MP Burke: I think Pentax got it wrong with this camera. If you see it alongside other mirrorless cameras it looks very bulky as a result of its greater depth. Pentax seems to have been concerned with having compatibility with its slr lenses, but they have designed something with such a large flange back distance, that it largely defeats the object of it being a mirrorless camera, as the review correctly emphasises.A notable disadvantage of the longer flange back distance is that the K-01 can not use the recently announced Sigma lenses (first third party AF lenses for mirrorless systems) or use any lenses made for older rangefinder cameras, such as those for Leica M or screw mount.A more sensible answer to the problem of compatibility with slr lenses would be to supply a dedicated adaptor which permits AF. Even this would not solve the AF speed issue. Obtaining higher AF speeds with CD-AF cameras really needs lenses to be specially designed for them, with internal focussing.
could you please tell us the main use you make out of it (meaning portraiture, street, arc, whatelse...)
Frankly, and with the maximum respect for the people working on this site, anytime a new model by Pentax reaches the shelves, the only real doubt about DP's review is where will they place the flaw, this time, and how much the final vote will be affected...If the camera would have been from another brand from the "big bunch" the review would have oulined the unique design, unbeateable image quality and the great opportunities given by large number of customizable esternal controls... "if you are not a naturalist photographer and you think you can live up the AF relative slowlyness..." they would have written.i love many things of this site but reviews...that said, one of the ugliest and worst thought camera's ever, and bad news from assembly quality control, too. This is not good!in my verrrrrry humble opinion...
i think someone's typing just because he has time and fingers...what would one expect to be the price range of a wide angle lens for a camera that is abot the 10ks one?Modestly looking around this MF realm, I humbly suggest it looks great in costruction and features. Now let's see if it is up the task as a "taking-pictures" device...cheers!
Gothmoth: why would you spend your money on a pentax system when your starting with photography?
imo canon or nikon have far superior systems.pentax may has some nice cameras and a few nice lenses.but looking at the whole system around it.... why buy into pentax?
considering that most of the buyers will eventually add a single lens to the kit one, there have been strong points to get a pentax from K20 on...Only some profs really needs some tools.
the (few) ones who really bought the camera at full prize are simply happy 'cause Sigma is offering them another lens for free...
There is a pair of question marks in all this, and they are big ones...did they hire good software developers this time?will they relate upon consistent alpha tester?
whtchocla7e: Best news I've heard all year. Deep down inside.. I had hope.The X100 is no longer a contender for me.
Big fevon in a small package. Dreams do come true.
"f2.8 hasn't been considered fast since the fifties!..."
actually any cmos sensor can't read any light further than that... dunno if foveon is different in this regard.So if you take into consideration focal length too, f 2.8 is simply perfectly reasoneable...
wildkat2: Argh! Why are some people NEVER happy!
Complaint - Pentax doesnt have a lens roadmap. SOLVED
Complaint - Lens ______ is not on the roadmap.
the complete Pentax lineup:
DA 14mm f/2.8DA 15mm f/4 LimitedDA 21mm f/3.2 LimitedDA 31mm f/1.8 LimitedDA 35mm f/2.8 macro LimitedDA 35mm f/2.4DA 40mm f/2.8 LimitedDA 40mm f/2.8 XSFA 43mm f/1.9 LimitedDFA 50mm f/2.8 MacroDA 50mm (2012)DA* 55mm f/1.4DA 70mm f/2.4 LimitedFA 77mm f/1.8 LimitedDFA 100mm f/2.8 macro WRDA* 200mm f/2.8DA* 300mm f/4DA 550 (2012)
Thats 18 (2 pending) prime lenses from 14mm-550mm including 11 that are 55mm or below.
DA 10-17mm f/3.5~4.5DA 12-24mm f/4DA 17-70mm f/4DA 18-55mm f/3.5~5.6DA 18-55mm f/3.5~5.6 WRDA 18-135mm f/3.5~5.6 WRDA 50-200mm f/3.5~4.6 WRDA 50-200mm f/3.5~4.6DA* 50-135 f/2.8DA 55-300mm f/4~5.6DA* 60-250mm f/4
DA 12-28mm (2013)DA 18-220mm (2012)DA* 18-85mm (2013)DA 22-38mm (2013)DA 130-370mm (2013)
16 zooms (5 pending) covering 10mm to 300+mm.
DA 14mm f/2.8DA 15mm f/4 LimitedDA 21mm f/3.2 LimitedDA 31mm f/1.8 LimitedDA 35mm f/2.8 macro LimitedDA 35mm f/2.4
it is not so difficult to notice that between DA 14 (not a cheap lense...) and DA 35 you have limiteds only...
paulkienitz: Still no fast 24 or 28mm.
DA 14 seems to be a great lense, but is all but affordeable. And thereabout you have limiteds only....With modern sensors and 2.8 limitation, a 20something f 3.5 in "plastic shape" could be light and cheap enough to sell tons. Anytime i take a 35mm "capeable" combo (XA2, Oly Trip, anything with my F24-50) I feel i really miss an "always on lens" of such length... :(
still no 24 mm or thereabout at all! :(it really really drives me mad... can we have a normal, affordeable lense that is equivalent to a 35/43 mm in the old 135? retrofocus, front focus, slow, screwdriven... who cares?!shall we go on with old M28 2.8 forever?