Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-23-2011, 03:56 AM   #151
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Israel
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 943
One of the more disappointing announcements as of recently. Pentax seems to be moving away from enthusiast photographers into toy land...

06-23-2011, 03:56 AM   #152
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 90
QuoteOriginally posted by openyourap Quote
There are, however, a few "serious" photographers for whom this camera will be of interest.

* Strobists (sync to 1/2000)

* Macro-photographers (small format= big depth of field)

* Birders/digi-scopers (great crop zoom and the possibility of mounting directly to a spotting scope with little addition to the weight of your kit)
You can add photographers who want something with a bit more capability to sneak in to places that require passes for DSLRS.
06-23-2011, 03:57 AM   #153
Veteran Member
eurostar's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Albareto, Italy
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 814
QuoteOriginally posted by openyourap Quote
[*]Macro-photographers (small format= big depth of field)[*]Birders/digi-scopers (great crop zoom and the possibility of mounting directly to a spotting scope with little addition to the weight of your kit)[/LIST]
Too true. But the Kenko camera presented at Photokina, and that is the base of the pentax Q, with C mount and a price foreshadowed at 350$ I feel would be a better option.
06-23-2011, 04:01 AM   #154
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 307
I must say I am a little skeptical about this camera, with sensor being smaller then the upper end of P&S cameras like G12. However, let's not make any premature judgements until we see the actual results. It may have a place in a certain market place, but if it is priced higher then the likes of G12 or equivalent Nikon, my guess is it will not be selling like hot cakes.
I have K20 and numerous lenses, and was looking for something smaller for the occasions when the SLR is too large to carry. I actually ended buying an Oly EPL-1 at a price lower then some of the P&S cameras (Au$450), since the model is in a run-out mode. I figured that this is the best value (performance/dollar) at the moment. Initial impression is that it does not quite match the K20, but is miles ahead of the P&S brigade, and is just compact enough for times when the K20 is too large.

06-23-2011, 04:13 AM - 1 Like   #155
Veteran Member
timh's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Wales
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 445
It's as if the Pentax design team saw the Ricoh GXR and thought "Oh man! Let's see if it's even possible to create a stupider system than that!" and went to work mocking up some concepts, as a b3ta-style joke between themselves.

But tragically the head of marketing accidentally got CC'd on one of their emails and failed to appreciate the humour. Hilarity turned to despair as the comedy camera took on a life of its own.
06-23-2011, 04:20 AM   #156
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Metro Manila, Philippines
Posts: 80
Some argue that people who want a P&S don't really care for interchangeable lenses - and that's true - but I think Pentax might have something up it's sleeve here.

Potential buyers of the Q would most likely get it with either the fast prime or the zoom - normally they wouldn't drop another $300 on another lens - but since the 2 toy lenses come in at only USD $80, I think quite a lot of people who would buy this would buy the extra lenses.

Of course, $800 is still a bit pricey for what it is - but then, considering that Holga and Diana shooters spend quite a lot buying and developing 120 film and shooting them on light leak-y plastic lens cameras, perhaps dropping $800+ once on a digital Holga like the Pentax Q would actually be a better investment.
06-23-2011, 04:40 AM   #157
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,912
QuoteOriginally posted by Boris Quote
One of the more disappointing announcements as of recently. Pentax seems to be moving away from enthusiast photographers into toy land...
But that's where the market is going. Hipstamatic and Instagram are the 2 super hot apps for the iPhone. If you are an optics company and you make cameras, the Q is how you follow that market.
06-23-2011, 04:45 AM   #158
Veteran Member
timh's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Wales
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 445
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
But that's where the market is going. Hipstamatic and Instagram are the 2 super hot apps for the iPhone. If you are an optics company and you make cameras, the Q is how you follow that market.
Hipstamatic is about $2 and Instagram is free. They are also infinitely smaller.

If you are a bloody stupid optics company you try to sell a $800 piece of hardware that does the same thing and the market goes 'WTF?'

06-23-2011, 04:58 AM   #159
Veteran Member
soppy's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Gainesville
Posts: 348
Bottom line is this thing is $800 and doesn't have an ASP-C sensor. You could buy any number of DSLRs or other 4/3 cameras plus lenses for that price. I don't see the benefit in size of this thing compared to other 4/3 cameras. Pentax made a bad move here in my opinion.
06-23-2011, 05:05 AM - 2 Likes   #160
Veteran Member
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
Geez, is it that hard to understand that this camera is not targeted at this forum's userbase? It's to attract new customers to the brand, especially people in Asia (Japan) who like gadgets. As far as I can see the Q takes better photos than the iPhone (and it even offers RAW, which Pentax would never do if they thought the sensor is not up to par).

The original Auto 110 was a great system, but it was seriously hindered by the bad film quality back then. I still remember the VERY grainy pictures I got with my 110 camera. The Q seems to be WAY better.

I'm happy with this camera, because the Q seems to have its own niche. I still laugh at the NEX and NX systems, which look very awkward once a serious lens is attached. No; Pentax understood that a tiny camera needs tiny lenses, not overly large super zooms.

Now... to the serious photographer: let's wait for the FF Pentax mirrorless (with DA crop function) which will be introduced after the summer
06-23-2011, 05:06 AM   #161
New Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6
Well, I have to admit, that a few years ago, when I had a Ricoh GRD, I wished it had interchangeable lenses, rather than the telescoping one built in .

Now, with the Micro 4/3 sensor and the small cameras/lenses that have really good image quality, I think the smaller sensors are pretty limited, even though I still have one. If Pentax has their CD AF speed up to the Panasonic GF realm, then it might be interesting, but if they are going to release a slow focusing AF system and count totally on the cuteness factor, I don't think it will be of interest to me.
06-23-2011, 05:14 AM   #162
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,912
QuoteOriginally posted by UdonUdon Quote
You can add photographers who want something with a bit more capability to sneak in to places that require passes for DSLRS.
And video. From the photo, I suspect the big, fat lens at the back in the promo photo to be an AF video lens (fingers crossed).
06-23-2011, 05:17 AM   #163
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,218
The sales will drop very soon when users will see the dust at photos...
06-23-2011, 05:20 AM   #164
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,512
QuoteOriginally posted by Longliner Quote
If Pentax has their CD AF speed up to the Panasonic GF realm, then it might be interesting, but if they are going to release a slow focusing AF system and count totally on the cuteness factor, I don't think it will be of interest to me.
I don't own a K-5, but I thought the CD-AF in the K-5 was pretty good? So if they've invested some R&D in better CD-AF, I'm sure the Q (and the upcoming large-sensor mirrorless) will benefit from that!
06-23-2011, 05:22 AM   #165
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,912
QuoteOriginally posted by UdonUdon Quote
You can add photographers who want something with a bit more capability to sneak in to places that require passes for DSLRS.
QuoteOriginally posted by Unsinkable II Quote
1. A regular point-and-shooter wanting better image quality? --- Get an LX5/S95/XZ-1 and save a lot of $$$, eliminate lens-changing inconvenience, and in all likelihood get better images.

2. A DSRL-owner wanting a second, smaller, camera? --- Get a GF3 with the 14 or 20mm, or a NEX-C3 with the 20mm and have hugely better IQ for a small size trade-off. Oh, and still save $$.

3. Someone wanting a do-it-all mini system and expecting Pentax to bring out an ultra-wide and a super telephoto lens in the Q mount? --- Get a Sony HX9v with incredible wide-angle portrait stitch panoramas, 384mm zoom, image-stacking noise reduction, 10FPS, 1080/60P video, and GPS. All for $350 ($300 here in Hong Kong).

4. Someone wanting a fun mini system? --- Bingo! Except the price for the body and lenses is 2 to 3 times too high. I can almost get a Oly XZ-1 with its 1/1.7" sensor and F1.8-2.5 zoom lens for the price of Pentax's far slower, narrower-range, Q-mount zoom alone!!!

It's fun and cute, I'll grant it that. But the pricing is pure comedy.
1. As a former LX-5 and current S95 owner I disagree. The S95 is, in fact, too small. Both these cameras are costly and their lenses are by far the limiting factors.

I agree the Q does not compete on price here.

2. The Q is substantially smaller than any M43. Completely different market.

Again, the Q is seriously over-priced for the sensor size.

3. The Q is a fun camera, not a "serious camera system. The Sony HX9v gets poor reviews for its photo IQ.

4. Yup! The Q is too expensive for the sensor size.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, mirrorless, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q10, q7
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Spotmatic motordrive...in the flesh! pickles Pentax Film SLR Discussion 8 08-09-2010 01:00 PM
Of Flesh and Clay dantuyhoa Post Your Photos! 9 11-11-2008 11:57 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:00 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top