Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-23-2011, 08:29 AM   #241
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hoek van Holland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,245
Why don't we all just wait and see what the pics will look like, and then come to conclusions. I do have to agree that the price is a bit high. But will I buy one? If the image quality is good, and the price comes down, then maybe yes. Pros are using G12's as back up cameras forr the quick shot, and the Lumix LX5 so why G12 and Lumix and not the Pentax Q, whose sensor should be better (as it is newer)

06-23-2011, 08:30 AM   #242
Pentaxian
LFLee's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Western MA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,249
QuoteOriginally posted by Clinton Quote
I hope we are hearing incorrectly about the price. At $400 I can see this camera flying off the shelves at Costco. At $800, I can buy a K-r.

I'm sure it will come down. But even at $600, I'm not sure that most consumers will be interested. Most prosumers will stick to the dlsr.

That is of course, unless this takes unbelievable images, and then I suppose everything is out the window.
I guess most ppl agreed at ~$400 - $500 this thing can fly.

$400 + abt $100/lens, this can be a nice gadget. At $800? K-r + lenses is better option. Other similar systems on the market have lenses too big. It has to produce images better than advanced P&S (LX5, G12) and comparable/better than micro 4/3.

OR... they are going to increase the price of next generation entry level dSLR ???
06-23-2011, 08:30 AM - 2 Likes   #243
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,914
Can't see what the problem with this camera is. It strikes me as netsuke for the digital age and like that art form sometimes these miniature objects command substantial prices.

Besides, this is probably only the first and perhaps the high-end iteration of a series of Q cameras. For every millionaire and celeb toting the high-end Q+ there are 10,000 regular folks who might well buy the pared-down, priced-down Q- versions we can actually afford, perhaps ones with the fixed zoom lens of a typical compact, no RAW support, simpler settings, wild body colours , etc.

There are plenty of canny people at Hoya, one suspects, and we are looking only at the first move in a long game. The sensor size is not an issue, imho. This is digital netsuke for the online age. If you want prints and enlargements, buy a DSLR.

My own reservations are two. First, whether Pentax has the distro channels and marketing clout to carry this off in Europe and North America. Second, simple ergonomics. Westerners tend to have bigger, clumsier hands and fingers and there is a size below which stuff just doesn't make sense as most of us must have found with mobile phones.

None of this precludes the Q being a big hit in Japan and the Far East at which it is probably aimed anyway. I hope it is a hit, too. We in the West are just not the main event.
06-23-2011, 08:34 AM   #244
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,206
Where the hell are the tiny pancakes so it can fit in your pocket?

06-23-2011, 08:38 AM   #245
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by juu Quote
It's certainly smaller. Whether "substantially" so can be debated to no end.
If these were linebackers or automobiles, the difference would be "substantial", no questions asked.

The lens mount alone tells the story, be it M43 or NEX. The circumference of the Q lens mount will fit right into the NEX with mm to spare. What's that, a 30% difference on the diameter at least?

And they got a hot shoe on it! And maybe a better flash.

The more I look at it the more I think the image circle of the Q can handle a larger sensor; maybe up to 50% larger. If it had a G12 sensor and a $150 off in MSRP it would be a killer system (if IQ testing plays out).
06-23-2011, 08:42 AM   #246
ogl
Banned




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
QuoteOriginally posted by juu Quote
Actually, the zoom looked comparable to Olympus 14-42mm and the primes to the 20mm/17mm/14mm m43 pancakes. But need to see a side-by-side comparison.

It's certainly smaller. Whether "substantially" so can be debated to no end.

smaller, but...
Panasonic GF3 108 x 57 x 33 mm
Pentax Q 98 x 57,5 x 31 mm

Not much. GF3 has crop 2. Pentax Q has 5.65.

new Oly m4/3 will be like XZ-1... even smaller...rather small too.
06-23-2011, 08:48 AM   #247
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Madison, Wis., USA
Posts: 1,510
Thanks, I think you've captured the wider and deeper view of this new product line - particularly the point that it's the start of a new line. Small sensors will get better and an ever-larger percentage of camera buyers will find the images good enough.

If presented well, it will appeal to those who like to think and talk about the magnesium body, multiple funky small lenses, availability of raw, AF tracking, etc. They may not need or use magnesium, raw, etc. but that's not the point. Think of people who buy Leica-labeled Panasonics (but in larger numbers than the Leica fans).

Now, if we can get them monogrammed (on the front, of course) we'd be all set!

QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
Can't see what the problem with this camera is. It strikes me as netsuke for the digital age and like that art form sometimes these miniature objects command substantial prices.

Besides, this is probably only the first and perhaps the high-end iteration of a series of Q cameras. For every millionaire and celeb toting the high-end Q+ there are 10,000 regular folks who might well buy the pared-down, priced-down Q- versions we can actually afford, perhaps ones with the fixed zoom lens of a typical compact, no RAW support, simpler settings, wild body colours , etc.

There are plenty of canny people at Hoya, one suspects, and we are looking only at the first move in a long game. The sensor size is not an issue, imho. This is digital netsuke for the online age. If you want prints and enlargements, buy a DSLR.

My own reservations are two. First, whether Pentax has the distro channels and marketing clout to carry this off in Europe and North America. Second, simple ergonomics. Westerners tend to have bigger, clumsier hands and fingers and there is a size below which stuff just doesn't make sense as most of us must have found with mobile phones.

None of this precludes the Q being a big hit in Japan and the Far East at which it is probably aimed anyway. I hope it is a hit, too. We in the West are just not the main event.
06-23-2011, 08:53 AM   #248
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
smaller, but...
Panasonic GF3 108 x 57 x 33 mm
Pentax Q 98 x 57,5 x 31 mm
iPhone 4 (I swapped H and W to match camera dimensions):

Width: 115.2 mm (4.5 inches)
Height: 58.6 mm (2.31 inches)
Depth: 9.3 mm (0.37 inch)
Weight: 137 grams (4.8 ounces)

06-23-2011, 08:58 AM   #249
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
otherwise there's not much point as the K-mount adapter would make it as thick as a DSLR.
I don't understand this. DSLRs are much larger than film cameras... why can't we make them that size?

Problem with Q is no DOF control... I don't care how high quality the picture is... P&S can do this stuff already.
06-23-2011, 09:02 AM   #250
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
I don't understand this. DSLRs are much larger than film cameras... why can't we make them that size?
Electronics for the sensor and rear LCD screen, plus the batteries to power it all.

It's better to compare a DSLR to an AF SLR system from the 1990's than to the mostly mechanical systems from the 1970's. This is always a misplaced analogy.
06-23-2011, 09:05 AM   #251
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Ah, I see.

Well, then, an ASPC evil with a registration adaptor + DA ltds should still be really compact, yes? As much as a camera from the 1970s?
06-23-2011, 09:06 AM   #252
ogl
Banned




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
The problem is...
it's NEW BAYONET. NEW MOUNT AND NEW SYSTEM FOR YEARS.
It's not a P&S or gadget or toy camera.

It's NEW SYSTEM - HOYA thinks that EVIL SYSTEM must BE precisely what HOYA offered today - PENTAX Q.

Not like APS-C mirrorless system. We never see another mirrorless camera from HOYA for a long time.

IMO.

Last edited by ogl; 06-23-2011 at 09:16 AM.
06-23-2011, 09:21 AM   #253
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,168
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
The problem is...
it's NEW BAYONET. NEW MOUNT AND NEW SYSTEM FOR YEARS.
It's not a P&S or gadget or toy camera.

It's NEW SYSTEM - HOYA thinks that EVIL SYSTEM must BE precisely what HOYA offered today - PENTAX Q.

Not like APS-C mirrorless system. We never see another mirrorless camera from HOYA for a long time.

IMO.
are you always this negative, i've yet to see a positive post from you on anything. Christ life must be hell with such a completely negative attitude
as many have pointed out to you there have been many rumours about the apsc milc along with the smaller milc that turns out to be the Q. All originating from the same sources. A market launch of a new product not mentioning another product that will launch 3 months later is not proof it isn't coming. no marketing person in there right mind would even consider muddying the waters on the launch of a new system by talking about something coming later for a different market segment.If they did they would be fired the next day.
I don't see people at samsung yapping on about the rumoured square sensor model coming down the line when they talk about the current lineup launch.
So you don't like the Q don't buy it you weren't who they were aiming at anyway. Either wait and see what the fall launches bring in the way of new models like an apsc milc and entry DSLR in all likelihood
Or bail and go buy a Pana or Oly
06-23-2011, 09:22 AM   #254
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Jakarta
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 96
I can't tell which market segment Pentax is targeting with the Q, but if it has a collapsible, fast, 16-80/90/100 FF equivalent zoom lens, a touch screen with full manual control sliders on it, and a much more reasonable price, I'd buy it.
06-23-2011, 09:30 AM   #255
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,168
If Ford built a Lincoln like a Maybach and kept the price of a Lincoln I'd buy it
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 11:51 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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