1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Pentax K01 Officially announced- First Video

Discussion in 'Other Systems' started by Bhupinder2002, Feb 2, 2012.

  1. Bhupinder2002

    Bhupinder2002 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Its like a Brick actually and can be used a weapon in case of need ..hahahahh
    But I am impressed with new 40 mm 2.8 lens ..wow..puts panny into shame
    Cheers
     
  2. kytra

    kytra Mu-43 Regular

    126
    Feb 28, 2011
    as a former Pentaxian I can recognize the pattern...backward compatibility, shared components, affordable price (for a body with a huge lens lineup)

    I switched to Nikon in 2009 for the AF performance (slow and, in tungsten light, even dodgy), the unreliability of the SDM AF drive system and insufficient lens options currently in production.

    What I don't like is lack of EVF/OVF and the big body which makes it less attractive for current K5/K-r owners. Maybe the performance and added improvements in software and hardware will make up for that.
     
  3. Jman

    Jman Mu-43 Veteran

    475
    Apr 20, 2011
    Columbus, OH
    • Like Like x 1
  4. taz98spin

    taz98spin Mu-43 Top Veteran

    843
    May 13, 2011
    NYC
    No matter how much I want to like the design, I just can't.. :frown:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. pcnyc

    pcnyc Mu-43 Regular

    198
    Sep 15, 2010
    I think I agree with you.
    - not small enough, might as well get a k-r.
    - CDAF will probably be slow with old lenses.
    - design looks good to me, but doesn't look too functional or ergonomical.

    i feel that pentax shoulda gone with a slimmer, more traditional mirrorless body, then bundle the adaptor for their legacy lenses for free or something.
     
  6. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    I don't think Pentax is in a position to add a fourth lens mount to to their stable. This is an opportunity to move toward fully electronic cameras with an already huge array of lenses available.

    Fred
     
  7. nrowensby

    nrowensby Mu-43 Regular

    89
    Jan 25, 2012
    Columbia, SC
    Wow... That's an awfully big camera not to have an EVF... :frown:
     
  8. Narnian

    Narnian Nobody in particular ...

    Aug 6, 2010
    Midlothian, VA
    Richard Elliott
    Considering how much thicker the body is it is really not that impressive - it extends into the body where the mirror would be so I will bet if you set it beside a Panny 20/1.7 it would not be any thinner. Plus it is a 2.8, over a stop slower.
     
  9. crsnydertx

    crsnydertx Mu-43 Top Veteran

    995
    Dec 31, 2010
    Houston, TX
    Chuck
    That has to be one of the ugliest cameras on the planet....
     
    • Like Like x 3
  10. hkpzee

    hkpzee Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 5, 2011
    Hong Kong
    Patrick
    x2
    Couldn't agree more! :eek:
     
  11. nrowensby

    nrowensby Mu-43 Regular

    89
    Jan 25, 2012
    Columbia, SC
    That 40/2.8 is only slightly thicker than a body cap!!!

    Not true... It can't extend into the body where the mirror would be, because it can also be used on DSLR's.


     
  12. blue

    blue Mu-43 Veteran

    280
    Jun 1, 2010
    UK
  13. Bhupinder2002

    Bhupinder2002 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

  14. John M Flores

    John M Flores Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 7, 2011
    Somerville, NJ
    I think that people are getting thrown off by the new pancake lens. That thing is actually so thin I think it needs to be called a crepe lens!

    Some enterprising folks have 'chopped other Pentax lenses onto the body:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    That's more like it!


    (source - the pics of K-01 - Page 8 - PentaxForums.com)
     
  15. Bhupinder2002

    Bhupinder2002 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

     
  16. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
  17. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    Nope. The Samsung NX100 still holds the title. ;)

    But at least now there's a runner-up. xD
     
  18. Narnian

    Narnian Nobody in particular ...

    Aug 6, 2010
    Midlothian, VA
    Richard Elliott
    Actually it does extend a little bit from looking at the picture - not enough I am sure to interfere with a mirror.

    I checked the specs on the previous 40/2.8 and it looks like it is the same diameter and weight as the Panny 20/17 but it is about 2/3 the tickness. Don't have them on the new lens yet.

    Even so the fact it is 2.8 reduces the usefullness and I think it has shrunk to the point of diminishing returns.

    It will be interesting to see which is thinner - a EP-3 or GX1 with the 20/1.7 (or 14/2.5) or the Penatx and the 40/2.8?
     
  19. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    No doubt the E-P3 or GX-1 will be. Anyone with both a K-mount adapter and a m4/3 pancake lens can tell you for sure, but I'm pretty sure a K-mount adapter with even just a body cap is longer than a pancake lens.