I received some information on the US pricing of the upcoming Pentax NC-1 mirrorless camera - the kit with one lens will have a MSRP in the $600 range. More lenses are expected to be released later in the year. Pentax already showed a teaser for their new mirrorless camera at a recent trade show in China. The NC-1 is expected to be announced in June, 2011.
June will be a busy month with upcoming announcements from Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Leica and possibly Samsung.
There will be also a second digital camera with interchangeable lenses from Pentax based on the old Auto 110 film camera.
The price of the new Optio RZ18 compact camera will be $299 (expected announcement: July, 2011). Another entry level Pentax RS2000 point and shoot camera will be released in August, 2011 with a price tag of $149.
Related posts:
- Pentax mirrorless camera to be announced on June 23?
- Pentax will bring two new interchangeable lens cameras this summer, only one will be mirrorless
- Pentax NC-1 mirrorless camera will come in two colors
- Pentax manager on their mirrorless camera: “We’re on it” (NC-1)
- Pentax RZ-18 Optio compact camera will have a swivel screen
17 Comments
I’m sorry but that thing is just too hideous!
The Pentax will be priced higher than the Sony NEX 3 and Samsung NX? Half the quality I bet, too.
Gotta love that Pentax quality control!
Buy it; it’ll probably end up being a rare camera.
World is gone insane. The first was Sigma, now Pentax. What else to expect? Nikon Coolpix #### with 5x crop factor up to $2899?
Wait a second, is this the one with the APS sensor or the compact sized sensor. If it’s that compact sized sensor that’s INSANE! You can get an Olympus EPL-1 or Samsung Nx100 new for $400 with lens!
keep in mind that this camera is target at people who want very small camera.
if you judge it by the size of the hotshoe it should only be 9,0cm wide and 5,0 cm tall.
That’s a good point… Maybe the scale will make it look better in person.
But that’s pretty darn small for an interchangeable lens camera. Possibly too small unless the entire lens line consists of pancakes.
A 400 gram brick with the sensor size of my cell phone. Which year are you living in, Pentax? 1997?
Sensor size is everything, dammit! The bigger, the better! And don’t give me none of that “above DX and portable means 7 grand minimum” horse radish!
sensor size is not that important for everybody…
just look at all those people using instagram on their iphone and ipod touch..
i think this pentax is more directed at the camera hipsters retro vintage folk.
it is probably more for camera lovers.. not technical fanatics
just look at the fuji x100.. the quality isnt really out of those world but still the camera world talked a lot about and it also had lots of preorders.
HA!
It’s WORTH 299 for the body and maybe 50 for each lens.
Maximum.
It’s a gimmick, not a serious camera.
In hands of competent photographer, *everything* is competent camera, even shoe-box.
I agree with Chris, this won’t be system for pixel peepers and technical fanatics.
I get so bored with these “every camera is good in the hands of a _competent_ photographer” comments. Sure, everfy camera can, in some capacity, be used for something, but a QuickCam Pro from 1998 is not useful in landscape photography, commercial product photography, portraiture, or any serious purpose. Look, a hipster can have fun with a polaroid 600 and some IP film, but a pro can’t show up for any engagement with such a setup. So, go stuff your elite condescension and take some photos for other people, to their requirements in stead of your own. Take blurry shots for an advertising house and you won’t even get paid for your time.
Ouch! Obviously this is not going to be a camera for “pros” shooting for “advertising houses.” There are already a billion excellent cameras for pros; they’re called DSLRs. If you really are a pro, then why are you flaming people you don’t know on a thread about a mirrorless enthusiast camera? For anyone other than “pros,” elkardde is absolutely right, and calling him a hipster/elitist/condescending just makes you a camera-butthole.
Even enthusiasts want cameras that can produce good images in a wide variety of circumstances- 600 bucks for a non-competitive camera is ridiculous because the limitations of the sensor are well above the threshold for even passable images. If they came out with this system for the hipster crowd, one would expect a price that was in line with the system’s compromises.
Interchangeable lens cameras even including four thirds and micro four thirds are in fact sometimes used by enthusiasts and professionals in conjunction with more technically perfected systems, but what Pentax is doing is not capable of such uses.
I’m not saying that if it’s not capable of professional use , that it isn’t a proper camera, I’m saying that the compromises of the system even bar it from artistic enthusiasts’ purposes. Sure, an iPhone can produce decent enough images in some situations, but 600 dollars is simply ridiculous for this particular product.
And yes, I do believe that if your camera produces blurry images because it isn’t CAPABLE of focusing sharply, it isn’t the artist producing the art- and then, is it art at all? Elephants can paint, but is their work art? Is a Polaroid photo that’s out of focus and underexposed an example of art if the choice of being out of focus wasn’t the choice of the photographer?
Is it a snapshot camera or a photographer’s tool? I think it’s a snapshot camera posing as a photographer’s tool.
As David already pointed, this camera won’t be targeting professional users, and yes, it’ll have it’s limitations, sure.
But I must agree with you, too – $600 is ridiculously too much for a camera with cellphone-sized sensor.
Maybe if it came with a 4 lens kit or something, but $600 for a compact sensor when there are cameras like the S95, LX3 and X-Z1 out there with great features and very capable lenses already, and for less money… well, it doesn’t make much sense.
Too bad! I’d like to see what they do with their APS-c mirrorless cam though.
Let’s wait and see what level the IQ comes out as. I agree small sensors have their limitations, but I suspect there might be some worthy engineering rationale in there somewhere. I can’t say for sure; I hope to be pleasantly surprised.