Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Some think the K-01 is too big... hmm is it?

R

raist3d

Well-known member
R

raist3d

Well-known member
Another thing - someone mentioned this at dpr:

"From dpreview:

"The theory that was proposed elsewhere is that although the camera has the old Pentax mount in the technical sense, because of the lack of mirror, Pentax will be able to build lenses that are partlyinside the camera, as if the flange distance were the about 2cm instead of the actual about 4 cm. This is utilizing all the benefits of mirrorless, except that the actual size of the camera, when the lens is unmounted, is 2 cm too thick. Whether this is an issue or not is debatable. If you transport your camera with a lens mounted on it, then the Pentax solution does not essentially differ from M43 or NEX.""

The interesting news is that a little bird told me that is so apparently.. of course new lenses would have to come out. But what an interesting way to keep the camera small yet have full lens support out of the gate? No?

- Raist
 
V

Vivek

Guest
A couple reactions I read elsewhere:

“Does this thing squirt water when the shutter button is pushed?”

“So when did Fisher-Price buy Ricoh/Pentax?”

:ROTFL:
 
R

raist3d

Well-known member
Vivek said:
A couple reactions I read elsewhere:

“Does this thing squirt water when the shutter button is pushed?”

“So when did Fisher-Price buy Ricoh/Pentax?”

:ROTFL:
Click to expand...
In the meant time a lot of the peanut gallery commenters miss the apparent superb clean photographer centric design, along with the fact that you get a good quality prime lens at $900 USD with excellent DR/high ISO.

- Raist
 
T

tsjanik

Well-known member
Raist: Very interesting. I'm a little surprised at the negative reaction to this camera. It appears to be a K5 (less the finder) at a very reduced price - how bad is that?

Off topic. I never felt the 645D is all that big compared to "pro" 35mm, so your link was very useful:

Compare camera dimensions side by side

Tom
 
M

Martin S

New member
One problem might be the focussing speed with Pentax SLR lenses. Olympus 4/3 lenses on m4/3 cameras were either very slow, or not workable at all.

Also the lack of any kind of EVF is worrisome. Just a shoe mounted OVF??

Martin
 
V

Vivek

Guest
raist3d said:
In the meant time a lot of the peanut gallery commenters miss the apparent superb clean photographer centric design, along with the fact that you get a good quality prime lens at $900 USD with excellent DR/high ISO.

- Raist
Click to expand...
Photographer centric design- nice.
 
Godfrey

Godfrey

Well-known member
A perfect little kit: Bumblebee K-01 + DA21 + FA43 mm Limited lenses.
I like it. And I'm not kidding. :)

However, it nets me nothing that I don't already have in equipment of comparable quality and even more versatility. And it would cost me about $2000. I'll buy some plane and train tickets instead.

"Down, Magpie! Down!!" ]:)
 
R

raist3d

Well-known member
Martin S said:
One problem might be the focussing speed with Pentax SLR lenses. Olympus 4/3 lenses on m4/3 cameras were either very slow, or not workable at all.

Also the lack of any kind of EVF is worrisome. Just a shoe mounted OVF??

Martin
Click to expand...
AF speed on this camera of the Pentax lenses won't be an issue. The k-5 itself focuses them faster than the m4/3rds do some 4/3rd lenses and as shown in the videos the preproduction firmware already focuses them fast.

As for the EVF- while I think it would have been nice to have the option, think about medium format film cameras in the past that had a projection on a glass that the photographer would look at. This is analogous to looking at the LCD to some degree. I would have wished the K-01 had a built in "cover" to view it better or such though. Maybe some sort of 3-side square or even full cover square mechanism that would "open up" when you wanted to use the camera to provide premium visibility in all conditions.
- Raist
 
R

raist3d

Well-known member
Godfrey said:
A perfect little kit: Bumblebee K-01 + DA21 + FA43 mm Limited lenses.
I like it. And I'm not kidding. :)
Click to expand...
Bumble bee.. lol! Maybe they could make those two primes in the BumbleBee EditionTM :)

I actually like the kit with its DA 40 XS prime. Really. Very to the point- a photographer's tool. I could see myself using that all day for all shots for a while.

However, it nets me nothing that I don't already have in equipment of comparable quality and even more versatility. And it would cost me about $2000. I'll buy some plane and train tickets instead.

"Down, Magpie! Down!!" ]:)
Click to expand...
Certainly. Admiring the good aspects of a tool like the K-01 (or lack of) shouldn't imply upgrading, buying or ditching what you already have that works great. (same goes for any other camera, brand, etc.).

- Raist
 
Godfrey

Godfrey

Well-known member
raist3d said:
Again, is it really that big? In this picture it has the lens!



Click to expand...
I had the DA40 Limited. Didn't like it ... not from an image quality perspective–it's a good performer–from a handling perspective. It's too flat and thin to manage the focusing ring well and there's nothing to help grip and stabilize the camera with. This new version is even flatter and thinner ... Not to my taste.

The size of the camera is fine by me. It's a little bit larger than the GXR-M but that is because it must accommodate the deeper lens mount for system compatibility with the Pentax SLR lens line. I don't want or need to shove my camera into a pocket, I like a camera that has enough finger space to operate it comfortably.

And yes, it's fine to think about new cameras as a thought exercise and consider them from the point of design. One cannot really appreciate how they really work, however, until you have it and use it ... so long, drawn out debates over some fractional detail of this or that seems pretty absurd to me.

Aesthetically, I like the Bumblebee finish and simple blocky shape, but Pentax should also offer a simple, solid black camera for those who prefer a more utilitarian look. I like industrial lumps that work. ;-)

Thinking of size comparisons:

Pentax K-01 vs Leica M9
http://camerasize.com/compare/#285,213
 
R

raist3d

Well-known member
And yes, it's fine to think about new cameras as a thought exercise and consider them from the point of design. One cannot really appreciate how they really work, however, until you have it and use it ... so long, drawn out debates over some fractional detail of this or that seems pretty absurd to me.
Click to expand...
Eh, I don't think this is a "long drawn out debate." We also have the context of other cameras and sizes of hands. I am only pointing out a reference, an idea. I agree that picking one up is where the tire meets the road, but it's not like this is all theoretical astronaut software design. I am only talking specifically on the size, that some think it's "too big."

Aesthetically, I like the Bumblebee finish and simple blocky shape, but Pentax should also offer a simple, solid black camera for those who prefer a more utilitarian look. I like industrial lumps that work. ;-)

Thinking of size comparisons:

Pentax K-01 vs Leica M9
Compare camera dimensions side by side
Click to expand...

See? It's a reference :)

- Raist
 
Godfrey

Godfrey

Well-known member
raist3d said:
Eh, I don't think this is a "long drawn out debate." We also have the context of other cameras and sizes of hands. I am only pointing out a reference, an idea. I agree that picking one up is where the tire meets the road, but it's not like this is all theoretical astronaut software design. I am only talking specifically on the size, that some think it's "too big."
Click to expand...
I didn't say it was, but I've seen a bazillion lines of analysis about how horrible/wonderful the K-01 is already on every persnickety detail, and no one's even seen one in a store yet. That's absurd.

The ergonomics of a camera are actually quite subtle ... Most theoretical astronaut software design is actually quite straightforward (I used to do that stuff). It's easier to write code to manage systems control and navigation of a spacecraft than to shape a camera's grip and controls so that 95 percent of 100,000 users will be comfortable with it, IMO. ;-)
 
R

raist3d

Well-known member
Godfrey said:
I didn't say it was, but I've seen a bazillion lines of analysis about how horrible/wonderful the K-01 is already on every persnickety detail, and no one's even seen one in a store yet. That's absurd.
Click to expand...
Cool, thanks for clarifying.

The ergonomics of a camera are actually quite subtle ... Most theoretical astronaut software design is actually quite straightforward (I used to do that stuff). It's easier to write code to manage systems control and navigation of a spacecraft than to shape a camera's grip and controls so that 95 percent of 100,000 users will be comfortable with it, IMO. ;-)
Click to expand...
Haha. When I said the astronaut software reference I was alluding to what Joel on Software calls an 'architecture astronaut' (now that I think about it, I misquoted the term). Basically someone who has a PHD and is all theory about architecting the most powerful fault tolerant, distributed networked based serializable architecture that doesn't ship in the real world for lack of a pragmatic approach to scheduling and development.

Meaning in short, when I am pointing about the size, I am not stating all from just theory in a vacuum.

:)

- Raist
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top