Question for Smeggy, maybe or others...

The flange distance dictated the brick like dimensions of the K-01 (although I'm sure they could give it a mild nip & tuck). To get to NEX size you are looking at using adapters.

From my post above:
"I know that this will happen, I toyed with a Fuji Xe-2 (Really like the X-Cams) trouble is, I would need to buy more Lenses then, and not cheap ones either! Also it's not weather sealed, my one big bug with the X-Cams. GR was also a thought but a bit limiting to just it and a wide adapter and I'd want the viewfinder as well, so Expensive and more than a K5 which wrecks my head!
K5 it is I think and just a smattering of older small zooms or manual primes, NO LIMITEDS, they are definitely off...Err, limits!
I really want another K5II of some description probably the S because I can process the files in the same fashion as the K3, which means less time at the P.C.
The other reason for staying with a DSLR is the old reliability thing, I have not bought a Camera in the last five years that did not have something wrong with it, save for two Pentax's! An Xe-2 would not be able to simply perform double duty in lieu of a K3"

I really really liked my Xe-1 but it lacks weather sealing and in Cumbria, I have come to the conclusion that I can't do without that but the X's are lovely and should be tried by everyone (Alongside everyone trying Pentax of course!:wink.

Everybody seems to be liking the MX-1, and given that I've made A3 competition pictures successfully with it, quality may not be as much of an issue after all. It will be an issue at high ISO levels, but there are limits to what it can do.

It seems once people get over the design of the K-01 it starts to look as though there's something very useful there after all. I'd still like one. I have my Marc Newson K-01 case in its box waiting for when I buy one.

The MX-1 does have sensor-shift SR for stills (not video) as well as an optional 'Dual Mode' (combines it with software based SR). A bigger sensor means a bigger lens which means a bigger camera, I find it the perfect size as it is. Mine could easily replace my K-5 & DA17-70 when I want to travel small & light.

I've been pondering the same thing for a while now. I want a go everywhere, always prepared, camera that is capable of high quality results. Although high quality is unnecessary for the majority of situations I want that option should I happen across a rare opportunity. There will always be some compromise, quality, price, compactness, range of focal length. For the potential benefits the compromise to which I'm most likely to succumb is price.

I'd prefer it to be a Ricoh Imaging product. I'm not sure that the ideal camera exists yet for me from any marque, although it's getting close now.

I did look at the MX-1. I thought it very good for what it was but I thought it was compromised by slow RAW write speeds. Image quality, whilst very good for the small sensor, and for the price, is ultimately quite a way short of my requirements.

I have been very impressed indeed with the GR. Almost everything is right. I can live with a fixed focal length but I would want that to be a 35mm equivalent. I do think we may see some variants to build on to the success of the GR. Maybe a choice of focal lengths or even a limited zoom. So I shall try and hang on a little longer. I think Ricoh might have some announcements next month that will give a good indication of where products are heading.

For a 35mm APSC equivalent, there is already a superb camera available in the X100(S). That's what I'd buy unless you're really wedded to only ever buying Ricoh/Pentax gear. Excellent viewfinder too.

I'm fully aware of that, a few other members/ex-members of this forum have been using it as a second body/primary body. The quality is very good but the I think the GR would suit me better in every other way. I'm not wedded to only ever buying Ricoh I just think that there will be some developments soon that make it the right option. The GR is so good that is worth waiting a while to see what will happen - I want to get something that I now I will be happy using for five years. It is the same with full frame for me. I've always been prepared to give Ricoh a reasonable time to deliver products and this year is now right to do that. I think they will.

The case comes first John!

The case did come first jules, so I bought it while it was there, from a forum member as it happens.

I have a target price in mind for when I see a K-01 on offer. Amazon looks a bit unrealistic at the moment.

Love the GR, peerless inags quality.
I just can't get my head round the price in comparison to a to what you get with a K5.

Need to change my way at looking at that conundrum. ..

True, but you could view it as an alternative to a wide angle prime. Plus I can envisage many situations where it is preferable to using a K5. I'm going to London next week. I usually lug around the K5 and a tripod. The prospect of a GR in the pocket and a gorillapod (or possibly a walking stick monopod with feet is mighty tempting and opens up creative possibilities. From what I have seen it beats the K5 for cityscapes. If I'm going specifically on a landscape shoot then I'll take all the gear, but if am just out and about then the GR in the pocket will mean that I will miss nothing if a great opportunity arises and I think that's worth a premium.

The downsides for me, apart from possibly the focal length, is that it can't be operated I don't think by an IR remote and that the low light AF could be better.

The GR snaps into focus with lightning speed, even in low light. Amazingly good in this respect. It also has superb image quality. But...no SR and no zoom lens and limited macro capability.

The MX-1 has SR, has amazing macro capability, has a very fine zoom lens with large aperture, but.....smaller sensor.

I'm not so sure the small sensor is such an issue in reasonable lighting conditions other than lack of ability to minimise depth of field (although there's some ability to do this at longer lengths). The fast aperture of the MX-1 lens coupled with SR means ISO can largely be kept low. You don't need to stop down much to get quite a lot of depth of field which also means shutter speeds stay high and ISO stays low when you want lots of sharpness across the image. The image quality in daylight is more than good enough for larger prints than most people make. The image quality in poor light is much better than you might think. Certainly better than early generations of dSLRs or m43 cameras. Unless a viewfinder is required, I think the MX-1 is a great buy, especially at its current bargain prices.

An important qualification, at least for me. I wouldn't want to do without a viewfinder, partly out of habit, I daresay, but also for more substantive reasons (stability eg). On something like the MX1 it would have to be a hybrid, for those occasions needing precise framing.

As the comments of others in the thread seem to suggest, Pentax does have most of the right ingredients - but they are not (yet) baked into just one body.

I have been thinking for at least a couple of years of getting a second camera that's light and portable. The choice is much better than it was. I nearly fell for the RX100, but just didn't like handling it (and they forgot the viewfinder); my current favourite is the X100s, but the price ... ouch! I'm sure my prevarications will go on long enough for Pentax to come up with my ideal.

I find the focus peaking to be incredibly useful for just about any shot where I'm interested in which areas of the shot are in focus as opposed to just nailing it for a specific point. If you have ever regularly used the scales on MF primes for estimating DOF you are going to absolutely love this focus peaking gizmo.