DPR review review

Started Mar 1, 2013 | Discussions
OP anthony mazzeri Senior Member • Posts: 2,078
Re: DPR review review

mngsmt wrote:

Not sure what point you're trying to make. Are you saying the Fuji is actually 'compact' and 'little' as per the DPR review description?

If on the other hand you're just saying it is slightly smaller in profile than the K-01, that has never been in dispute and you're just repeating the caption in the first post so you're not actually playing a trump card.

The point is if the difference is enough to warrant one being described as 'bulky' by DPR while the other is 'compact' and 'little'. To me they are similar enough that the difference is just a matter of degrees, and your image actually supports this - neither can be described as 'compact' or 'little' - yet one is. Why?

mngsmt Regular Member • Posts: 303
Re: DPR review review
1

anthony mazzeri wrote:

mngsmt wrote:

Not sure what point you're trying to make.

I guess I was trying to make the point that you should compare a camera with a lens attached with a camera with a lens attached.

Part of the reason why the K-01 never appealed to me personally is the concept of eliminating everything viewfinder related, but keeping the size very similar to a standard DSLR.

The fact that the X-E1 has a very short flange focal distance is one of the design choices that make it a very attractive camera IMO. It makes it smaller, and compatible with virtually any lens out there except for 4/3.

not a big difference, isn't it?

forpetessake
forpetessake Veteran Member • Posts: 5,172
Comparing apples to oranges, eh?

Get a picture with Pentax 18-55mm (and don't photoshop it), it would be a closer comparison.

Though it's expected that a camera with a longer flange will be at a disadvantage for the wide angle lenses, the disadvantage though disappears for longer FLs, and that's where the most bulk is anyway. For P&S cameras short flange distance is a must to keep them compact, for more advanced equipment it's a moot point.

mngsmt wrote:

anthony mazzeri wrote:

...but at the end of the day?

forpetessake
forpetessake Veteran Member • Posts: 5,172
Re: DPR review review

mngsmt wrote:

anthony mazzeri wrote:

mngsmt wrote:

Not sure what point you're trying to make.

I guess I was trying to make the point that you should compare a camera with a lens attached with a camera with a lens attached.

Part of the reason why the K-01 never appealed to me personally is the concept of eliminating everything viewfinder related, but keeping the size very similar to a standard DSLR.

I disagree. Manufacturers should look into designing a convenient DSRL-like grip and eliminating the other bulk, especially optical viewfinder. The grip-less mirrorless cameras are a pain to use with anything but the lightest, smallest lenses. If anything is missing from K-01 is a larger grip.

The fact that the X-E1 has a very short flange focal distance is one of the design choices that make it a very attractive camera IMO. It makes it smaller, and compatible with virtually any lens out there except for 4/3.

The flange distance doesn't mean much in mirrorless design. The wide-angle lenses can protrude inside the camera, and for the long lenses the flange distance makes no difference. Since it's a grip that determines the overall size, the flange distance only becomes an issue if one wants to use adapters for the legacy glass.

mngsmt Regular Member • Posts: 303
Re: DPR review review

forpetessake wrote:

mngsmt wrote:

anthony mazzeri wrote:

mngsmt wrote:

Not sure what point you're trying to make.

I guess I was trying to make the point that you should compare a camera with a lens attached with a camera with a lens attached.

Part of the reason why the K-01 never appealed to me personally is the concept of eliminating everything viewfinder related, but keeping the size very similar to a standard DSLR.

I disagree. Manufacturers should look into designing a convenient DSRL-like grip and eliminating the other bulk, especially optical viewfinder. The grip-less mirrorless cameras are a pain to use with anything but the lightest, smallest lenses. If anything is missing from K-01 is a larger grip.

Hm, so you like more bulk. Fair enough.

The fact that the X-E1 has a very short flange focal distance is one of the design choices that make it a very attractive camera IMO. It makes it smaller, and compatible with virtually any lens out there except for 4/3.

The flange distance doesn't mean much in mirrorless design. The wide-angle lenses can protrude inside the camera, and for the long lenses the flange distance makes no difference. Since it's a grip that determines the overall size, the flange distance only becomes an issue if one wants to use adapters for the legacy glass.

That's all I'm saying. And that the X-E1 is approximately 20mm slimmer than the K01.

McSpin Contributing Member • Posts: 504
Re: The K-01 is a spade...
1

People enjoy exaggerating about it's looks.  I admit I wasn't crazy about it at first, but it didn't keep me from wanting it's abilities.  The styling has grown on me since I've had it.  Still, a combination of looks and high initial price are what slowed sales in my opinion.

When I first got my camera, I was quite thrilled with the results I was getting.  I called up a friend who shoots Pentax. He had been wanting to upgrade his DS.  I told him it was a very suitable camera for his needs and that the price was a steal. He didn't buy it, saying that he was going to wait to see what else hit the market later this year.  I happened to go to his house with my k-01 and we shot a bunch of photos.  He was more than a little impressed and admitted he didn't jump at it when I first mentioned it because he didn't like the way it looked.  After handling it for a few minutes, he went over to his computer and placed an order for one.  He was truly excited about the images we were getting and at that point the looks were meaningless.  If only more people had a chance to handle one, the sales would have taken off.

forpetessake
forpetessake Veteran Member • Posts: 5,172
Re: DPR review review

mngsmt wrote:

forpetessake wrote:

mngsmt wrote:

anthony mazzeri wrote:

mngsmt wrote:

Not sure what point you're trying to make.

I guess I was trying to make the point that you should compare a camera with a lens attached with a camera with a lens attached.

Part of the reason why the K-01 never appealed to me personally is the concept of eliminating everything viewfinder related, but keeping the size very similar to a standard DSLR.

I disagree. Manufacturers should look into designing a convenient DSRL-like grip and eliminating the other bulk, especially optical viewfinder. The grip-less mirrorless cameras are a pain to use with anything but the lightest, smallest lenses. If anything is missing from K-01 is a larger grip.

Hm, so you like more bulk. Fair enough.

That's not what I said. The camera body should be only as large as necessary for comfortable handling. I wouldn't sacrifice a good grip for a tiny body, I already have Sony NEX-5N and it's very uncomfortable with anything but smallest lenses.

The fact that the X-E1 has a very short flange focal distance is one of the design choices that make it a very attractive camera IMO. It makes it smaller, and compatible with virtually any lens out there except for 4/3.

The flange distance doesn't mean much in mirrorless design. The wide-angle lenses can protrude inside the camera, and for the long lenses the flange distance makes no difference. Since it's a grip that determines the overall size, the flange distance only becomes an issue if one wants to use adapters for the legacy glass.

That's all I'm saying. And that the X-E1 is approximately 20mm slimmer than the K01.

Again, adapting foreign glass is not a primary purpose of the system. Definitely, Pentax with so many k-mount lenses wouldn't think that way. Though I do have and like playing with old lenses, so I got a Sony for that. But I don't need yet another camera for the legacy manual lenses, I actually like K-01 for its full compatibility with Pentax lenses. I think all camera manufacturers, which have a large choice of DSLR lenses would be very successful releasing mirrorless cameras with the same DSLR mounts -- Sony NEX is suficient for all those who like playing with adapted glass.

chillgreg
chillgreg Senior Member • Posts: 1,248
Re: The K-01 is a spade...

McSpin wrote:

People enjoy exaggerating about it's looks. I admit I wasn't crazy about it at first, but it didn't keep me from wanting it's abilities. The styling has grown on me since I've had it. Still, a combination of looks and high initial price are what slowed sales in my opinion.

When I first got my camera, I was quite thrilled with the results I was getting. I called up a friend who shoots Pentax. He had been wanting to upgrade his DS. I told him it was a very suitable camera for his needs and that the price was a steal. He didn't buy it, saying that he was going to wait to see what else hit the market later this year. I happened to go to his house with my k-01 and we shot a bunch of photos. He was more than a little impressed and admitted he didn't jump at it when I first mentioned it because he didn't like the way it looked. After handling it for a few minutes, he went over to his computer and placed an order for one. He was truly excited about the images we were getting and at that point the looks were meaningless. If only more people had a chance to handle one, the sales would have taken off.

And that, good Sir, is precisely the point.

Greg

 chillgreg's gear list:chillgreg's gear list
Ricoh GR Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Sony RX100 II Apple iPhone 6 Plus Huawei P9
McSpin Contributing Member • Posts: 504
Re: The K-01 is a spade...

chillgreg wrote:

McSpin wrote:

People enjoy exaggerating about it's looks. I admit I wasn't crazy about it at first, but it didn't keep me from wanting it's abilities. The styling has grown on me since I've had it. Still, a combination of looks and high initial price are what slowed sales in my opinion.

When I first got my camera, I was quite thrilled with the results I was getting. I called up a friend who shoots Pentax. He had been wanting to upgrade his DS. I told him it was a very suitable camera for his needs and that the price was a steal. He didn't buy it, saying that he was going to wait to see what else hit the market later this year. I happened to go to his house with my k-01 and we shot a bunch of photos. He was more than a little impressed and admitted he didn't jump at it when I first mentioned it because he didn't like the way it looked. After handling it for a few minutes, he went over to his computer and placed an order for one. He was truly excited about the images we were getting and at that point the looks were meaningless. If only more people had a chance to handle one, the sales would have taken off.

And that, good Sir, is precisely the point.

Greg

I agree completely that the styling affected sales, but if was as bad as you describes, he'd would not have bought it under any circumstance.  I still think you exaggerate - good sir.

Jack Simpson
Jack Simpson Forum Pro • Posts: 11,835
Re:Richard Butler// DPR review review

R Butler wrote:

Image quality (JPG) - You can see from the image below. The Pentax is far too sharp. And the blacks are not grey enough. That is why the Fuji got better image quality (JPG) scores.

Richard - dpreview.com

Hi Richard,

FWIW, I would rather have a slightly oversharpened pic come out of my camera as opposed to a noticeably soft pic

Cheers,

Jack

-- hide signature --

STREET PHOTOGRAPHY DOCUMENTARY: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kkHKP4Gnd0
(*UPDATED NOV 16th*)MY BLOG.... www.nakedmanonawire.blogspot.com
****MY EMAIL ADDRESS IN IS MY 'VIEW PLAN'****
It's amazing what one can do when one doesn't know what one is doing

 Jack Simpson's gear list:Jack Simpson's gear list
Canon PowerShot G2 Ricoh GR Nikon Coolpix P900 Pentax *ist DS Pentax K-r +15 more
Jack Simpson
Jack Simpson Forum Pro • Posts: 11,835
Re:Richard Butler// DPR review review

Jack Simpson wrote:

R Butler wrote:

Image quality (JPG) - You can see from the image below. The Pentax is far too sharp. And the blacks are not grey enough. That is why the Fuji got better image quality (JPG) scores.

Richard - dpreview.com

Hi Richard,

FWIW, I would rather have a slightly oversharpened pic come out of my camera as opposed to a noticeably soft pic

Cheers, .... EDIT .. mind you, this coming from a photog who's last worry is technical perfection in his imagesĀ 

Jack

-- hide signature --

STREET PHOTOGRAPHY DOCUMENTARY: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kkHKP4Gnd0
(*UPDATED NOV 16th*)MY BLOG.... www.nakedmanonawire.blogspot.com
****MY EMAIL ADDRESS IN IS MY 'VIEW PLAN'****
It's amazing what one can do when one doesn't know what one is doing

 Jack Simpson's gear list:Jack Simpson's gear list
Canon PowerShot G2 Ricoh GR Nikon Coolpix P900 Pentax *ist DS Pentax K-r +15 more
djrocks66
djrocks66 Senior Member • Posts: 1,601
K0-1 Should have had a view finder. :N/T
 djrocks66's gear list:djrocks66's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon D500 Fujifilm X-T100 Nikon Z6 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +16 more
britcam
britcam Senior Member • Posts: 2,476
Re: K0-1 Should have had a view finder. :N/T

... but the whole point is that it doesn't have a viewfinder

-- hide signature --

britcam

 britcam's gear list:britcam's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Nikon Coolpix 5000 Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Ricoh GR Digital IV Olympus E-330 +8 more
Gesture Veteran Member • Posts: 8,854
Re: K0-1 Should have had a view finder. :N/T

Even better, a robust LCD that swings up to the horizontal-allowing use as we did with TLRs and waist-level viewed medium format SLRs.  That would give stability and an alternative viewing experience.  But I doubt there will be a K-02.

(unknown member) Forum Pro • Posts: 15,724
It's not the reviewers job to educate

JoeDaBassPlayer wrote:

Thanks for taking the time to comment here. I know reviews are subjective, but tell that to the typical low information reader. The reviews here do carry far more weight amongst the public than they should. That is one reason why the non review of the K 01 on this site should not have been made public. One of the regular staff should have done it instead of jobbing it out. An actual review, done in house should have been done.

the average person about the fact that humans have opinions of their own. They do enough educating about the subject.

I think the mindset of taking the responsibility for another's thoughts is flat out lunacy and impossible. People have to have common sense and not expect others to do the thinking for them.

Here's a clue. Any person that has ever said or written anything is giving their opinion. Some are more educated than others, but still opinion. Even facts don't always stand the test of time. Its up to each person to fact check and discern for themselves- and never put all your eggs in one basket. Save some for yourself. We are all born with a brain and the capability of rational thought in this world.

Use the grey matter.

And use common sense.

Carl
http://www.carlgarrard.blogspot.com/ (Best work compilation)
http://www.photographic-central.blogspot.com (Gear reviews)
Also formerly AlphaMountWorld.com (Now off the web)

Dale108
Dale108 Veteran Member • Posts: 9,254
Re: DPR review review

Hi Anthony:

You make some good points.  However, from a marketability perspective, the Fuji is a lot more appealing than the K01.  Note that I own a K01 and find it is a fine camera.  Somehow Pentax needs to find the marketing savvy that Fuji has found with their X series.

Dale

 Dale108's gear list:Dale108's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Olympus TG-5 Sony RX10 IV Pentax K-1 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads