax for trying something new, but this is just a failure. It takes the worst traits of both the SLR and mirrorless formats and combines them into one weird camera that excels at nothing.
AF does work and is very accurate. It is slower in good light but does not really drop in speed until it starts to get fairly dark. For indoor shots, it can go against most DSLR's for speed. AF accuracy is not an issue.
Pixel Judge: Funny. Many questioned the look of the camera. I actually like this unique look. 'Avant Garde' style! Images looks very good, too. But I really like to see BETTER sample photos. The sample photos are......yarn.....sleeeeepy.
Ditto on the samples. I was hoping for a good gallery instead of a rehash of Jeff's stuff. The camera can supply some stunning images. Rehashing Jeff's issues and then his bad images does not do this camera nor its designers justice.
Jeff had some issues with bad lenses. I do not know if it was QC or shipping damage. Either way, his experience was not the norm. However, DPR chose to use this outlier review as their own. That should be a red flag.
Sergio DS: Pentax has an amazing RAW (and JPEG has a matter of fact) engine on their cameras since the K-x (and switch to sony sensors), but after seeing the level of detail the new 24MP sensors are capable of, I won't be cashing in for anything less (High ISO can bite me, I seldom go anywhere north of ISO 1600...)Regarding the K-01, I think Pentax didn't went far enough (I actually like the looks of it), If the point was making am entire different camera they could've gone for a cube look or something like a cross between a video cam and a Lytro... Not having a swivel screen on a non OVF cam is a deal-breaker, they could've capture a huge following if they just tried to make a more forward thinking video/stills camera, and leaving room on their line up for a conventional K-r successor...
The KM/K2000 was when the JPEG engine really got worked out. Pentax has always used Sony sensors except for the Pentax/Samsung 14MP sensor.
MP Burke: The Leica M9 clearly fits the bill if you have a range of expensively acquired Leica lenses and want to take digital photographs with them. There is no alternative that allows you to use these lenses without a crop factor of 1.5 or so.The M bayonet mount has been around for nearly 60 years and is a remarkable survivor in an age where technologies are increasingly ephemeral.There is no reason in principle why an M mount camera could not be designed with an autofocus mechanism. This was done in the film era by shifting the film plane back and forth in the Contax AX camera.Similarly, there is no obvious reason why the M9 camera could not have been given a formal review. The lack of autofocus should not be seen as such a terrifying prospect that it disqualifies a camera from consideration.
Manual focus should not be an issue for those who are interested in this style of shooting. In fact, a live view focus peaking model may be a next step to consider for Leica.
Scott's comments on focus are much like mine when using focus peaking on a K 01. One does pay closer attention to what will be in focus and this results in better photos. Being free from the restrictions of an eye level viewfinder creates more opportunities as well.
The mirrorless, focus peaking camera is the rangefinder of the present and it can be yours for less than $1000. :-)