CJ Lan: I am neither Canonian, Nikonian, Pentexian, or micro 4/3 users. I use/like a camera as long as it is good in features and practical. Honestly speaking, I do not quite understand the philosophy behind the Pentax design engineers. Not getting into full frame market before jumping into very expensive medium format 645, interchangeable lens system with tiny p&s sensor (Q), now a bulky mirrorless camera. and who knows the next in the future. Correct me if I am wrong. I thought the main purpose getting rid of mirror is to achieve portability of a interchangeable lens camera system. What does K-01 try to accomplish in this regard? If just for using the existing line of lenses, I would rather stick with K-5 or any other Pentax APSC for their professional looks, not this as bulky and toy-looking "SLR".
Hello CJ Lan,
I can see some advantages of eliminating the optical viewfinder besides compactness/portability:
-Cost cuttings, so the camera can be cheaper.-Quieter operation (no mirror flip).-Hence, no need for mirror lock up when using a tripod for landscape photography.
Some people uses live-view with their SLR's (not me) and makes a lot of video too, so it makes sense to sell a K-mount camera without mirror and pentaprism.
Anyways, I'd rather have the viewfinder, so it would be the K-5 for me.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review