Josh Root 
, Feb 02, 2012; 11:12 a.m.
Pentax K-01 mirrorless was announced today (4am my time *yawn*). Info here if you haven't seen it:
http://photo.net/equipment/pentax/k-01/preview/
It uses K-mount lenses. This is a huge advantage in that it instantly gives the K-01 the biggest non-adapter lens list of any mirrorless out there, and I think a lot of budget minded people and existing pentax users are going to find that cool. But it also limits the size of the camera to being bigger than other mirrorless systems. Pentax has embraced that and given the K-01 some interesting styling via Marc Newsom, whom I'm told is a famous industrial designer.
I don't see this as being a bad move for Pentax. The chances of them outdoing Nikon or Sony or m4/3 at the same game is pretty small. They needed to take a different path than the current "create a new body and lens mount to go with it". The way I saw it, joining the m4/3 group (highly unlikely) or doing something like this were the only two real choices for them.
So I like it. I think those who want small or super small cameras already have plenty of options in the mirrorless world (Hi Pentax Q!). So I don't mind that the K-01 is a bit bigger. Plus, for anyone who has a set of the Pentax Limited Primes, the overall kit size is still pretty compact. I love the APS-C size sensor for, what should be, great high ISO performance relative to other mirrorless systems with smaller sensors. The fancy designer? Don't mind it and if it brings a new group of people into more serious photography, more power to them. Lack of an EVF, that's a legitimate gripe perhaps depending on what lenses you are planning on using. Older bigger K-mount lenses might have been easier to handle with an eye to the VF. But I can also see why they left it off. More and more people do not see any use for a VF. Particularly the type of people that are moving from p&s cameras up into a mirrorless system.
What's your take?
Walt Flanagan , Feb 02, 2012; 11:40 a.m.
I'll start off by saying this is the ugliest camera I have ever seen. I don't know who the "famous" designer is and after seeing this I don't really care.
I'm more curious as to who Pentax thinks the target market is. Lack of EVF and contrast based AF will make it less appealing to the enthusiast crowd. Dpreview shows that it is basically the same width and depth as the K5 DSLR. You just save a little height. For entry level consumers I'm not sure why this is any better than a mirrorless alternative.
Josh Root , Feb 02, 2012; 11:48 a.m.
I'll start off by saying this is the ugliest camera I have ever seen. I don't know who the "famous" designer is and after seeing this I don't really care.
I didn't know the designer either and his name brings nothing to the table for me either. I don't personally find the camera ugly, but it isn't a stretch to see that some people will. It does feel better in the hands than you probably expect from initial impressions.
Lack of EVF and contrast based AF will make it less appealing to the enthusiast crowd.
While I don't have any technical specs on it, the Pentax people confirmed to me this morning that the K-01 will have AF during movie focusing. So your comment regarding AF may not be accurate. The VF issue may or may not be an issue with the overall market, even if it is an issue with the PN type crowd of more serious photographers. Although lack of a VF hasnt' hurt other mirrorless systems sales. But then again, those systems have other features that may be more important to photographers and overcome the missing VF in users' minds.
Jerry Thirsty , Feb 02, 2012; 11:51 a.m.
Yeah, I don't get it either. Maybe it's a Japan-centric concept? The 40mm would make sense on a full-frame, but on a 1.5X? Maybe there are people out there who like a 60mm equivalent, but it's neither normal nor tele- enough for my prime preferences.
Michael Howard , Feb 02, 2012; 12:17 p.m.
I like it. I'll have to get my hands on one to play with before buying, though. I can see this in my bag with a 15, 31, and 55-300 as a fairly small portable kit. I am getting very used to the idea of no viewfinder, especially after talking to my good friend who is a pro shooting Sony mirrorless. Watching him work, he has a free flowing routine, and, as he states, he will never look into a viewfinder again. If the AF on this is decent, I think it will be a winner. Remember, this is the introductory product for a new line, Pentax needed to do something completely different. Keeping the K lens line makes perfect sense, they already have a tiny new mirrorless system. The limited series of lenses was made for this camera. I could have done without the "retro" styling and the pentaprism hump...but lets see what the next in line brings.
Leslie Cheung , Feb 02, 2012; 12:30 p.m.
I think the pricing should be more prominent. I missed it the first a couple times I glimpsed through it.
Will Daniel , Feb 02, 2012; 12:35 p.m.
I am starting to get the message that composing a photo by placing your eye at a viewfinder will someday be history. Composing by looking at the tiny monitor on the back of a camera seems very retro when you consider that the best photos were at one time composed on the ground glass of a view camera, albeit upside down. It's not that this old dog can't be taught new tricks, but I can't yet get wrapped around any camera that doesn't have some kind of viewfinder. I'm sure I'll come around on that point if I live long enough -- I probably won't have a choice.
I was a Pentax sales rep when we introduced that silly looking 40mm pancake lens. Most of us on the sales force had a laugh when we first saw it, but it sure did sell well over the years. I still don't like it.
Josh Root , Feb 02, 2012; 12:40 p.m.
The only thing I don't like about the 40mm lens is that it is a 61mm effective focal length. I just don't care for that particular field of view, but that's just me. I would have preferred a 40mm field of view if they wanted to do something a little unique. While I don't have any info on how it performs real-world. It is a tiny and cool lens physically.
Will Daniel , Feb 02, 2012; 12:52 p.m.
When we launched the 40mm lens, we also introduced an accessory belt clip for the Pentax ME. The idea behind the lens was to make the ME into a "pocket" camera, or one that could be worn on the belt for instant access -- a street shooter's delight. You had to have a big pocket, but consumers got the idea. There was some consumer resistance to it as a "normal" lens because of both the focal length and the speed. Everybody was accustomed to 50mm and everybody wanted F1.7 or faster, or so we thought. The thing that surprises me most about that lens is its value today as a collectible.
Walt Flanagan , Feb 02, 2012; 01:53 p.m.
I don't personally find the camera ugly, but it isn't a stretch to see that some people will.
Aesthetic things are personal opinions. I think the Honda Element is hideous but the fact that I see so many on the road means that many don't agree with me.
the Pentax people confirmed to me this morning that the K-01 will have AF during movie focusing. So your comment regarding AF may not be accurate.
My comment was that the AF system is contrast based, not a phase detect system like a traditional SLR. From your preview
Type: TTL Contrast Detection AF
Phase detect AF is generally faster and better at tracking subjects in continuous AF mode.
If I had a ton of Pentax lenses I would buy a traditional Pentax DSLR, not this mirrorless camera that is pretty much the same size as a DSLR with most likely worse AF performance and no viewfinder.
