Pentax Q official samples (low ISO)

slocant · 08-25-2011, 10:29 AM

Source: ?????????????????????PENTAX Q?PENTAX

Last edited by slocant; 08-25-2011 at 10:45 AM. Reason: Removed huge embedded images

RonHendriks1966 · 08-25-2011, 10:43 AM

That looks very good. Qurious about it's iso800 results.

joe.penn · 08-25-2011, 12:18 PM

Wow, shot number 4 is really impressive!

--

gazonk · 08-25-2011, 12:37 PM

Actually, for such a tiny sensor, ISO 200 can be noisy (it is noisy on my daughter's Optio W80), so I'm impressed by sample #1.

deadwolfbones · 08-25-2011, 01:11 PM

Also very impressed.

**Ash** · 08-25-2011, 01:58 PM

Perhaps these might dispel some of those myths about the quirky camera.
Fine images, all of them - at large size the platform is hard to fault, pretty sharp, perhaps a little haloing around high contrast areas but otherwise clean results - certainly worth a closer look...

DaveBlack · 08-25-2011, 05:30 PM

Originally posted by Ash

Perhaps these might dispel some of those myths about the quirky camera.
Fine images, all of them - at large size the platform is hard to fault, pretty sharp, perhaps a little haloing around high contrast areas but otherwise clean results - certainly worth a closer look...

Nice series of photos.. Even the iso 200 shot. It will be interesting to see the camera in the hands of actual buyers.

Dave

violini · 08-25-2011, 06:18 PM

Those are "close-up" shots. I would like to see street and landscape shots.

jackseh · 08-25-2011, 06:59 PM

Looks good to me !

My only concern is price tag.

ogl · 08-25-2011, 10:06 PM

Originally posted by slocant

Source: ?????????????????????PENTAX Q?PENTAX

To say honest - really good JPEG for P&S camera and low ISO. Not worse LX-5 and XZ-1.

But Q has RAW - and I think that it's real to get more sharper images from Pentax Q.

Jasvox · 08-25-2011, 10:09 PM

The LX-5 and XZ-1 both can shoot raw. I shoot raw only on my LX3 and get superb results...but nowhere near the resolution and detail of my K-7.

These samples look ok, but not overwhelming...and all of them are taken with optimal lighting and low iso...I'd like to see what 400 and above produce.

Jason

ogl · 08-25-2011, 10:12 PM

Originally posted by violini

Those are "close-up" shots. I would like to see street and landscape shots.

I think that there are no any P&S camera which can make landscape shots close to APS-C DSLR.

Don't you remember that photographers had used MF for good landscapes in the film era and 35 mm was just for amateur landscape photos?
The same is now. FF DSLR is not bad for landscapes, but any digital MF is much better.

To demand good landscape photos from P&S cameras is strange....

IMO.

zxaar · 08-26-2011, 02:53 AM

here are some sample images from m43 camera, mostly at base iso.

Sample Images | LUMIX G™ MICRO SYSTEM | LUMIX | Digital Camera | Panasonic Global

After looking at Q sample images, i do not think Q is doing badly compared to m43 at base isos despite its very small sensor.

Edited to add:

Here is one such 100% crop.

WARNING: These are not presented here to say which camera is better than other. (subjects are not same and framing is also not same)

GF3 file first

Pentax Q sample

**Rondec** · 08-26-2011, 03:16 AM

Looks pretty good. I guess the lack of an AA filter gives it extra sharpness from the get go.

Wheatfield · 08-26-2011, 06:56 AM

I might just buy one of those little buggers (the camera, not the dog or cat).

08-26-2011, 02:53 AM	#13
zxaar Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: kobe/japan Posts: 510	here are some sample images from m43 camera, mostly at base iso. Sample Images \| LUMIX G™ MICRO SYSTEM \| LUMIX \| Digital Camera \| Panasonic Global After looking at Q sample images, i do not think Q is doing badly compared to m43 at base isos despite its very small sensor. Edited to add: Here is one such 100% crop. WARNING: These are not presented here to say which camera is better than other. (subjects are not same and framing is also not same) GF3 file first Pentax Q sample Last edited by zxaar; 08-26-2011 at 03:10 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-5 low light/High ISO samples	johnmflores	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	21	04-19-2011 05:03 PM
Any K5 Long exposure low iso samples please?	vancmann	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	40	11-14-2010 12:42 AM
K5 High ISO low light images please	Tommot1965	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	32	11-12-2010 05:29 PM
No ISO 51,200? Official Pentax site says 12,800 MAX!	K-9	Pentax News and Rumors	6	09-20-2010 07:43 AM
Official samples & official web sites	nosnoop	Pentax News and Rumors	29	01-25-2008 06:12 AM

08-25-2011, 10:29 AM	#1
slocant Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Rio de Janeiro Posts: 65	Pentax Q official samples (low ISO) Source: ?????????????????????PENTAX Q?PENTAX Last edited by slocant; 08-25-2011 at 10:45 AM. Reason: Removed huge embedded images

08-25-2011, 10:43 AM	#2
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	That looks very good. Qurious about it's iso800 results.

08-25-2011, 12:18 PM	#3
joe.penn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,902	Wow, shot number 4 is really impressive! --

08-25-2011, 12:37 PM	#4
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Actually, for such a tiny sensor, ISO 200 can be noisy (it is noisy on my daughter's Optio W80), so I'm impressed by sample #1.

08-25-2011, 01:11 PM	#5
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450	Also very impressed.

08-25-2011, 01:58 PM	#6
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Perhaps these might dispel some of those myths about the quirky camera. Fine images, all of them - at large size the platform is hard to fault, pretty sharp, perhaps a little haloing around high contrast areas but otherwise clean results - certainly worth a closer look...

08-25-2011, 05:30 PM	#7
DaveBlack Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Louisville, Kentucky Posts: 441	Originally posted by Ash Perhaps these might dispel some of those myths about the quirky camera. Fine images, all of them - at large size the platform is hard to fault, pretty sharp, perhaps a little haloing around high contrast areas but otherwise clean results - certainly worth a closer look... Nice series of photos.. Even the iso 200 shot. It will be interesting to see the camera in the hands of actual buyers. Dave

08-25-2011, 06:18 PM	#8
violini Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Winnipeg MB Photos: Gallery Posts: 350	Those are "close-up" shots. I would like to see street and landscape shots.

08-25-2011, 06:59 PM	#9
jackseh Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 118	Looks good to me ! My only concern is price tag.

08-25-2011, 10:06 PM	#10
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by slocant Source: ?????????????????????PENTAX Q?PENTAX To say honest - really good JPEG for P&S camera and low ISO. Not worse LX-5 and XZ-1. But Q has RAW - and I think that it's real to get more sharper images from Pentax Q.

08-25-2011, 10:09 PM	#11
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107	The LX-5 and XZ-1 both can shoot raw. I shoot raw only on my LX3 and get superb results...but nowhere near the resolution and detail of my K-7. These samples look ok, but not overwhelming...and all of them are taken with optimal lighting and low iso...I'd like to see what 400 and above produce. Jason

08-25-2011, 10:12 PM	#12
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by violini Those are "close-up" shots. I would like to see street and landscape shots. I think that there are no any P&S camera which can make landscape shots close to APS-C DSLR. Don't you remember that photographers had used MF for good landscapes in the film era and 35 mm was just for amateur landscape photos? The same is now. FF DSLR is not bad for landscapes, but any digital MF is much better. To demand good landscape photos from P&S cameras is strange.... IMO.

08-26-2011, 03:16 AM	#14
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Looks pretty good. I guess the lack of an AA filter gives it extra sharpness from the get go.

08-26-2011, 06:56 AM	#15
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	I might just buy one of those little buggers (the camera, not the dog or cat).