New pentax mirrorless APS-C

[BernardLanguillier]

Interesting announcement from Pentax.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02/02/Pentax_K-01_announcement

As predicted, their tiny mirrorless offering was just part of a larger strategic plan to go mirrorless and focused on differentiation.

What if other brands did something similar?

Cheers,
Bernard

[stever]

i'm having trouble understanding what taking the mirror out of a dslr body brings to the party

[BJL]

For a positive spin to balance the inevitable flood of internet skepticism, it has focus-peaking to support manual focus.

But no EVF or OVF, despite being rather bulky as non-SLRs go. So a question: with the problem of bright light on the rear screen, to what extent does the combination of highly visible cues from focus-peaking for manual focusing plus being able to somewhat make out the framing in the LCD mitigate the absence of any "peep-hole" VF, either OVF or EVF?

Pentax again seems dedicated to its long tradition of backward compatibility for its SLR users, by staying with K-mount. I predict that both Pentax and Sony will leave the traditional digital SLR market soon, leaving the SLR market to Canon and Nikon [oh, and Mamiya and Hasselblad!], and with the remaining SLR product lines moving upscale, away from consumer level offerings.

[Fips]

Sticking with the old K-mount means limited choice in legacy lenses (at least compared to the NEX system) and a relatively large body. From what I see at dpreview there's only little difference in size between this and the K-5 and that without any viewfinder  

On the other hand, I sort of like the styling. Nice to see something other black bricks and retro-looking devices. If there was a viewfinder option, this might be a nice camera for street photography: A smallish camera looking like Tonka Toy won't be taken too seriously, which I consider a good thing in many situations.

[Martin Ocando]

To me, it looks like a LEGO camera. And no viewfinder whatsoever??? I imagine how can it be to manual focus using live view. Do anyone here have 3 hands? Come on Ricoh, you can do better than this !

[BJL]

I imagine how can it be to manual focus using live view.

Read about focus peaking: that plus the ability to zoom around the focus point can make an LCD a far better focusing tool than an OVF. In this respect, note that the secondary image on the frosted plastic screen of an SLR OVF is only about as sharp as a 1-2MP LCD.

Do anyone here have 3 hands?

If supporting the lens from below with the left hand, it is easy to operate focus with the left hand while looking at the screen and operating other controls with the thumb and forefinger of the right hand. And by the way: many of us can do all this with elbows tucked against torso, providing a stable camera support --- and my eyes are on the wrong side of forty years old.

[BJL]

Sticking with the old K-mount means limited choice in legacy lenses (at least compared to the NEX system) ...

Yes: there are only about 25 million Pentax K-mount lenses out there. And how does this compare to fully functioning legacy lens support (with AF etc.) for Micro Four Thirds or Nikon One or Samsung NX? Pretty good I think.

[jalcocer]

For me it looks like a good choice for a Pentax user who wants something aside his bulkier dslr (maybe not so bulkier compared to this, but smaller than k-5 or 645d), and still be able to use the same lenses without an adaptor and get better quality than M 4/3.

That aside, I like the focus peaking, but not so crazy about the shape and size and also no viewfinder.

[Martin Ocando]

Read about focus peaking: that plus the ability to zoom around the focus point can make an LCD a far better focusing tool than an OVF. In this respect, note that the secondary image on the frosted plastic screen of an SLR OVF is only about as sharp as a 1-2MP LCD.

I know what focus peaking is, I use it all the time on my 60D and Magic Lantern when shooting video. But I don't use it with LV. I prefer to use the Magic Zoom feature and fine tune focus manually. Maybe the K-01 have a better implementation, but one thing I love about optical viewfinders (or EVFs) are the ability to abstract yourself from the real world (no peripheral vision) and just watch at the framed scene. That is lost here. That is why I've never liked point and shoots with no viewfinder, or even a rangefinder. But is just me.

If supporting the lens from below with the left hand, it is easy to operate focus with the left hand while looking at the screen and operating other controls with the thumb and forefinger of the right hand. And by the way: many of us can do all this with elbows tucked against torso, providing a stable camera support --- and my eyes are on the wrong side of forty years old.

The camera against the face makes a third supporting spot for the whole thing, specially when using larger lenses. That is lost here too.

[stever]

i assumed it had a viewfinder - this has got to fall in the category of "what on earth were they thinking of?" - the bulk of a dslr without a viewfinder smacks of "throw it against the wall and see what happens" - a sad waste of resources

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

I think a modern rangefinder should meet some requirements:

1. Small footprint (weight, size).
2. A good sensor that can make use of Biogon type symmetrical wide angles. This typically requires microlenses.
3. Short flange distance to allow Biogon type lenses and to allow using an adapter for retrofocus design lenses, like your old DSLR lenses. This requires an appropriate mount.
4. Good modern viewfinder.

To me it appears, that Leica has got this quite right (too expensive unfortunately), and that the NEX types and the upcoming Xpro-1 point in the right direction, though I don't know if they could use any Biogon type lenses.

This Pentax baby uses an old mount, has a big footprint and I must say I fail to understand what would be the advantage over just sticking with your old K5.

[scooby70]

i'm having trouble understanding what taking the mirror out of a dslr body brings to the party

Without the mirror box the camera can be smaller and lighter and take almost any lens. Another bonus is without all that mechanical stuff thrashing about you get rid of mirror slap and, for those who care, you can have a higher frame rate.

[BJL]

I agree that there are still good reasons for sometimes wanting a one-eyed "peep-hole" VF, like you new point of blocking out distractions, and as you can see by my question above, I am still actively wondering how much the gap has been closed by improving LCD technologies. But manual focusing is probably not such a big negative anymore. And sometimes, I greatly like being able to work "heads up", maintaining eye-contact with a subject or keeping an eye out for incoming traffic that could ruin my photo. So I do greatly like having the rear-screen ... as an option.

As to steadying a camera: I never pushed the camera against my face, and in fact I fear that head movement could actually make things worse than relying only on my more steady torso. One option that some recommend is a short strap, so that the camera is held pushed out with the strap tight, using the back as a third anchoring point. Anyway, between very usable medium to high ISO speed settings and image stabilization, I think we can now chill a bit about absolutely perfect camera holding technique in most cases.

[BJL]

Without the mirror box the camera can be smaller and lighter and take almost any lens.

But unfortunately, Pentax has stayed with its deep SLR K-mount, about 46mm from mount to focal plane, so the K-01 misses out on the usual wide lens compatability of mirror-less cameras. And it is not that much lighter than some DSLRs: it is the new heavyweight champion amongst "mirror-less digital cameras with no EVF that are not Leicas"; the body with batteries but no lens is only 19g less than the Pentax K-x DSLR and 24g lighter than the Leica M9.
Update: I scratched "with no EVF", since even all the Panasonic and Sony and Nikon "compact system cameras" that do have EVFs are lighter.

[stever]

scooby, the point is that they didn't make it smaller and lighter and by sticking with the k-mount it is pretty much limited to k-mount lenses.  lose lose

[JonathanRimmel]

I am starting to wonder about these "mirror-less" cameras. I don't see much advantage over an enthusiasts DSLR. There are two advantages I see from removing the mirror: smaller/lighter camera and no shake from mirror slap. But neither of these is enough for me to consider the new format. UNLESS, the camera is much smaller (think compact size). This camera is certainly not very small. I just don't see the benefit.

[deejjjaaaa]

But unfortunately, Pentax has stayed with its deep SLR K-mount, about 46mm from mount to focal plane, so the K-01 misses out on the usual wide lens compatability of mirror-less cameras.

Ricoh does not miss anything - they already have a mirrorless solution for M-mount already... this is a replacement for junior dSLRs in Ricoh's lineup - like Kx, Kr, etc

[BJL]

Ricoh does not miss anything - they already have a mirrorless solution for M-mount already ...

M-mount lenses are not much use to the 99.9% of interchangeable lens camera buyers who want a system that offers modern lazinesses like autofocus and zoom lenses, so I suspect that Ricoh-Pentax could be missing a lot of potential customers in an important and growing market sector.

[deejjjaaaa]

M-mount lenses are not much use to the 99.9% of interchangeable lens camera buyers who want a system that offers modern lazinesses like autofocus and zoom lenses, so I suspect that Ricoh-Pentax could be missing a lot of potential customers in an important and growing market sector.

Ricoh and Pentax were so far always after whatever niche markets they can find around... they do not compete w/ C&N&S head to head, or w/ Panasonic-Olympus-Sony-Nikon-etc for that matter in mirrorless...

[BJL]

Ricoh and Pentax were so far always after whatever niche markets they can find around... they do not compete w/ C&N&S head to head, or w/ Panasonic-Olympus-Sony-Nikon-etc for that matter in mirrorless...

But nor have they ever served the high margin low volume 0.1% of the Leica or Rollei or Hasselblad fraternity: they need products that appeal to more like 5% of the amateur photographic enthusiast market to be viable. But as I have indicated above, starting with the established K-mount lens users might be an adequate starting point, if the market appeal is then widened a bit with future models.