Previous page Next page

Body & Design

To say the Pentax K-01 differs physically from its mirrorless rivals is an understatement. The decision by Pentax to maintain compatibility with its K-mount lenses without the use of an adapter means the camera must accommodate a large flange-back distance (and essentially leave space for a mirror it doesn't have). And Pentax has shown no hesitation in embracing a large-camera aesthetic. Indeed the K-01 is much closer in size to a DSLR than a mirrorless camera.

Build quality appears solid with a sprinkling of aluminium parts adorning the plastic-coated body (there's an aluminium chassis under there somewhere). The front and side plates of the K-01 are covered with a ribbed rubber layer.The rear half of the rubber side-panel doubles as the accessory port door. It makes sense as part of the design but we found slightly awkward to close and have real concerns about its durability, especially as the rubber starts to lose its flexibility over time.

The camera sports a total of 13 external controls points in addition to a 4-way controller. The size of the camera allows for large, easily identifiable buttons, though we have some reservations about the control point layout.

In your hand

The K-01 is by far the heaviest mirrorless camera we've handled. Even more disappointingly, the lack of a sufficient hand grip makes it not only awkward, but uncomfortable to hold. While the red and green buttons atop the camera are customizable, it is impossible to actually reach the green one with your hand in a shooting position.

With the buttons arranged over such a large camera area, we found key controls difficult to manipulate without large shifts in your hand position. While you can reach both the red and exposure compensation buttons with your hand in the shooting position, neither of them are particularly comfortable, as they are set so far to the rear of the camera plate. The rear thumb dial, by comparison, is very well placed.

There's no getting around the fact, however, that the K-01 is a heavy camera. In addition, it feels particularly unbalanced, with significantly more weight distributed along the grip side of the camera. When using anything other than the Pentax smc DA 40mm F2.8 XS pancake lens, we find the only comfortable option when holding the camera is to support the bulk of its weight with your left hand holding the lens barrel. From an ergonomic handling standpoint, the K-01's external design falls far behind a DSLR form factor like that of the Pentax K-5.

Compared to the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1

The Pentax K-01 and the Panasonic GX1 make for an interesting comparison. While both cameras offer 16MP resolution and are available as kits with a very compact lens, the camera bodies themselves sit at opposite ends of the size spectrum for mirrorless cameras.

The K-01 is a significantly taller camera than the Panasonic GX1. And while the K-01 houses a physically larger APS-C sensor, it is clear from the top-down view that the extra depth needed to support the K-mount lens specification accounts for much of the drastic difference in size between the cameras.

Furthermore, it's worth remembering that the GX1's lens covers a 28-84mm equivalent range, while the K-01's pancake prime leaves you stuck with a fixed 60mm equivalent field-of-view.
Previous page Next page
139
I own it
10
I want it
26
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 376
1234
Eddy M

Ridiculously FUGLY!.

2 upvotes
John Koch

The camera looks interesting. But the performance tests are what will really count.

Pentax has roiled the codgers, who want everything to look like a '61 Coup de Ville. The yellow K-01 looks too much like a '65 Mustang. The OM-D E-M5 is more pleasing to stodgy traditionalists. Nothing less than a D800 or Miii will meet some people's standards, wether they can afford them or not.

0 upvotes
Tee1up

We codgers want a viewfinder and maybe a camera that doesn't look like my kids Tonka.

0 upvotes
kenyee

"With the buttons arranged over such a large camera area, we found key controls difficult to manipulate without large shifts in your hand position. While you can reach both the red and exposure compensation buttons with your hand in the shooting position, neither of them are particularly comfortable, as they are set so far to the rear of the camera plate."

Soooo not like Pentax which used to have the best ergos around :-P

0 upvotes
Raist3d

They still do. It's called K-5 and Q.

1 upvote
Jonathan Siegel

The front and the top design of this thing is definitely Marc Newson, the back of this camera is certainly not Marc Newson. This is where the design fails in my opinion. That cheap D-pad design that's seen on ever Pentax camera, this was a fantastic opportunity to improve on the user-interface design! The back of this camera is just dog-ugly, how can he possibly be satisfied with this? I hope this wasn't his call to do it this way, I hope he kicked and screamed and exhausted all of his options before letting them stick that point-and-shoot standard layout to the back of this camera. There are so many missed opportunities with this camera, why not remove some of those buttons and optimize the functions! I wish someone would give me a shot at designing a camera, I'd run circles around Marc Newson.

0 upvotes
viking79

You comment on how heavy the camera is, but does the aluminum body give it a quality feel?

0 upvotes
Richard Murdey

It's made of plastic, like the K-r. Only the mode dial, power switch and perhaps some other trim around the flash are metal.

0 upvotes
viking79

No it isn't, it is machined aluminum according to the specifications.

0 upvotes
waxwaine

Richard Murdey
FYI the K-r body is not like a d5100/3100 or an EOS Tsomething, it´s has solid magnesium-alloy body covered with tough plastic.

0 upvotes
il_alexk

Now we are back to the ultimate argument of all Pentax fanboys, "The magnesium body". This argument alone is supposed to overweight all disadvantages of Pentax cameras. However it doesn't - the camera must have a comfortable grip, accurate and fast AF, good IQ, etc. Magnesium body may be considered a bonus when the first three criteria are satisfied but useless in the absence of any of these

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
onlooker

Laughable.

0 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic

Your ignorant comment surely is.

3 upvotes
foto guy

"stuck with a fixed 60mm equivalent field-of-view"?
Perhaps someone should inform DPR that the K-01 has interchangeable lenses. Pentax has some of the best primes available. And they make zooms, too.
I'd rather be "stuck" with a good quality 40mm than a crappy 14-42mm anytime.

6 upvotes
ET2

They were referring to the kit lenses and were doing the size comparison with those two kit lenses. Read it carefully next time, foto guy

0 upvotes
Maxfield_photo

I believe it's also available with the traditional 18-55 kit lens.

0 upvotes
snake_b

Even if they were referring only to kit lenses, the DA40XS is probably the best kit lens to be stuck with, focal length preference aside. It's optically and mostly mechanically identical to the incredible DA40 limited, a phenomenal lens, despite being "only" an f2.8.

3 upvotes
Edmond Leung

Pentax, you can make a professional type camera D645 and a toy type camera K-01; can you make an optical instrument type mirrorless camera for your loyal customers? I trust a lot of your loyal customers are waiting for such a camera.

1 upvote
Steve 316

I was a loyal Pentax SLR customer for several decades before entering the digital age about 10 years ago. I wanted to like this camera and the Pentax Q also. To me, the sad truth is that this camera is too big and the Q, with its tiny sensor, is too small. Pentax is looking for a niche but they haven't found it. I hope they do.

5 upvotes
Edmond Leung

Right, so disappointed.
Pentax, please wake up. Otherwise you would lose your customers.

0 upvotes
Guidenet

Actually, I like the looks a lot. I also like it takes KA lenses. I wish it would allow stop down metering and the use of older lenses, but I like the looks.

The problem is that there is no viewfinder and no way I can see of adding one. You'd have thought they would have at least added an accessory port in case they wanted to add one. Without getting over-flamed, serious photography requires something other than Liveview for use most of the time. You also have to be able to track at least moving children. Without this ability, you are only appealing to point and shoot upgraders.

Secondly, I don't see an easy way change the things that need to be changed quickly. There's only one dial for aperture and shutter speed. Not much else not in menus.

What's Ricoh doing to Pentax? First we get a couple of "Toy" lenses for the Q, and now we get the actual Toy, by Fisher Price.

I'd have forgiven all the rest had they just not failed to have a viewfinder. Foolishness!

2 upvotes
Revenant

It does allow stop down metering:

"Instead you have to use the green button, which stops down the lens and sets the shutter speed to the metered value for that aperture. This isn't necessary for KA and newer lenses."

And I think the development of both the toy lenses and K-01 were already well under way when Ricoh bought Pentax.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Edmond Leung

Might be a wrong direction to be a subsidiary of Ricoh.
Pentax is now making toys, not optical instruments.

1 upvote
Revenant

Surely the idea and the design for the K-01 were a reality already when Ricoh bought Pentax last summer?
Also, Ricoh isn't exactly known for making ergonomically challenged designer cameras.

0 upvotes
Greg Lovern

Ricoh had nothing to do with the Q or the K-01. You can thank Hoya for the Q and the K-01. We'll have to wait for Photokina in September, at the earliest, before we know anything about products that have anything to do with the Ricoh ownership.

0 upvotes
Edmond Leung

How come there is no EVF?
Pentax should design another camera with high resolution OLED EVF (like Sony NEX7) and significantly reduce the weight and size of the camera.
Otherwise, there is no way to compete with Sony, Panasonic and Olympus.

0 upvotes
whtchocla7e

Why did my monitor crack when I opened this page?
I would appreciate a warning next time ;p

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
RStyga

K-01 is significantly smaller, lighter and cheaper than K-5. K-5 does not have focus peak. K-5 has slower LV AF. K-5 has worse video features. I can get a K-01 for $670 body even in pre-order phase; i.e., it will drop to $550 very soon. I think these are enough to stop people repeating the erroneous argument that K-5 is overlapping with K-01 in cost and features.

3 upvotes
Jim Evidon

Aesthetics aside, one wonders, as the market heads toward smaller camera ergonomically efficient bodies vis a vis Sony's NEX line and Panasonic's GF and GX lines, why did Pentax choose such a chunky design to market? It's shape is somewhere between the old Argus C3 and the Berning Robot Royals and Star cameras; all competent cameras, but not lovely to look at and heavy. At 1 1/4 pounds weight, the Pentax might make as lethal a weapon as did the Robots and the Argus C3 should someone really annoy you.

2 upvotes
noonecantellimadog

In the early 70's my first camera was a Pentax (1957 Asahi Original) followed by a Spotmatic. I shot Pentax digital from 2007... so I effectively shot Pentax all of my cognitive life.

I had transitioned to all primes pretty much. I waited for their mirrorless entry, and in the meantime played with an E-PL2 just to see if it was doable. As soon as I saw this I sold everything and moved on.

Oly is doable. This is NOT. Pentax has lost their way.

woof!

2 upvotes
Edmond Leung

From 60's to 70's, the design of Asahi Pentax Spotmatic was the most beautiful one in the market; the designs of Nikon/Canon/Minolta cameras look bulky and their forms were like the copies of German cameras. At that time, Pentax sold a lot of Spotmatic; and their market share might be more than Nikon F.
But since 80's, Pentax had no more revolutionary design when compared with Nikon, Canon, Minolta and Olympus.
I like the "old" Pentax cameras but not the cameras that they are selling today. What they are offering now is just a toy, not an optical instrument.

3 upvotes
Gesture

And should Oly continue the "full" size 4/3rds camera, there is at least a way to use your 4/3rds lenses on micro 4/3rd cameras. Mixing and matching with Panasonic and Olympus also has an appeal. Wish Nikon and Canon had the "courage" to go 4/3rds. Useful compromise between compact cameras and APS-C.

0 upvotes
Raist3d

@Edmon - I beg to differ- the K-5 is ergonomically fantastic.

2 upvotes
JoeDaBassPlayer

m43 has horrible real world DR compared the the sensor in the K 01 or any recent bottom of the line pentax. I will not go below APS C but the Sony's only accept their proprietary toy flash and microphone.

1 upvote
Alizarine

Did you sell a K-5 just because of the K-01? Sorry sir but I found it a bit unbelievable that you "sold everything" as soon as you "saw this".

1 upvote
G Davidson

I'd say in terms of lens selection, with their DA series, Pentax has perhaps the best system for APS-C sensors out there. When I heard of this camera coming, I got very excited, with easy use of all those lenses (and adapters, the K mount being flexible with them) and IBIS, but unfortunately, the reality is not so great.

The boxy nature of the camera is perhaps understandable, but it looks a bit too weird for me to walk around with. If it's very light, then there would be some advantage over the K5 just for that. The most difficult point though is the lack of a viewfinder. Throw one in and shrink the design somehow and I think you have a very viable system. Yet a better way of doing this seems to be to have a new mount, with a sensor capable of phase-detect AF, a slim, passive adapter to use the legacy lens collection easily and a Nex 7-style viewfinder. I see this camera as a step along the way to that.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
RStyga

It seems to me that this camera will be received better from the photographers than the reviewers. There seems to be a consensus about its features which is an indication of the bias towards the remaining aspects of the camera.

1 upvote
dscottsatx

It's fugly for a Pentax and the ergonomics are crap...this is a complete turn around for Pentax. I've been sitting on the fence with all my Pentax primes wondering when Pentax was going to release something that made me say, "Wow." This has done that, but not in a good way.

0 upvotes
Richt2000

Surelly the whole point of mirrorless is to have the same quality IQ of DSLR but in a small package. This is just mirrorless because they have done away with the mirror. Either Pentax has missed the point, or I have. This to me is a half hearted attempt at joining a market segment without real investment, after totally flopping with a interchangable system with compact IQ! Oh stick to the 645D, pentax, that is what you do best :-)

6 upvotes
D1N0

Don't forget the K-5 :p anyway, this is meant to be a niche product and it will appeal to current Pentax owners (as they already have lenses) and off beat people look for something different. They should market this camera in fashion and art magazines. Also a gold version would be nice, to attract the Bling-bling audiience.

0 upvotes
Essai

cool camera, without a mirror... and without a VF !
And also not that small !! ??

I hope Canon is taking notes.

0 upvotes
Edmond Leung

I hope Canon can introduce an interchangeable lens mirrorless camera ASAP.
I also hope Nikon can introduce an APS-C (or 4/3) interchangeable lens mirrorless camera too.
But, the cameras MUST have high resolution OLED EVF.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Ben Raven

Plus one, Edmond,
And YES, YES, YES, on the EVF !

1 upvote
Baxter Bad

No EVF! It's ugly! My God, my observations are witty and original. Just thought I'd share those nuggets of wisdom with you proles.

Comment edited 50 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
T3

It's almost like a Lego camera. Cute. But that is all.

I'm all for innovation in design, but I'm not sure this one needed to go into full scale production.

4 upvotes
happypoppeye

Well, I guess always look on the bright side ...it could be wood paneled like that Sigma thingie ...but still, I think this one is uglier. This may be the ugliest thing I've ever seen out of a camera.

1 upvote
Richard Murdey

The K-01 is many things, but it is not ugly.

1 upvote
Humboldt Jim

Proof that mirrorless is easy. Just remove the viewfinder and mirror and you have the latest in trendy high end fashion cams.

Funny how "mirrorless" is not used to describe the Olympus E-M5 even though it lacks a mirror.

HJ

1 upvote
Photomonkey

I have seen other reviews on the 'net that criticizes the K-01 for having no EVF or capability to add one.

So now people are finally waking up to the uselessness of a rear LCD VF for anything other than the most trivial of picture taking?
Oly sensed this by offering the EVF option early on. Sony nailed it with the NEX-7 and Oly have followed suit with the E-M5.

Next thing you know it will be the "new" orthodoxy.

BTW, I do think it looks cool but had it incorporated an EVF it would have gotten my attention.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Pentax_Prime

Ouch: "Build quality appears solid with a sprinkling of aluminium parts adorning the plastic chassis."

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba

"Machined aluminum frame with rubber accents"
http://pentaximaging.com/hybrid/K-01#!product-specs

0 upvotes
Richard Murdey

It's plastic, but solid with a nice matte finish. The metal parts are a nice touch. The mode dial, especially, is excellent.

0 upvotes
Paul Pasco

I have always liked Pentax cameras; I had a Spotmatic way back when and used an MX with several "M" K-mount lenses for almost 30 yrs. I have periodically toyed with the idea of chucking my Nikon gear for a K-5. But I have to say this latest thing is the Pontiac Aztec of the camera world!

1 upvote
Joe Ogiba

Does the Pontiac Aztec have 1080p30,25,24 & 720p60 video mode with full manual control ? Does the K-5 have that ?

0 upvotes
Ben Raven

Paul,

You just nailed it, with the Aztec reference !!

1 upvote
Greg Lovern

Clearly this was developed with limited resources under Hoya's thumb. It may appeal to the form-before-function crowd who buy fashion statements not photographic tools, but it will have very little appeal to enthusiasts.

Just wait to see what Ricoh can do with Pentax; we haven't seen any results of Ricoh's ownership yet. I predict that this September at Photokina a K-mount module for the GXR will be announced, and once that product is released, I think we'll soon see a quiet end to the K-01.

1 upvote
Richt2000

Hear hear. I just read your post after writing mine.

1 upvote
Richard Murdey

More correct to ask what Pentax can do with Ricoh. The Ricoh engineers are moving to Pentax, even though ownership is moving from Hoya to Ricoh.

0 upvotes
Greg Lovern

Richard -- Okay, what Pentax can do with Ricoh's resources and indulgence. However you parse it, Pentax's future is so bright I gotta wear shades! :-)

0 upvotes
Esen Draga

If a new and different design hepled to better ergonomics, smaller size and better performances, I wouldn't worry about how strange or different a camera could look like.
But this is not the case.

I don't understand why making this body compatible with existing lenses implies such a deep body. Why not simply make a body just the size a mirrorless camera needs, offering just a few new lenses, and including in the box an ad-oc adapter for k-mount?
(But it should be yellow, and surely in square shape as a previous commenter wrote)

1 upvote
Lan

Flange focal distance is the answer to that one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba

Sony NEX-5N with $400 A-mount adapter :
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7167/6817055283_0b410df6f1_b.jpg

with 35mm F1.4 :
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7162/6808893643_f09c3a6b60_o.jpg

K-01 with 85mm F1.4:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7195/6845254858_d930024fc4_b.jpg

with 50mm F1.4 :
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7202/6991377793_d98bb4e64f_b.jpg

0 upvotes
Sergey Borachev

This Pentax K-01 and the Olympus E-M5 are both intriguing in being so special cameras that managed to see the light of day. One has so little value, so little features, such an unfriendly shape, so little appeal to most, and such a look that you wonder why it was made. The other has so much of everything that you wonder why any manufacturer would want to make it (and not try to spread the features out in different models and make more profit).

Aren't we lucky to have these cameras and have a choice to buy cameras that suits our tastes and needs, which can be so different!

I should also add the Fuji X-Pro1, a quirky camera that has unbelievable IQ and yet some unacceptable weaknesses for most of us. And it was actually released. That this camera is made show how weird and diverse consumers are.

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Raist3d

The K-01 is not actually little in features. You should probably check the user manual.

0 upvotes
pdelux

I guess hes talking about the lack of EVF, lack of Weather sealing, lack of IBIS

0 upvotes
Raist3d

I don't know about you but when someone says "so little value, so little features" I think it goes beyond that. For example the K-01 has focus peaking, has and out of the box enhanced HDR mode, best in class type image/sensor quality (pending more tests but photos sure look good so far), the IBIS of the K-01 also does tilt (not quite 5 axis but not the usual typical either), built in intervalometer (and ability to produce in-camera shots or movies out of it), multi-photo RAW development and deletion, ability to do Tonal Shift of DR for Capture (this also affects RAW, not just JPEG), ISO 100 (EM5 starts at ISO 200), probably better video (30, 25, 24 fps), longer battery life (like 50% more).

I don't know about you but I think he's mistaken on that end. Ah yes, you said lack of IBIS. The K-01 does have IBIS. And like I said, it also can do tilt.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
topstuff

I have no problem with the design. It is infinitely better looking and offering better quality than the many bland black plastic boxes other makers offer at this price level.

It is also very well priced for a camera with exceptional IQ.

But I think Pentax made a mistake in not even allowing for an optional clip on EVF.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe

Bland black plastic boxes? At the price point of the K01 you get high quality metal bodies such as the NEX-5n, NX200 and GX1.

1 upvote
spidermoon

well price ? A amazon.fr, K01 is 849 euro naked, K5 is 829 euro naked. K5 is sealed with 100ovf better ergonomics and it's the same sensor. Pentax kr is 429 naked, it's plastic mae and different sensor. K01 well price may be 600euro, not more

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady

Luckily it comes with a swiveling screen to somewhat ease the pain from the lack of a viewfinder. Wait...

0 upvotes
Mescalamba

Lol my thoughts exactly, but that can be applied to various manufacturers. For example I thought 5DMK3 will have tilt-swivel screen.. and nothing. :/

Tho you can add external via HDMI output (maybe possible with K-01 too?). It cant look worse than it already does.

0 upvotes
maximuscr

my first thought when i saw the k-01:
They watched LOTR too often:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8joT0oFuGoI

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
Mescalamba

:D

My first thought was:

Someone really does like mixing LSD and weed. Maybe bit of peyotle?

And second:

I need to puke.

0 upvotes
jmmgarza

Where's the viewfinder?

2 upvotes
Faintandfuzzy

I agree. Useless without one. And it's hardly any smaller than the K5.

0 upvotes
D1N0

use a hoodloupe. works fine.

0 upvotes
spidermoon

The K01 with viewfinder is name K5 :)

0 upvotes
BJN

Meet the Ikea Leksakslådan.

5 upvotes
tkbslc

All the size and cost of a K-5 with none of the performance and handling! Where do I sign up!!!!???

2 upvotes
Richard Butler

Except that its list price is several hundred dollars less, so it's reasonable to expect it to drop in price.

0 upvotes
someuy

From CameraSize.com (http://j.mp/xXKSJf)
# Pentax K-5 is 8% (10 mm) wider and 23% (18 mm) taller than Pentax K-01.
# Pentax K-5 is 24% (14 mm) thicker than Pentax K-01.
# Pentax K-5 [740 g] weights 32% (180 grams) more than Pentax K-01 [560 g] (*inc. batteries and memory card).

K-5 MSRP = $1499 (currently on sale for around $1,000)
K-01 MSRP = $749 so still much cheaper than the sale K-5

With an upgraded sensor and much better video. Try again.

0 upvotes
Sergey Borachev

The price right now on Amazon and B&H for the K-5 is $995, a drop of 50% from RRP.

0 upvotes
ET2

Have you checked the latest K-5 prices? It's under $1000 for body only. K01 street prices might drop soon, but at the launch date, it's overpriced.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler

All cameras are overpriced at their launch dates. That's how MSRPs and product lifecycles work.

2 upvotes
Richard Murdey

It's the size and effectively the cost (once the dust settles) of a K-r. Get a grip.

0 upvotes
tkbslc

Thank you guys for putting my obviously factual, serious and literal post in its place.

Looking at the side by side, it's not really functionally any smaller than the K-5 and $900 vs $1000 is the same price category. The only size difference is the viewfinder, really.

Also, while the k1 will drop in price over the next year, so will the K-5. It's inevitable. Although if nobody buys the k1 it might drop really fast.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Raist3d

I think the point you missed is that the K-01 should have a bigger drop after the initial sales at MSRP. The K-5 will drop further but not the same proportion of its initial drop.

0 upvotes
Jogger

built in stabilizaton makes this interesting.. but, only for pentax users.. if they had a shorter flange distance, then it would have been far for interesting as a stablized digital back for lenses

0 upvotes
mpetersson

I don't understand why they would make a camera that looks so strange and unappealing, and at the same times seems so awkward to operate. Sometimes I guess it might be tempting to let a famous designer give it a try, but I'm not so sure I like the result here. I think that in the future mirrorless cameras will come in all shapes and sizes, as soon as they fix the slow AF. But this is not really the development I have been waiting for. I don't understand why they don't have an external EVF either, just look at the NEX-cameras and Olympus/Panasonic, apparently many people are interested in a viewfinder even if it is electronic.

1 upvote
D1N0

It's heavy? I own a K-5. That's not heavy. I also own a K10d, now that's heavy ;)

0 upvotes
Sergey Borachev

A couple of these would be so cute as bookends in a 10 year old's room.

Did the guy also design a square lens for it?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo

Yes, they would be cute as bookends in a 10 year old's room - providing the child has no taste.
Not so sure about the square lens, but maybe they'll come up with a square hood, who knows...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Macx

I love the idea of square lenses for it. I'm sure if the designer had his way, we would have had some.

I usually have a positive reaction to designs that tries to break the mold and go somewhere completely different. Though such designs are often ridiculed or reviled when they appear, many become iconic and classic. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating. It's no good with a good looking chair if it's lousy to sit in. Pentax makes excellent cameras, so I hope for the best, but from the looks of things, I'm doubtful.

0 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo

It has no viewfinder of any sort, it's contrast-detection AF only, it's big, bulky and ugly and controls are limited (only one rotary dial to control exposure).
Can anyone explain me what the advantages of buying this camera over the K-r or the K-x are?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Richard Butler

You don't have to shoot wide-open with legacy lenses. That was an error on our part that we've now corrected.

0 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo

Ok, R. Curiously, I was correcting my comment, after reading a previous corrective reply, at the same time you were replying!

0 upvotes
Azfar

Its unbelievably fat. yep thats the word. You get your head around the size of DSLR because it is a DSLR. But to see this Fat body on a mirror less just shuts you off. You wanted to have K-mount on your cam fine. but should have at least given some more thought into what impact it will have on the overall design.

1 upvote
alfredo_tomato

If it takes good pictures, feels good in my hand, has fast AF, I might consider it. The lack of a VF does bug me. I had a Canon G10, I am inured to ugly.

1 upvote
Kinematic Digit

It had the opportunity to handle one of these a week ago. It's a bit bulky and tough call. It is definitely a paradigm shift from conventional camera designs, but there were some nice things like functions and buttons in different but kind of better places.

In a way it reminded me of the Leica DigiLux (the Leica with a Four Thirds Sensor), both in handling and size.

It's boxy, but it feels solid. I don't know how I feel about designers designing photographic equipment, but sometimes it takes a different approach to look at it. I don't like the yellow, but the one I got to look at was black and it was much easier on the eyes.

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
1 upvote
thx1138

Literally the worst looking camera I've ever seen and going mirrorless while keeping K-mount defies belief. I'm sure this will bomb, yet I was actually looking forward to what Pentax might offer. Hopefully when this fails it might send them back to the drawing board to get it right.

5 upvotes
marike6

I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think it looks kind of cool. And that K-5 type IQ is truly tempting.

I prefer the look of the Q, but I wouldn't call this camera ugly. It's different. After awhile all these soulless black boxes get boring.

4 upvotes
pdelux

What do you mean?, it looks like a soulless black box, only painted yellow.

1 upvote
minzaw

It is minimalist astereotypical design and uniqueness in itself demands critique and attention is the fundamentals of design deviates from the norm
I love it!

1 upvote
Sad Joe

Wow - so ugly and not very smart when it comes to control lay out either . Whatever happened to the genius that designed the Pentax Spotmatic or the MX LX or ME Super - boy do they need him back!

2 upvotes
pannumon

Pentax can't lose much with this camera. They don't need to develop a completely new lens setup. At least they are offering a different option to the mirrorless market. And let's face it, AF speed is not everything (as long as it is less than a second).

On the other hand, what kind of products are they planning to sell after 5 years?

5 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo

'Pentax can't lose much with this camera'. False. They lost the photographers' community respect already.

7 upvotes
luigibozi

'Pentax can't lose much with this camera'. False. How about zeiss zk and voigtlander pk discontinued lenses?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Richard Murdey

pannumon is correct. The K-01 gives them a inexpensive and fun alternative to the K-r and some nice PR outside of the photographer community for very little investment. It is not high end, it doesn't appeal to the high end, and it doesn't have to.

1 upvote
eliaspt

Who cares about previous? Is DPReview so short on staff recently ? It's about time to see some proper reviews guys, please.

0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo

To do a review, we first need to have a production level camera. Otherwise, all we can say about it with certainty is that it's yellow ;-)
BTW the word is "previews"

11 upvotes
penguin45

I agree with you, eliaspt.

Logically, we see a preview and then a corresponding review later. We are still to see this pattern in dpreview. It's a bit of disappointing!

It is time to do more serious reviews, please.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Barney Britton

@ penguin45 - did you not read what Amadou said? WE DON'T HAVE A REVIEWABLE CAMERA YET.

4 upvotes
solarider

Evidently even penguins with 45 autofocus points with disconnect to R brain don't know what 'preview' and 'pre-production camera' means.

2 upvotes
mpetersson

I appreciate these previews as well. Of course, sometimes I would wish a full review sooner, but the preview still gives a hint about whether it's a camera to even consider. And if there is no production camera available it's either a preview or nothing, and then i definitely prefer a preview...

2 upvotes
spidermoon

It's the same sensor than K5, so IQ is more os less the same, very good. Only handling and AF differ.

0 upvotes
increments

I thought you could use older lenses with this? I watched this on youtube earlier.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOC05iPSbGY

0 upvotes
Richard Butler

I've corrected that part of the preview.

Having spent an hour trying to get it to work with a pre-KA lens, and based on the user manual's statement 'Automatic Exposure with the aperture open (The aperture ring has no effect on the actual aperture value),' I though we'd got it right.

However, resetting the camera seems to have got it working. Sorry about the misunderstanding.

1 upvote
increments

No problem, thanks for checking it out for us.

0 upvotes
Mssimo

I love this new anti-theft system they implemented.

6 upvotes
Raist3d

I gotta admit, that's a pretty funny thing to say :-)

1 upvote
Baxter Bad

Thanks, Amadou. When you get to testing, can you please have a look at using the onboard flash for daylight fill? I'm experiencing severe overexposure/blur with a variety of lenses and settings.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 376
1234