[rparmar]

I still wish Pentax would have joined m4/3's instead of going this whole Q route. Panasonic, Olympus, and Pentax would have made for quite the system. No one company in the world could have matched the lens output if all three shared the same mount.

Yeah but that would have made too much sense. Pentax could have leveraged their experience in small primes and carved out a decent market with minimal investment. Imagine the FA 43 and FA 77 retooled for MFT.

[Aristophanes]

Yeah but that would have made too much sense. Pentax could have leveraged their experience in small primes and carved out a decent market with minimal investment. Imagine the FA 43 and FA 77 retooled for MFT.

Don't be daft. There is no way that Pentax, invested a;ready in the more mainstream and better quality IQ of APS-C, is going to slide dow the slippery slope of joining M43. no one would waste the optical effort of making the FA Ltd's adapted to M43. That would be a shame, wasting all that optical goodness.

The Q aims at the high-end P&S and bridge camera areas which still sells now that compacts are stalled due to phone/camera integration. This is the 110 all over again.

There is almost certain to be an APS-C mirrorless from Pentax in the Fall, or maybe even earlier. Saying it like Pentax went Q instead of M43 is flat out deceptive.

[Ash]

Well, Pentax has previously shown absolutely no product to put faith in when it comes to the point and shoot market

Really? What was paltry about the X90 or WG-1? Remember it would be unfair to expect more out of a product that it was not designed to do...

[eddie1960]

I'm with Aristophanes and Ash here, the product looks to be quite interesting for it's target market, which for the most part is not us as a group. our time will come with the rumoured apsc milc later. if this can get people buying pentax hey I'm all for it. anyone here who thought there was a chance of an m43 pentax has been dreaming. not going to happen, why would it, if they are going to chase IQ in a Milc why leave apsc.
this is a cool looking little cam for what it is, and the whining about DOF really makes no sense. it wasn't really designed with that in mind (though it looks like they have a bokeh filter)
small with a fast lens (ie allows lots of light in) sounds pretty cool to me

[ogl]

I'm with Aristophanes and Ash here, the product looks to be quite interesting for it's target market, which for the most part is not us as a group. our time will come with the rumoured apsc milc later. if this can get people buying pentax hey I'm all for it. anyone here who thought there was a chance of an m43 pentax has been dreaming. not going to happen, why would it, if they are going to chase IQ in a Milc why leave apsc.
this is a cool looking little cam for what it is, and the whining about DOF really makes no sense. it wasn't really designed with that in mind (though it looks like they have a bokeh filter)
small with a fast lens (ie allows lots of light in) sounds pretty cool to me

The user of Pentax Q must clean sensor...None from P&S camera's users make it before...

Looks like Chinese toy-gadget. Even through Hoya will offer EVIL with APC-S sensor later, this Q system will stay the most ridiculous system in the digital era...It's a pity.

Maybe Hoya discharged all old Pentax camera's engineers? It looks like the work of first/second year student..

[ogl]

The Q aims at the high-end P&S and bridge camera areas which still sells now that compacts are stalled due to phone/camera integration. This is the 110 all over again.

I've seen IQ from this sensor...No any miracle. XZ-1 and LX-5 is simply better.
But...It's simply better than ordinary P&S cameras.

The design of Pentax Q is terrible...Work of first/second year student...Or it was designed by Hoya's endoscopic division

Pentax lost high-end P&S market many years ago...Pentax is NOTHING at the modern market of P&S cameras now. Absolutely ZERO.

Pentax Q is already stillborn son of Hoya. They waste money. I think that Pentax Q will be a BIG faillure of Hoya and one of the silliest invention in digital world.

Why do you think that big corporations never make mistakes?

[uccemebug]

I'm with Aristophanes and Ash here, the product looks to be quite interesting for it's target market

I don't see the target market, Eddie. If it's domestic, I think that it's a non-starter: the mobile phone is a much larger part of life in Japan than it is in the West. Email, sharing photos, using Mixi on your phone, these all require the presence of .. the phone. Home PC's were never as big in Japan as they got here, and they've been steadily waning for years. Meanwhile, you can't see anything worth looking at in that country without someone at hand taking a photo with a mobile phone.

I don't think that anything that sails this close to the mobile phone image quality offers any utility that the mobile phone doesn't. Just to come up to par with the sharing capability of a mobile phone, Hoya would have to offer dead-simple integration with email and the proprietary Internet systems of the carriers, which would require an add-on service for each carrier to be interested. And that's just to match the utility of the mobile phone's similarly-sized sensor.

At the other end of the spectrum, Japanese women have no trouble using DSLR's.

Back in the Auto 110 days there was nothing like the mobile phone (an imaging device that people carried every day anyway) to compete with. I think the time for a small odd-ball like this is well past.

[ogl]

I don't see the target market, Eddie.

So do I. What target market.?..I don't understand...

P&S users don't need to clean sensor, convert RAW or think about interchangeable lenses...
They want to buy camera and simply push the button. And nothing else.
No need to use Quick Dial on the front of the camera...
No need fish-eye lens - it's easy make with in-camera filters...

E.t.c.


The advanced amateurs could buy LX-5 or XZ-1 with bigger sensor and better design and controls...

[twitch]

It's D.O.A before it's even announced, that must be some sort of record.

[Ash]

There have been naysayers about the K10D even before it was released.
There have been naysayers about the K20D even before it was released.
There have been naysayers about the K-7 even before it was released.
There have been naysayers about the K-r even before it was released.
There have been naysayers about the X90 even before it was released.
There have been naysayers about the WG-1 even before it was released.
Were any of these cameras flops after their release?

Common theme has been plenty of negativity prior to any real use or evidence of shortcomings being presented. This Q-mount and EVIL camera disdain is no different.

Can we discuss new products without the usual derision, please?

[Biro]

There have been naysayers about the K10D even before it was released.
There have been naysayers about the K20D even before it was released.
There have been naysayers about the K-7 even before it was released.
There have been naysayers about the K-r even before it was released.
There have been naysayers about the X90 even before it was released.
There have been naysayers about the WG-1 even before it was released.
Were any of these cameras flops after their release?

Common theme has been plenty of negativity prior to any real use or evidence of shortcomings being presented. This Q-mount and EVIL camera disdain is no different.

Can we discuss new products without the usual derision, please?

Fair enough, Ash... but most forum members are expressing their honest confusion. It's hard to see the target market for this camera/system. I hope Pentax knows what it's doing. I wish them well and hope they can sell a million of these because I don't want the company to be damaged financially by an expensive flop. And I continue to await their APS-C mirrorless system (assuming that is real) with great anticipation. But, someone please, but a paper bag over that white version of the Q.

[Art Vandelay II]

This Q-mount and EVIL camera disdain is no different.

Can we discuss new products without the usual derision, please?

I have no issues with EVIL's, in fact I started a thread on this forum the day m4/3's was announced wondering if Pentax would follow suit. I've since bought 3 different CSC's. I honestly believe CSC's are the future and will surpass DSLR's in the very near future; I simply don't understand the point of a CSC built around a sensor this small. I mean sheesh: why not at least use a 1/1.7? How are those not small and cheap enough? At least then someone could make a case to get the Q system over an LX5 or XZ-1. As of now the only case I can make for the Q is for novelty reasons.

[ogl]

Common theme has been plenty of negativity prior to any real use or evidence of shortcomings being presented. This Q-mount and EVIL camera disdain is no different.
Can we discuss new products without the usual derision, please?

What are your arguments for Q? Do you think that we live in wild woods and know nothing about photo industry, photo cameras and photo history???
EVIL and high-end P&S market is not secret for us... No places for Pentax Q at this market.

[juu]

One can argue many ways which sensor size vs. lens size compromises make sense for mirrorless, with probably everything from 1:2.5 to 1:1 crop factors compared to FF being feasible, and IMHO 1:2 (m43) being in the sweet spot; however 1:6 with a 1/2.3'' sensor is not it, especially if as ugly as this one.

It will sell OK for the first few weeks in Japan while it's a novelty. Then it will die, lingering with a market share somewhere around the GXR.

Pentax should have joined m43, NEX or NX instead.

[adr1an]

What are your arguments for Q?

I dont think there needs to be arguments 'for' either - rather what Ash was perhaps suggesting is its a little premature to be arguing 'against' (particular with the vigor some are) since no one commenting here so far has actually snapped a single frame with one...

"Too Early To Call" I believe would be the electoral equivalent of this argument at this stage....