Pentax K-01 picture leaked, DA 40mm f/2.8 XS lens specs (UPDATED)

Th0se are the first pictures of the Pentax K-01 from the the Chinese forum xitek:

 

Here are also the detailed specification of the new PENTAX-DA 40mm f/2.8 XS lens:

  • Lens Mount: PENTAX KAF Mount
  • Focal Length: 40mm (Equivalent to 61mm in 35mm format)
  • Aperture: F2.8
  • Minimum Aperture: F22
  • Lens Construction: 5 elements in 4 groups
  • Angle of View: 39° (with PENTAX D-SLR camera body)
  • Minimum Focusing Distance: 0.4m
  • Maximum Magnification: 0.13x
  • Number of Diaphragm Blades: 9
  • Filter Diameter: 27mm
  • Maximum Diameter & Minimum Length: 62.9mm x 9.2mm
  • Weight: 52g

1. Exterior design by Marc Newson

Together with the PENTAX K-01 camera body, the exterior of this lens has been designed by Marc Newson. Mounting this lens on the K-01 results in a highly stylish imaging tool.

2. Easy-to-use, super-thin lens for everyday use

This unifocal standard lens offers a focal length equivalent to 61mm in the 35mm format, and measures a mere 9.2 millimeters in length, making it the world’s thinnest interchangeable lens. Thanks to its super-thin design, it is highly portable and easy to store and carry. Its optics were designed based on those of the acclaimed smc PENTAX-DA 40mm F2.8 Limited lens. Its maximum aperture of F2.8 produces sharp, bright images in a wide range of applications, including snapshots, scenic photos, portraits, and even incident-light indoor shooting.

3. Exceptional image-description

In addition to numerical evaluations made by various testing machines, PENTAX has also conducted an image-quality evaluation of hundreds of images actually taken with this lens. As a result, it not only offers outstanding specifications, but also demonstrates exceptional image descriptive power and an image rendition unique to this lens. It features a round-shaped diaphragm, which produces a smooth, natural bokeh (out-of-focus) effect in the background.

4. SP coating to block dirt and dust

The front surface of this lens is treated with SP (Super Protect) coating, which applies an exclusive fluorine compound to the lens surface through a vapor deposition process. This SP coating not only repels dust, water and grease, but also makes it easy to wipe off oily stains such as fingerprints and cosmetics.

  

  

 

Via Ricehigh

This entry was posted in Pentax and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • KnaP

    it doesn’t look as odd as i would have expected. not even “ugly but cute”

    are they going back to the 70′s or 80′s logo? or it is because they wanted something retro?

    • Eddy

      ugly or cute what? The 40mm lens or the body. This article has images of two completely difference bodies…

      • BP2012

        Second body is K-5 with a new lens made for K-01.

    • Ron

      I think this is 60′s retro… looks that only a Holga could love. If it takes k-mount… and it has k-5 image quality, I may dump my m43 for this – not my d7000 or x100, but my pen will take the sacrifice ;)

  • vam

    Actually I quite like it. I hope it has the focus peaking feature of the Ricoh GXR M Mount module to use it with the old manual focus Pentax primes.

    • Harold Ellis

      na ja ok.
      resume of normal life

    • Steve

      Gotta say I quite like the boxy look too. For me, I hope this prompts Canon and Nikon to make aps-c mirrorless cams too; it’s kinda funny that Pentax and Sony now do but the 2 major producers don’t.

      • yxy

        Canon and Nikon can’t lost their DSLR market.

  • D0n

    dedicated video button..
    image quality of the k-5 sensor..
    looks weathersealed…

    I’m guessing it’s class leading image quality, and it’s build quality will make this camera a resounding success for Pentax..

    I’m sure the trolls hired by Canikon biased marketing firms will chime in with complaints of it’s looks..
    But all the real Photographers will be taking pictures WITH this camera..not OF it. So who cares what they think?

    • El_Pickerel

      I use Nikon and am not extremely well versed in mirrorless systems, but I don’t see anything to complain about here. Not sure what the lens lineup will look like but if I were to go for a mirrorless system, I think it would be between this and the new Fuji.

      (I am also not a hired troll, though for the right price I’d listen!)

      • Kai

        It uses the KAF mount (more commonly known as the K-mount), which would be safe to assume it would support most, if not all, K-mount lenses.

        Certainly more than most other mirrorless systems, including the Pentax-Q and Sony NEX.

        Oh, imagine this thing with my Tamron Adaptall-2 300mm f2.8 lens. If it’s really what the hype is building it up to be… It’ll be the companion to my K-5 and K20D.

    • Gummyrabbit

      “I’m guessing it’s class leading image quality, and it’s build quality will make this camera a resounding success for Pentax..”

      Funny how people know about the IQ of camera’s that haven’t been released..

      • Andy

        Well, there are some unknown variables, but it has the same sensor as the K5, which I think has the best ratings of any APS-C sensor on dxomark right now.

  • Kolame

    Why do they bring a 40mm along? 60mm is to long for a standard lens… As well as the f2.8 – this is not fast! In to 35mm-film, this would be 60mm 4.2…

    • Troll of Bifröst

      DoF, yes. F stop? No.

      • http://www.flickr.com/genotypewriter genotypewriter

        You have much to learn…

        • Troll of Bifröst

          Try harder.

          F Stop defines how much light gets to the medium. An f-stop value is equal on all formats and is a factor of the size of the lens’ iris and the distance from the film/sensor plane.

    • vam

      There were a lot of 55mm standard lenses for film, 60mm equivalent is not far from it. And if it has the same sensor as the K-5 it can produce usable images even at ISO 3200 not to mention the in-body stabilization which makes the lens pretty usable as a standard lens, at least for me.

    • http://www.diaspoir.net odaiwai

      Obvious troll is obvious.

      The crop factor of a lens affects the focal length, not the aperture.

      • Troll of Bifröst

        Or severely uneducated in terms of photography technology.

      • TRÖJAN

        please note that the “f” in “f/2.8″ stands for focal length.

        thus, if “The crop factor of a lens affects the focal length” (which actually isnt true at all) but “not the aperture”, the “F stop” (aperture number) would have to be affected too.

        non-coherent troll is non-coherent…

        • bob2

          Please get a light meter and then come back before you write anything more. Ignorance is bliss, until you try to pass it along as knowledge.

          • Andy

            I haven’t heard that before, but presumably he’s right about ‘f’ meaning focal length. Think of f as a mathematical variable — when you say f/2.8, you’re saying that the max aperture is the focal length divided by 2.8.

            The second paragraph is a bit confusing, but since he acknowledges that the focal length doesn’t change, he’s not really incorrect (although I’m not sure what he was trying to say, precisely.)

      • Max Archer

        I think he’s talking about the equivalent depth of field, not the actual aperture. Your picture will look like it was shot with a 60mm f/4 instead of a 40mm f/2.8. Not sure why he’s saying 4.2, either he knows something I don’t or he’s basing it off of how stuff works in Canon’s 1.6x crop instead of Pentax’s 1.5x.

        • Troll of Bifröst

          Then he should put it as DoF, not F stop, to think depth of field generates by lens is the same thing as light gathering ability of lens is ignorance of the highest order.

    • http://oneyearonafilm.tumblr.com elkarrde

      Focal lengths in whereabouts of mount’s focal flange depth can be made more compact. In case of K-mount, 40mm focal length is pretty close to it’s flange depth (45.46mm), so no wonder they’re using tried and tested lens as a base (that is – smc Pentax-M 40mm f/2.8).

  • Petter

    my god that is one ugly camera

  • huh

    What’s with the old logo again? Is this for real or an early rendering? All they seem to have done is make a K-5 worse/cheaper by taking out the mirror? Don’t get it. And I’m a Pentax user.

  • David

    My K-5 has been in the shop for about a month (dumb mirror issues,) so I recently bought an MX body for my lenses. The MX is so small, and so nicely built that I honestly haven’t even missed the DSLR. This will probably ellicit the usual “good for you / send it to me, then” replies, but I really think that a large slice of the “enthusiast demographic” (NOT EVERYONE, but plenty of folks reading these rumors sites) would have much more fun (and save a ton of money) if they shot film. Just saying. I do think this is a nice design though.

  • BP2012

    When I saw today this photo http://www.flickr.com/photos/shiningcamera/6801660513/in/photostream on flickr I thought what the hell is this. Came here to share the photo and saw this “rumor”. The rest is history :)

  • AarinL

    That is one seriously UGLY duckling.

    • preston

      Can you please list a couple cameras that you think are attractive? I’m curious because I think this K-01 is beautiful.

      • Christopher M

        Of modern cameras:

        Leica M9
        Fuji X-Pro 1
        Fuji X100
        Olympus E-P3

        • FBY

          Ah…for a digital camera that looks like an oldie. Would a Digital Spotmatic be beautiful? How about a 2-kg Nikon F-digital with the awesome tank-like motor drive? But wait….soon comes the OM-D :)

          • Troll of Bifröst

            Its name is EM-5 now. According to the other site.

          • Troll of Bifröst

            Its name is EM-5 now, according to the other site.

        • bidou

          And for the modern look:

          NEX 7
          Ricoh GXR&GRD
          Canon G12&G1X
          Pana GX1
          Nikon J1/V1
          Pana LC1

          And mostly every camera that look like a tool, where form&function actually blend together.

          This camera is full of strange styling gimmick, and the first thing i though when i see it was that someone actually tried to fit a entry level slr style in a kind of ricoh gxr body

          • preston

            @ bidou

            NEX-7, Ricohs, Panas, Canons – completely agree that they look nice!

            The Nikon J1/V1 – holy moly those are ugly. As a side note I’m not a hater of the smallish sensor at all – just the design. And if I’m a fanboy of any brand it’s Nikon since I love my D90 and lenses! Have you ever tried to hold a J1? I got the sense that Nikon TRIED to make it impossible to grip so that people would still buy their low end dslrs instead.

        • preston

          Christopher, I agree that the Fuji’s are gorgeous, but I think the M9 is without a doubt one of the ugliest cameras out there. The Leica lenses are a different story though . . (drool)

  • http://www.zhovtenko.net Vsevolod Zhovtenko

    My 2 cents – camera is ugly (IMHO), But I would in not time trade my Nikkor 50mm 1.8 for this pancake because it would make my D300s so much more pocketable! Alas it is made for pentax :(((

  • http://twitter.com/#!/57thStIncident 57thStIncident

    I’m encouraged, this looks very nice to me. The sloping sides of the pseudo-prism (flash housing) with the retro typeface make it look a LOT like an M-series (MX, ME). Looks nice and grippy too.

    Some notes:
    - Has single top-mount, rear-facing e-dial
    - HDR and ‘no-flash’ options on mode dial
    - rear LCD appears to be fixed, no obvious EVF capability.
    - has SR badge so probably includes sensor-shake stabilization

    It might be just as well that there’s no EVF, it suggests this will be somewhat reasonably priced.

    • http://twitter.com/#!/57thStIncident 57thStIncident

      Also, regarding DA40/2.8 XS – I suspect this is intended to be a cost-saver vs. DA40/2.8 Limited — probably made of plastic, loses focus distance markings & DoF scale. Appears that it may still be compatible with SLRs.

  • hiplnsdrftr

    If it were all BLACK, and not too plasticy might be OK, but looks kinda crappy with the silver top.

    Maybe takes great photos, love the extreme pancake lens, but my feeling is its rather cheap quality. Would love to be proven wrong.

    • dfsekgfshg

      It’s made of aluminum.

  • bidou

    Did someone already mention that this cam is FUGLY ?

    • preston

      Can you please explain why you think this? I think the camera looks great.

      • bidou

        see above :)
        (February 2, 2012 at 5:22 am)

        • preston

          thanks :)

  • photonut

    wow, and I thought the Fuji X-Pro1 is looking butt ugly….

  • frade

    Nex 7 will beat it ! sony’s better

    • KnaP

      based on what?

      • Ron

        based on the fact the frade is a blind Sony fanboy.

        • frade

          based on handle of nex and 24 mp sony is newer tecnology instead of the old pentax sensor

          • http://twitter.com/#!/57thStIncident 57thStIncident

            I don’t think I’m the only one who has been a bit unimpressed so far with the new 24mp sensor. I don’t think we’ll see what it’s capable of until Nikon or Pentax mounts it in one of their bodies, probably in a D5100/D7000/K-5 successor, whichever comes first. History has shown so far that Nikon and Pentax wring a little more performance out of Sony’s sensors than do Sony’s own bodies.

            I don’t expect this camera to be a *direct* competitor to the NEX-7, I think it’s being targeted for a lower price point, more like a NEX-5n. I hope I’m right, making room for a later, more up-market mirror-less Pentax.

          • Bob2

            Always good to know that more MP = better image.

            If that’s what you believe, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

          • BMPHOTO

            Oh, don’t worry. Sony Fanboys are becoming increasingly more vocal lately. The latest post on sonyalpharumors says that Canon could be dethroned, hinting that Sony may take over the camera market.
            Sony has proven themselves to be capable of doing a few things:
            -Making lenses
            -Maximizing sensor performance
            -Releasing a camera without a ridiculous amount of problems
            -Winning over the pro market
            -Winning over the enthusiast market
            -Winning over the amateur market
            -Making a camera that is usable past ISO 1600
            -Realizing that the NEX series turns people off because the lenses are TOO LARGE.

            Yes, they’ve gained market share, but that’s because they have flooded the market with DSLR’s and SLT’s. I believe they currently have like 12 dslr/slt models selling at the moment? It’s a shit show, and I for once don’t think they’ll ever be serious competitors in the professional market, especially not with their idea that EVF’s are the immediate future.

  • Aaron

    Pentax, why you no make 35mm equivalent wide angle lenses!?

    • Ron

      hello… k-mount… kAF mount… there are craploads of lenses available. Why “you no make” sense?

      • JG10

        Yes, Pentax has plenty lenses but none that are the equivalent 35mm. Why you no comprehend what he said? 35mm was one of the most popular focal lengths in the film world for a reason. And don’t mention lenses that are 30mm equivalent. I wouldn’t tell someone who wanted a 24mm equivalent lens to get a 28mm. Big difference.

        • http://wildkatphoto.com ksuwildkat

          18-55 zoom includes 35mm eq

          want it fast? get the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8

        • Alex

          Well, would you tell someone who wanted a 35mm to get a 36mm? I ask because a 24mm has an effective focal length of 36mm on the Pentax APS-C sensors.

    • http://twitter.com/#!/57thStIncident 57thStIncident

      Pentax DA21/3.2 Limited is a pretty good compact general-purpose wide-angle prime, 31.5mm equiv. Don’t knock it till you’ve tried it, its sort of meets 28mm and 35mm equiv in the center.

  • amien

    sorry, but this signs the end of pentax. the camera looks bulky and super ugly.

  • Craig

    Looks like an older fixed zoom Kodak camera to me.

  • Matt

    Whoever this Marc Newson fellow is, I think he just lost some serious creditibility. I was excited for this camera, and will withold judgement until official info/photos come out but from what we see here it looks like a plastic toy you would give to a 5-year old. Bummer.

  • JG10

    WTF is that? LMAO! Hideous.

  • DST

    I’m a fan (amongst many) of Marc Newson’s work. This however, is a design disappointment. It looks more dated as apposed to post modern (or simply modern).

    I’m not of fan of the ‘flash hump’. I think lining the body up with lens mount (considering the long flange to sensor distance) would have been nicer. Better yet, create a body with shorter flange distance and release a series of pancake lenses. Adaptors can always be used for legacy glass. If this is the final design, I feel that Pentax waisted a perfectly good opportunity to collaborate with an innovative designer.

    When will companies realize that consumers have strong interest in well designed products. Simply look at the demand of Sony’s NEX-7 and Fuji’s X Pro 1. Apple’s success is no happenstance. Good design is good business.

    • http://twitter.com/#!/57thStIncident 57thStIncident

      Eye of the beholder. I think it has a lot of nice touches and pays some homage to Pentax history as well. I think the “flash hump” is actually one of these touches. I’m not sure what you mean by ‘lining the body up with lens mount’.

      Unless this camera is a huge failure (and I suspect it may do at least OK) may not be the last body of this type, there may be other designs that incorporate EVF etc., and based on this I’d welcome future interpretations with Newson’s input.

      I personally don’t think the NEX series (including NEX-7) is particularly attractive…and I think it remains to be seen just how much real demand there really is for the Fuji X Pro — at its price level — which isn’t really treading any new styling ground, it’s just a pleasant and modern take on mostly retro rangefinder aesthetics.

      • DST

        @57thStIncident

        Yes, this is very true. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. However, the market is in the hands of the consumer. You may very well be right in terms of Pentax doing okay in sales. Unfortunately, I feel the merge/acquisition of Ricoh’s camera division and hyping a reputable designer warrants either more risk taking, or paying homage to previous Pentax designs in a stronger way.

        I’m not opposed to viewfinder prism ‘humps’. I just think this falls short in terms of the Pentax K-01. It looks rather safe and predictable in a Kodak sort of way. A common mistake that companies often make.

        I’m also not speaking from a completely biased standpoint. As a commercial photographer and digital technician, I’ve worked very closely with companies and publications such as IDEO, Autodesk, Apple, HP, Design Within Reach, Dwell, Sony, etc over the past 14 years. I’ve had the humbling opportunity to work directly with many industrial designers. In some cases, I’ve seen everything from concept to production. It’s given me an eye opening understanding of the process in terms of corporate politics. I simply don’t feel this is a result of Pentax giving Newson freedom to explore design and help reinvent Pentax during a very exciting time in consumer electronics.

        I guess it rely boils down to price range, marketing, and who Pentax is targeting. I hope not to come across and condescending in any way. My apologies in advance if so. I guess I’m just really disappointed. For some, this may be the perfect product. And in a way, this gives folks another option to choose from. And that certainly is a positive.

        • http://twitter.com/#!/57thStIncident 57thStIncident

          Not insulted — it’s taste. I suspect that Pentax had some idea of the body design (in terms of shape) they wanted from a technical packaging standpoint and had Newson style its skin & controls. They probably realized that the shape would be initially unfamiliar to potential customers and wanted to give it a little pizazz to mitigate the effects of its odd shape.

          As far as the flash hump, the pentaprism housing has been a Pentax signature ever since the very earliest SLRs, and this is probably part of making it ‘look like a Pentax’. Pentax has tried to do this with their I-10 compact and their even more recent Q as well — though with the Q it was just a bulge for the hotshoe, as the popup flash emerged on an arm from the top panel.

          So I think maybe you’re right, they could have taken this slightly further styling-wise, but that might be an even bigger risk. I’d *love* *love* *love* to see some of the alternatives they (and Newson) were toying with.

    • Wer1

      K-5 is extremely well designed!

      • P.

        Why no vf? :(

    • ras

      i agree, this is not one of newson’s better designs.

      however, i’m inclined to point the finger at pentax’s management instead. the toy camera gimmick is not resulting in any lustworthy cameras, even by toy camera standards.

  • Christopher M

    Yes, this is one ugly camera. It may set the new standard in ugliness

    It looks plasticky and the shape in not pleasing

    They made it mirror-less but kept the K-mount so that meant that the backfocus distance had to be the same. So that meant it is basically the same size as a DSLR, just without the mirror. The typical advantage of mirror-less camera is similar sensor size, but small camera. Not so in this case.

    Marc Newsom may be semi-famous, but this work is awful.

    • http://wildkatphoto.com ksuwildkat

      There is no reason for it to “have” to be the size of a modern DSLR. The Pentax LX was a K-Mount body and it mesured 144.5mm x 90.5mm x 50.0mm (5.7″ x 3.6″ x 1.9″) with Standard FA-1 Finder attached. The modern k-r is considered to be one of the smaller DSLRs available and yet it measures 125mm x 97mm x 68mm (4.8 x 3.6 x 2.7 in).

      The k-r is smaller side to side but is much taller and much thicker. Side to side distance was a function of flim. All things being equal, there is no REASON why a DSLR with a mirror cant measure 125mm x 90mm x 50mm. I would be surprised if the k-01 did not approach those numbers.

      We have gotten used to DSLRs being thick and tall. they dont have to be!

      • http://twitter.com/#!/57thStIncident 57thStIncident

        Why use the relatively chunky LX as an example when there are even smaller MX and ME super?

        Anyway, I think some of the height is due to popup flash which the old film SLRs lacked. I believe the K-x was a bit shorter, only 91mm. Not really sure why Pentax made the K-r 0.5cm taller but it might be the shape of the popup flash which appears to have a small peak – maybe more styling than reason. Pentax did add AF point LED viewfinder indicators in the K-r, not sure if this was part of the reason for restructuring the pentamirror housing.

        The depth is a bit tougher — film and a pressure plate can be thinner than a digital sensor and rear review LCD. Having the mechanical sensor-shake SR stabilization probably only makes it harder to keep that area thin. Some of the chunkyness of modern cameras also comes from bigger grips that hold big batteries.

        I also think there’s a tendency among those who yearn for a modern Pentax LX to shoot lighter lenses like primes of modest length. The ergonomics of older film bodies for heavier lenses wasn’t so great, could make ones hands hurt in short order — though improved if you added the bulky motor drives.

        I suspect when we see pictures of this K-01 next to a DSLR it will look quite small. I think when we see it sitting next to a NEX-7 or EP-3 it might look slightly chunky, but it may still feel pretty good in the hand with controls better suited for adult hands (better than, say, a Panny G3), and it offers full compatibility with a fully-realized lens lineup right now.

        I’d like to see what Pentax’s other two new lenses will be. I think a short compact prime (like a DA21/3.2 XS) and a compact standard zoom might be good.

  • RR

    was a reply to amien

  • http://wildkatphoto.com Ksuwildkat

    I want one if…………..

    Price – $500 ish
    Weather proofing – 25% of why I shoot Pentax is WP
    its not too heavy – about 400g

    What I see is not ugly but something very close to the MX/LX I drooled over for years. It also reminds me of the A3000 I had for years.

    For some reason we all seem to0 have forgotten that film cameras were SMALLER than most modern DSLRs. I would LOVE for Pentax to make a digital LX – Im talking the EXACT body but with digital guts. Removable prism, removable focus screens, etc.

    • rodkdjx

      You think there is a chance this will be in the $500 range? How much does the inferior Q sale for? And it didn’t have a big name designer.

      • http://wildkatphoto.com ksuwildkat

        So it looks like $750 body only MSRP, $900 with the 40mm lens. That should translate into $600-$650 for the body only street. A little on the high side for me so I am a little disappointed.

        Hopefully it will drop into the $500 range by summer

      • Kid

        Just got Q for 499.95US$, new, with prime lens. What crack have you been smoking?

    • MuttonPuncher

      +1 on the digital LX

  • E

    That’s not ugly, its a tragedy!

  • Dean Forbes

    61mm (equivalent view) fixed lens?? That’s got to be the oddest focal length yet. Useless.

  • D0n

    Let all the Fauxtographer’s bash all they want this camera is a serious contender with image quality no 4/3′s, Mirrorless, Evil class cam has reached before…
    the 40 mm (if the 35 2.4 is anything to compare with) will retain the optical performance of it’s LTD cousin… combined the the sensor from the k-5 (compare the dxo lab scores of the k-5 which outperformed EVERY aps-c cam, Every mirrorless and even a couple full frame d-slrs) and this camera will be well recieved by real Photographers that want toy use Pentax’s fine Prime lenses in a compact body…. evrey Pentax user will consider this as a back-up body, and the performance and Image quality will entice other shooters as well…

    So let the Fauxtographers and poser call it ugly… Photographers want image quality and build quality…two things Pentax is known for.

    • spam

      I don’t care how it looks, but no viewfinder? And AF, is it as low as K5 in live view mode? IQ should be NEX-5n-level as long as they use the same sensor.

  • sgts

    oh my goodness – did they blindfold the designer ???

    anyway blah blah 40mm – nice pancake and all but 28mm ff is where its at people !!

  • blankscapes

    Gaaaah!!! My eyes!!
    ..how about letting an actual photographer design a camera for once?

  • http://www.flickr.com/genotypewriter genotypewriter

    So Pentax took a DSLR, removed the mirror and the viewfinder and they’re calling it a mirrorless… biggest stretch of the term MILC I’ve seen so far.

    And I guess this means Canon already has allowed us to have mirrorless versions of their DSLRs:
    http://www.canonwatch.com/not-again-mirrorless-canon-5d-markii-becomes-mirrorless/

  • DP

    I don’t know why making a camera smaller involves taking away the viewfinder. Photography wasn’t meant to be done at arm’s length.

    I do like Pentax and use their products, but I have to say that I hope Ricoh has some tricks to improve AF up their sleeves!

  • Bjrichus

    Hmmmmm……

    I am really trying hard to remember what that silver top plate reminds me of…..

    YES! Got it…

    A cheap, plastic and easy to break 1970′s space toy. The kind of thing that would have been sold to promote a childrens TV series from the USA sold to Europe sort of thing… Hey – does anyone remember “Space 1999″ in the UK? I feel exactly the same way about this camera as I feel whenever I recall those huge silver, grey and black control panels the girls used to sit at. Actually, the studios used parts from scrapped ICT/ICL (now Fujitsu owned) 1500 and 1900 series mainframes – deeply ironic. Oh this is such a notralgia trip!!! Nothing to do with photography however…

    If this has the same kind of IQ as the Fuji Xpro 1 but costs much less, the way the market it moving these days, it might stand a chance, otherwise…

    Does anyone have a retail price for it yet?

    • Troll of Bifröst

      There was a page on this site but got took down earlier.

      It says:

      Body alone 750US$
      with 40mm XS 900US$
      with 2 zoom lenses kit 18-55 & 55-200mm 1000US$

      • Bjrichus

        Hmmm. If (and I do mean a BIG *IF*) the image quality is up to it, this might survive in the market for a year or so. All depends on how (or if) quickly the X-Pro 1 drops in price or if other makers release equally ‘good’ systems in this price range.

  • zoomer

    frade… what the hell do you want 24 megapixels for… that is just dumb from sony. as far as im concerned 12 megapixels should be enough for these type of cameras.

  • King

    Good Job

  • matw

    And I thought this was a photography site -most have overlooked that the main picture is ugly mainly because of that stubby lens. The models with the regular lenses look much different- I would suggest more normal looking.

    Even the K5 is ugly with that lens.

  • Bob

    That new lens is pretty ugly. So much plastic, so little glass but it seems like it’ll be priced at under 200$. I’ll reserve judgement until i’ve seen pictures. If I could choose between the DA 40mm f2.8 or the FA 43mm f1.9 LTD it’d be an easy choice.

    At first, I thought this camera was fugly. But the ergonomics are growing on me. I won’t pay full price or be an early adopter, but I will definitely keep watching where Pentax Ricoh go with this line. I think it has a lot of potential.

  • Back to top




// B&H PopView code