RE: K-01 and the problem of "design"

[knarftheria...@gmail.com]

Whatever.

It's ugly.

I can put up with ugly if the ugliness makes it more usable, but I can't see 
that to be the case here.

It's just ugly.

Cheers,
frank

"What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof." -- 
Christopher Hitchens

--- Original Message ---

From: steve harley 
Sent: February 2, 2012 2/2/12
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" 
Subject: K-01 and the problem of "design"

i read the press release and watch the linked video interview



alas the hype about visual aspects of the design and the reputation of the 
designer is front and center, a huge mistake in my view

the interview with Mark Newson is helpful because as he handles the camera i 
got a better impression of it; the camera looks fairly usable within the 
constraints of "no viewfinder" and "not small" — those constraints are 
challenging and i wish more had been made of them; there is more sense of the 
handling in this video:



however i was unimpressed with Newson's presentation; he didn't convince me of 
his sincerity and dedication to the project, and i heard no real purity of 
vision; i most respect designers whose foundation is philosophy and whose 
mandate is functionality, such as some architects & typographers; there's a 
thread of this purity i seek in some web design too; industrial design is 
rarely so pure, though i think Apple has achieved a remarkable standard in 
physical design; the K-01 (or as Newson says, kay-oh-one) is almost a statement 
about making statements; a neo-modernist design with some major compromises 
(rubber door?); if it shipped flat it might be an Ikea camera ...

Newson is not an in-house designer, and for this (presumably) one-off project 
he probably had Pentax marketing breathing down his neck; he's used massive, 
simple forms, which are promising — if those blocky controls are as functional 
and durable as they signal, that will be something

but these two quotes from the interview seem shallow to me, and make me 
suspicious of the whole project:

"the inspiration behind this design ... is simply the desire to want to create 
something which, as a consumer, I myself would like to own, or would like to 
purchase"

"I wanted to present an _image_ of quality, and of expertise" (emphasis mine)

in the following statement, if he had said "innovation" instead of 
"individuality", i would have been more hopeful:

"i think the consumers will be happy that we've given them a choice,
because i don't see an enormous amount of _individuality_ in the marketplace" 
(emphasis mine)

so that's my critique of the hype; i do also see some hope in the design, that 
it may put a counterpoint to the chorus of "smaller is better"


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.
-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: K-01 and the problem of "design"

[P. J. Alling]

On 2/2/2012 1:56 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

On Feb 2, 2012, at 10:42 AM, steve harley wrote:


i read the press release and watch the linked video interview


alas the hype about visual aspects of the design and the reputation of the 
designer is front and center, a huge mistake in my view

the interview with Mark Newson is helpful because as he handles the camera i got a better 
impression of it; the camera looks fairly usable within the constraints of "no 
viewfinder" and "not small" — those constraints are challenging and i wish more had 
been made of them; there is more sense of the handling in this video:




He said something very interesting in the video, a detail that has been overlooked in 
every comment I've read so far, but when you get down to it almost the only thing that 
matters:  "It should out perform the K-5".


By what criteria, since it appears to be the guts of a K-5 in a shell 
without an eye level viewfinder, then in some cases yes in some no.  
Otherwise I doubt it will show any differences if both are clamped to 
sturdy tripods and the K-5 is used in live view mode.  Maybe the K-01 
will have a faster frame rate  not constrained by the flipping of the 
mirror, but that hardly qualifies as the only measure of performance.




Really, are you going to look at the camera?  Or look at the pictures you take 
with the camera?

--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est


--
Don't lose heart!  They might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a 
lengthily search.


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: K-01 and the problem of "design"

[Paul Stenquist]

On Feb 2, 2012, at 1:56 PM, Larry Colen wrote:

> 
> On Feb 2, 2012, at 10:42 AM, steve harley wrote:
> 
>> i read the press release and watch the linked video interview
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> alas the hype about visual aspects of the design and the reputation of the 
>> designer is front and center, a huge mistake in my view
>> 
>> the interview with Mark Newson is helpful because as he handles the camera i 
>> got a better impression of it; the camera looks fairly usable within the 
>> constraints of "no viewfinder" and "not small" — those constraints are 
>> challenging and i wish more had been made of them; there is more sense of 
>> the handling in this video:
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> He said something very interesting in the video, a detail that has been 
> overlooked in every comment I've read so far, but when you get down to it 
> almost the only thing that matters:  "It should out perform the K-5".
> 
> Really, are you going to look at the camera?  Or look at the pictures you 
> take with the camera?

It has a new processing engine. I suspect that the improved performance will be 
in jpeg rendering. That will be especially important for the market they're 
aiming at. I would be afraid of its manual focus capability. Focusing the k-5 
manually in live mode is not a happy experience.
Paul
> 
> --
> Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML@pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
> the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: K-01 and the problem of "design"

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Larry Colen  wrote:
> .. He said something very interesting in the video, a detail that has been 
> overlooked in every comment I've read so far, but when you get down to it 
> almost the only thing that matters:  "It should out perform the K-5".

+1

I find it a most interesting little box. "Should out-perform the K-5"
is an interesting thought ... and depends in large part on how you
define "out-perform".

If I still had my DA21 and FA43 Limited lenses, I'd buy one out of
hand and sell the SLR gear. I find the Bumble Bee model rather fun
looking, although I think they should offer a simple, all-black
version available too. I don't really care too much what the K-01
looks like, what it works like in the hand and the quality of the
images it produces are much more important. Functional and comfortable
are the big deal, styling is secondary.

The thing I think they missed is not enabling the ability to fit an
optional, high-resolution EVF. Adding that one element in a future
model will enable it to completely replace the SLR line by allowing
much easier hand-held use with longer lenses (also presuming that the
focusing performance is up to snuff for those who depend upon AF).

The importance of design aesthetics is real, but it doesn't really
matter how pretty a tool is. The critical element of design aesthetic
for good tools is that they work brilliantly.

-- 
Godfrey
  godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: K-01 and the problem of "design"

[William Robb]

On 02/02/2012 12:56 PM, Larry Colen wrote:






Really, are you going to look at the camera?  Or look at the pictures you take 
with the camera?



With this one, neither.
They could put a sensor and a view screen onto a paper shredder and have 
a perfectly functional camera, but it wouldn't work well because it 
isn't a camera in anything more than name.
This K-01 would be better if they took the Mark Newson name plate off 
the bottom and put a slot in it's place to feed paper into for recycling.


--

William Robb

--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: K-01 and the problem of "design"

[steve harley]

on 2012-02-02 11:56 Larry Colen wrote

He said something very interesting in the video, a detail that has been overlooked in 
every comment I've read so far, but when you get down to it almost the only thing that 
matters:  "It should out perform the K-5".


yeah, i noticed that; the other video i linked talks about this being a brand 
new sensor, and a new processing engine



Really, are you going to look at the camera?  Or look at the pictures you take 
with the camera?


that was my point, the hype about the design is overemphasis on looking at the 
camera; it's hard to live that down unless it is functionally superlative


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Re: K-01 and the problem of "design"

[Larry Colen]

On Feb 2, 2012, at 10:42 AM, steve harley wrote:

> i read the press release and watch the linked video interview
> 
> 
> 
> alas the hype about visual aspects of the design and the reputation of the 
> designer is front and center, a huge mistake in my view
> 
> the interview with Mark Newson is helpful because as he handles the camera i 
> got a better impression of it; the camera looks fairly usable within the 
> constraints of "no viewfinder" and "not small" — those constraints are 
> challenging and i wish more had been made of them; there is more sense of the 
> handling in this video:
> 
> 


He said something very interesting in the video, a detail that has been 
overlooked in every comment I've read so far, but when you get down to it 
almost the only thing that matters:  "It should out perform the K-5".

Really, are you going to look at the camera?  Or look at the pictures you take 
with the camera?

--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est





-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.