Rooru S: I'm curious about the sensor. I think this is the first time I have seen one of those 20Mpx modules with ISO102800.
Exactly. The form takes all the attention and the most important thing: a new sensor remains unnoticed. The 16MPx sensor of K-50 (and K-5, K-5 II and K-30 earlier) is pretty capable and even the newest 24 MPx sensor from K-3 does not outperform it in some aspects, so I am curious.
Pentax (oh sorry, Ricoh) tries to bring something different, attention-grabbing that will attract new customers. While I understand the goal, the outcome is rather awkward. To me it seems like a mixture of DSLR and CSC, unfortulately a mixture of their negatives: bad ergonomy and handling of a entry-level CSC (i.e. poor grip, few control dials) with the bulk of a regular DSLR (big mirror box). I want to believe there will be customers who find regular DSLR boring and will reflect the sparkles and LEDs and then find out how much there is inside the K-S1, because actually K-S1 offers a lot: completely new 20 MPx sensor with amazing ISO 102000, big and clear OVF etc. Me as an K-30 owner would appreciate more if these specs are put to a classic DSLR body (K-50 successor).
Rainer2022: The unique selling point of the cam against the Sony RX100... is the Electrical View Finder.
If you don't need it: buy Sony. If you need it, buy Fuji or other cams with EVF.
If you miss the EVF on RX100, well, buy an RX100 Mk III. ;-)
monkeybrain: Does anyone else suspect that this model is really to introduce the new slightly larger design that can later accommodate a larger sensor more easily?
Well it´s not a suspition, it is the only way how to keep this model line alive. I understand that that making a larger sensor would be complicated and costly, but this is what the customers want, this is the trend and when the future X40 does not bring a bigger sensor, customers probably choose from ather large sensor compacts (and next year there are gonna be plenty of them).
D1N0: This looks pretty good, though I rue the loss of the ovf. The camera looks better with one on it because of the retro styling. The evf will probably be better, but it's not retro. They probably should have gotten rid of some real estate on the front though, because of the missing OVF. Understandably they did not use a 1" sensor. It would have required a new lens design. Much larger. The RX100 III has a 24-70 equivalent lens, this is 28-112. The camera would cost at least $200 more lifting it out of it's price class.
Definitely agree with the looks. Previous models used the OVF to create a nice retro looks, similar to rangefinders. Now the transition to modern EVF ruined the retro image and the retro look and the camera does not look attractive any more.
I praise Fuji for using top-notch 2,4M EVF and take this anytime instead of inaccurate tunnel type OVF, but with giving the OVF away X30 lost some of it´s appeal and uniqueness (of the front view). Now the front look too plain and dull, with too big empty plastic area.
iudex: A lens (for CSC) this slow should definitely be smaller; e.g. a similar Pentax 18-135/3,5-5,6 is smaller and lighter (405g, 76mm vs. 490g, 98mm), just as is the Sigma 18-200 with longer reach; not mentioning the fact these are DSLR lenses, i.e. built for bigger flange distance. With the biggest X-mount camera (X-T1) it is so-so and for all the others the lens is too big.
Yes, the comparative Canon and Nikon lenses are probably the same size or even bigger; I sometimes forget that Pentax is quiete unique in making really small lenses, smaller that the big two. Yesterday a friend stopped at my place for a glass of wine and when handling my Pentax 100mm/2,8 Macro he was amazed just how small the lens was in comparison to his Canon 100mm Macro. So it´s maybe up to what gear you are accustomed to.
Kim Letkeman: Fuji's doing some nice work in this series of bodies ... so why on earth is this not a constant f/4? What a stroke of design that would have been ...
Yes, but it is supposed to be supplemented by the new zoom from the roadmap (DA zoom, cca. 16-85mm, i.e. both wider and longer): http://photorumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Pentax-K-mount-lens-roadmap-2014.png
BarnET: I am aware of this lens but I would sacrifise those 35mm at tele for 2mm at wideangle, so 16-70 mathes my criteria more. I am dreaming of 16-85mm f4 for Pentax, which would nicely complement my 18-35/1,8 (and the Pentax lens roadmap gives me some hope).
Why f11 for a portrait shot?
Completely agree. I have been waiting for something like 16-85mm f4, but only Sony came close to this with it´s 16-70mm/4.
I was comapring solely the size, not quality, but generally I am willing to accept bigger lens only if there is a reason for it (better luminosity, bigger zoom etc.). Sharpness does not have to influence the lens size (unlike luminosity).
Infared: Yawn...a slow zoom everything nothing lens...zzzzzzzz
Not necessarily ;-) Using cars analogy this lens is like Volkswagen Passat: solid and universal, but nothing extraordinary and for owner of Mercedes E Class or BMW 5 something to yawn at.
Zvonimir Tosic: Test shots with Nikon lenses, Fuji lenses, Canon lenses.When will DPR post samples taken with HD DA 20-40/2.8-4 Pentax lens using a K-3 Pentax camera?
BarnET: thanks. Very satisfied with it by now, the only donwside is itś size/weight, what is on the other hand the major advantage of Pentax 20-40mm.
A lens (for CSC) this slow should definitely be smaller; e.g. a similar Pentax 18-135/3,5-5,6 is smaller and lighter (405g, 76mm vs. 490g, 98mm), just as is the Sigma 18-200 with longer reach; not mentioning the fact these are DSLR lenses, i.e. built for bigger flange distance. With the biggest X-mount camera (X-T1) it is so-so and for all the others the lens is too big.
Menneisyys: Visibly worse corners at the wide end than with the (one stop faster) 18-55 (see for example "DSCF5519.acr "). Definitely not upgrading - waiting for the 16-55 instead.
Well I wouldn´t call an 18-135 lens "superzoom". A superzoom is something like 18-300; 18-135 is just a bit longer than common 18-105mm and given tha fact it is slow and quite expensive, we have the right to expect good sharpness.
Well, in this particular case I do not long for the review, since from reviews I read the limited zoom is not exactly the best Pentax lens you can buy. I was interested in buying this lens so I read all available reviews, but they discouraged me (and I chose the Sigma 18-35/1,8 instead).
Chris62: Another simple body.When the most advanced NX1?
HaR: The latest rumours talk only about Nikon D750 (which should be a faster D610 with articulating LCD).
I do not really believe in FF Samsung comming (just like I don´t believe in FF Pentax, Nikon D400 and other dreams of web-community).
Jogger: I dont think I've ever seen a Samsung mirrorless camera (or compact) in real life.. and i live in a really touristy area. Their phones are everywhere though.
P.S. Viking: How is your 16-50? I read a review that was not positive at all, having critisized extremely soft corners when wide open.