Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Digital Cameras > CSC : Digital Compact System Cameras -

CSC : Digital Compact System Cameras - This new category of digital Compact System Cameras with interchangeable lenses was mislabeled for a time as "Mirrorless Cameras" by those forgetting about "Mirrorless" Rangefinder cameras.  Such confusion is easily understandable, since interchangeable rangefinder cameras were only recently introduced in 1932.  hmm.    CSC or Compact System Camera is probably the best category description to date, although I am fond of the old RFF desigation of  CEVIL  indicating Compact Electronic Viewfidner Interchangeable Lens.   This forum is here at RFF because via adapters these cameras offer an inexpensive way to use rangefinder lenses on digital cameras -- in addition of just about every 35mm SLR lens you can think of.  All  offer the photo enthusiast an incredible array of adopted lenses which was not possible before these new digital formats.   This group continues to grow in popularity and new camera models! 

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Pentax K-01, Ugliest Camera Ever
Old 02-01-2012   #1
chris00nj
Young Luddite
 
chris00nj's Avatar
 
chris00nj is offline
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Texas
Age: 37
Posts: 1,016
Pentax K-01, Ugliest Camera Ever

I saw this camera, and just threw up in my mouth a little.

I think the problem is the mirrorless design along with keeping the SLR mount lens, so the backfocus distance has to be the same. As a result, the camera is just as big as an SLR, which erases the primary advantage of going mirror-less.

__________________
My Camera Family


Flickr

Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #2
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,713
But then there's no blackout and noise, right?
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #3
Disaster_Area
Gadget Monger
 
Disaster_Area's Avatar
 
Disaster_Area is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 875
looks like one of those all-plastic fake SLR's from the 80's... the ones that were fixed focus point and shoots disguised as an SLR, with names like Mikkon and Cannon
__________________
http://jbhildebrand.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #4
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne VIC
Posts: 4,817
Yeah I saw it as well, and threw up in my mouth as well. What a hideous little blob.
Supposed to be designed by Marc Newson too... massive fail IMO!
__________________
http://nopraise.tumblr.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #5
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 568
It looks OK to me. At least better than the previously leaked diagrams.

For me, there's hardly anything uglier than Leica Digilux 1.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #6
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 42
Posts: 16,639
Not really a good look... poor Pentax.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #7
hipsterdufus
Photographer?
 
hipsterdufus's Avatar
 
hipsterdufus is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Ferndale, MI
Posts: 883
Is it bad that I kind of want one just because it's such an odd design?
__________________
-Eric K.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #8
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 5,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by btgc View Post
But then there's no blackout and noise, right?
No blackout yes. As far as noise goes, YMMV. On the Sony Nex series, what is saved in noise by omitting the mirror is lost again by making the camera smaller so that the shutter (and tensioning motor) noise is less well shielded.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #9
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,713
Nice or ugly, that's not that important. But 60mm eq. FOV - anyone?
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #10
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 42
Posts: 16,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris00nj View Post
As a result, the camera is just as big as an SLR, which erases the primary advantage of going mirror-less.

Are you sure it is just as big?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #11
driver
Registered User
 
driver's Avatar
 
driver is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Age: 44
Posts: 250
Good thing cameras aren't fashion statements.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #12
timor
Registered User
 
timor is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 364
Will it take any lens with K-mount ?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #13
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,105
It looks as if it's suddenly been slammed into a wall. There's a dog name for it I think. Pug?

I'm also not crazy about that PENTAXPENTAX strap, but at least you can flip the signage over. There's not much that could help w/ this camera's odd styling and color scheme. Maybe buy the biggest lens hood you can find.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #14
dreilly
Chillin' in Geneva
 
dreilly's Avatar
 
dreilly is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Finger Lakes Region of New York State
Posts: 1,026
It's cousin, Ricoh GXR, is now relieved that people will stop calling it ugly and direct their attention at the K-01. What's up with the two-toned thing? That really does it in for me.

BTW, the GXR is a great camera. Just a bit lumpy. They really went to town on this with the ugly stick.
__________________
-D is for Doug

http://www.flickr.com/photos/xenar/collections/

No place is boring, if you've had a good night's sleep and have a pocket full of unexposed film. ~Robert Adams, Darkroom & Creative Camera Techniques, May 1995 (I suppose that should now read: "and have a full battery and an empty memory card." Though that sounds so dull.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #15
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 5,654
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Are you sure it is just as big?
It will not be much smaller, given that it has the same mount and mirror(less) box dímensions. The more so as Pentax' recent SLRs already were on the small side of things.

There is a image of that lens on a K-5 out on the net - and if that is no fake, the K-01 is barely smaller, except that it lost the prism hump and handgrip bulge.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #16
sepiareverb
aflutter.
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 6,863
Is this a Petnax?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #17
Paddy C
Unused film collector
 
Paddy C is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Too far north for my liking
Posts: 851
It is ugly and it's also a bad idea. What's strike three? Based on the Q it will be price and Pentax will be 2-for-2.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #18
rbelyell
Registered User
 
rbelyell is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,305
no vf=no buy

just my opinion, but at this stage of mirrorless cam development, lack of vf means manufacturer is just not 'serious'. ugly is ok, but impractical is not.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #19
f6andBthere
-
 
f6andBthere's Avatar
 
f6andBthere is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 445
I'd have hated to have been the kid living near you lot that looked a little bit different ... I'd just know that everytime I walked past I'd be hearing the chant "freak, freak" and dodging various missiles!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #20
dnk512
Registered User
 
dnk512 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 257
Nikon and Pentax have been major disappointments with their mirror-less multi-lens designs (speaking for my taste of course).

Frankly I no longer think that an optical viewfinder is a must. An articulating screen *is*. All other viewfinder options (optical range, optical TTL, or Electronic or any combination) are just that, options. Not having any such option is an issue, but no one offers all the above either.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #21
jippiejee
Registered User
 
jippiejee's Avatar
 
jippiejee is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 722
first that butt-ugly Canon aps-c release, now this. They just don't want you to switch from their lucrative dslr's.
__________________
flickr
flickriver
---
Leica M4-P/M8/M9
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #22
ruby.monkey
Registered User
 
ruby.monkey is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Garden of England
Age: 45
Posts: 3,881
Still less ugly than an M5.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #23
f6andBthere
-
 
f6andBthere's Avatar
 
f6andBthere is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruby.monkey View Post
Still less ugly than an M5.

True ... and when Leica releases a two tone camera they call it a Panda and everyone loves it!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #24
Stuart John
Registered User
 
Stuart John's Avatar
 
Stuart John is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 561
Looks like it was beaten with the ugly stick.
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/photogsjm/
http://www.sjmphotography.co.nr/

Canonet QL17, Canonet 28, Zorki C
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #25
loneranger
Registered User
 
loneranger is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 414
what is in that chimney sticking out.
Actually the design reminds me of a small leica R8, wasnt that designed by Porche?
__________________
Fuji SW 690, canon 7, konica 35 uc hex, canon 28/3.5ltm, canon 28/2.8 ltm, olympus pen ft, pany g1
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #26
regularchickens
Registered User
 
regularchickens's Avatar
 
regularchickens is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by loneranger View Post
what is in that chimney sticking out.
Shades of the Nikon Photomic Ftn's massive metered prism. It wasn't exactly svelte, either.

I see DNA from both the GXR and the Q in this. And somebody's grandfather was a K-1000. So we have a mirrorless that's a bit smaller than a Pentax manual film body... but retains the hump and mirror box. Why? Oh, right, so that they wouldn't have to roll out a new line of lenses.
__________________
flickr | tumblr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #27
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
 
batterytypehah!'s Avatar
 
batterytypehah! is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 1,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disaster_Area View Post
looks like one of those all-plastic fake SLR's from the 80's... the ones that were fixed focus point and shoots disguised as an SLR, with names like Mikkon and Cannon
My thought, too. Crossed with Thomas the Tank Engine, for that really young demographic.
__________________
WANTED: Fujimoto/Lucky 70M negative carrier

“Hair-splitting, of course. But hey, it's a LEICA. Probably there are those who get excited about the colour of the hairs you split.” – Roger Hicks

Contax IIa + Leica IIIf + M3 (project) + Zorki-1 (project) + Fuji GS645 + FED-2 + Vitomatic II + Revue 400SE + Olympus XA + more + still more
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #28
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 7,006
Ugly: who cares, what is the image quality? Can we use any of the 10 million lenses made for it? Is that penta hump for a future EVF or does it have one?

Size: K-01-12.1cm wide x 7.9cm high x 5.9 cm deep; K-5-131 x 97 x 73 mm, so smaller. Sony NEX-7-119.9 x 66.9 x 42.8 mm. Surprisingly, it isn't too much deeper than the NEX-7.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #29
Darthfeeble
Accidental Photographer
 
Darthfeeble's Avatar
 
Darthfeeble is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Logtown, California, USA
Age: 69
Posts: 757
How about the quality of the picture that it takes? Does anyone care about that? S
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #30
chrishayton
Registered User
 
chrishayton is offline
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England
Age: 28
Posts: 545
Looking at the photo it looks to be an internal lens. In other words maybe it will fit K mount lenses but it will also have some new lenses only for use in this new mirror less mount where the optic cell is in the camera (non retrofocus maybe) Therefore its still small and completely backwards compatible ( but no M mount!)
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #31
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
 
KoNickon is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hartford, CT USA
Age: 57
Posts: 2,994
Hey, we would have all bitched if we were unable to use all those Pentax SLR lenses, right? I've seen uglier cameras, for sure (think Agfa and Voigtlander rangefinders of the 1960s).
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #32
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthfeeble View Post
How about the quality of the picture that it takes? Does anyone care about that? S
No. The only important thing is how we feel the other cool people will feel about us if we use it.

At this stage I can't see an advantage over the K5. Any ideas?
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #33
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 568
Quote:
Originally Posted by charjohncarter View Post
Ugly: who cares, what is the image quality? Can we use any of the 10 million lenses made for it? Is that penta hump for a future EVF or does it have one?

Size: K-01-12.1cm wide x 7.9cm high x 5.9 cm deep; K-5-131 x 97 x 73 mm, so smaller. Sony NEX-7-119.9 x 66.9 x 42.8 mm. Surprisingly, it isn't too much deeper than the NEX-7.
It has the 16MP sony sensor, which means same image quality as the K-5, D7000, NEX5N and a65, etc.

The hump is built-in flash.

Pentax is just too attached to their DA lens lineup...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #34
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by btgc View Post
Nice or ugly, that's not that important. But 60mm eq. FOV - anyone?
40mm pancake lens, 60mm-equivalent field of view (135 format standard). It's an odd length, but some like it a lot. There was a time when many SLRs came with a 58mm standard lens! Pentax's 43mm lens is quite nice, even on the crop sensor. The DA21mm lens (31mm-equivalent) could be quite nice on this body.
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #35
Corto
Registered User
 
Corto's Avatar
 
Corto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: NE PA
Posts: 418
I like it.

But then I also drink expensive wines from papercups and drive a pick up truck.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #36
rbelyell
Registered User
 
rbelyell is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthfeeble View Post
How about the quality of the picture that it takes? Does anyone care about that? S
it cant take good pictures if youre focusing while hoding it as you would a child with a dirty diaper.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #37
MaxElmar
Registered User
 
MaxElmar's Avatar
 
MaxElmar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 492
Looks yuk. (But that's not very important.)

But native k-Mount? Really? How about a new mount and good quality adapters for K & M42?

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, now advanced technology makes it possible to have a mirrorless camera with absolutely NO size advantage over DSLR. And you will be happy to pay extra for the empty space where the mirror used to be.

What the heck is in the water over there at Pentax?
__________________
Chris L.

Still Photographically Uncool
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #38
dreilly
Chillin' in Geneva
 
dreilly's Avatar
 
dreilly is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Finger Lakes Region of New York State
Posts: 1,026
I heard the IQ blows the X-1 Pro out of the water!
__________________
-D is for Doug

http://www.flickr.com/photos/xenar/collections/

No place is boring, if you've had a good night's sleep and have a pocket full of unexposed film. ~Robert Adams, Darkroom & Creative Camera Techniques, May 1995 (I suppose that should now read: "and have a full battery and an empty memory card." Though that sounds so dull.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #39
Johann Espiritu
Lawyer / Ninja
 
Johann Espiritu's Avatar
 
Johann Espiritu is offline
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 498
It does *kinda* look like the Digilux 1...



If if feels solid in your hands, though, it might make up for it's odd looks.
__________________
“One photo out of focus is a mistake, ten is an experiment, and one hundred is a style.”

My Flickr

manilacamerastyle
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-01-2012   #40
benlees
Registered User
 
benlees is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB
Age: 44
Posts: 1,048
You wanted a Fuji X pro 1 but got this instead. Sweet.
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 13:17.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.