Pentax Q in the Flesh

fstdslrkx · 06-23-2011, 01:49 PM

Well, i am certainly an amateur in this photography thingy, but i always considered that the end result - aka the picture - is the important bit.
Maybe we should wait for those and only then let slip the dogs of war?
Of course it will not compete with ASP-C DSLR or mirrorless in image quality. It was not designed for it. Given the 800$ it should however outperform high-end compacts and maybe it is capable of this in which case the size might make it attractive for some,and if price will drop there might be enough people to keep this curious system afloat.

**Ash** · 06-23-2011, 01:55 PM

The disappointment in this system seems to be chiefly over what the disappointed would have wanted for themselves and/or what they think Pentax should stand for. Perhaps Pentax as a system is not suited to them and they should give up trying to make Pentax suit them.

You want an APS-C EVIL camera, there are some available elsewhere - get one.
You want a FF camera now, there are many around to buy - get yourself one.
But you can switch the whine mode off now, because it's getting very boring.

This thread is about the Q-mount in the flesh, and I'd like to see more contributions of this very subject if someone has that experience thus far...

juu · 06-23-2011, 01:58 PM

Strangely, two of my enthusiast friends (one shooting with a K10D and another with an EPL-1) say they'd want the Q.

Art Vandelay II · 06-23-2011, 02:04 PM

Originally posted by krebsy97

I think most of us shoot Pentax because it's different and FUN to shoot with. Heaven forbid that Pentax introduce something that is, yet again, quite different from the competition.

I think the problem most everyone is having is not that Pentax has tried something different, different is fine, however a 1/2.3 sensor camera for $800 is borderline insane. A person could get a GF3 + 20mm/1.7 for about that same price..and there is hardly any size difference between them.

Further, I have no issue with them trying something different, but do something different that actually makes sense; like Fuji did with the X100. I could understand the Q if it had a 1/1.6 or 2/3 sensor, but 1/2.3? 1/2.3 is the realm of $100 P&S's. Nikon recently put one in a "serious" compact as well with their P300 and got equally ridiculed for it. Speaking of the P300, it also uses a backside illuminated 12mp sensor. I assume it is the same one that's in the Q. So I imagine this is the IQ we can expect:

Nikon P300 Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

RonHendriks1966 · 06-23-2011, 02:11 PM

Originally posted by Christine Tham

I'll have too see it in the flesh (hopefully at PMA on Sat - I will be heading straight to the Pentax stand!) to decide between black or silver - I'm inclining for silver at this stage.

slip in a spare memory card and take some pictures

**Rondec** · 06-23-2011, 02:12 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Michael Barkowski

To all the people comparing the Q body to NEX and m43 ... try comparing the lens sizes ... and take a look at how much more physical control the Q has vs. these cameras. As the Panasonic 100-300 is way smaller than a 135-400mm APS-C lens, so will telephotos on this mount be super small. Large-sensor kit zooms are generally slower than f/2.8-4.5. Even the NEX 18-55mm is 2/3 of a stop slower than the Q 5-15mm, and 120g heavier. And the 100mm-equivalent toy lens gives you some idea of how small the telephotos could be. Pie-in-the-sky, I know.

When I had a Canon G11, I spent a lot of time using the Custom mode with 50mm-equivalent zoom setting recall. I'd turn the camera on and wait for the lens motor to zoom me to 50mm, where, by the way, it was not f/1.9.

Canon sold a lot of Canon G10s, and that camera had worse high ISO performance than G11.

Yes, a small sensor camera has poor high ISO. High ISO is useful for two things: extending your ability to shoot with decent shutter speed in lower light (but faster kit zoom does the same), increasing depth of field when you have a bit more light (but smaller sensor makes this unnecessary).

So I'm a bit surprised at the prevalence of negative reaction to this thing.

I think clearly Pentax was wanting to keep the package small. The NEX model doesn't make sense, because while the camera body is small, the lenses stay big and the whole contraption ends up an ergonomic nightmare. I think that is why Pentax kept the zoom covering as small focal lengths as it does. Sticking a super zoom on a tiny camera defeats the purpose. Why not just buy a bridge camera then?

I don't think it is a bad package except for the price (which will come down with time). Hoya always prices things high in the beginning to stick the early adopters and then prices drop by 10 to 20 percent fairly rapidly.

Kenn100D · 06-23-2011, 02:55 PM

Originally posted by redpigeons

no wide prime ? are they kidding me . what am I going to do ?
I want this camera I would get it over the LX-5 but the LX 5 goes to 28mm.
a normal pancake is useless to me

. fix it please pentax give me 28mm or 35mm something I could use on the street . I guess I could get the Zoom but then why am I a Pentax shooter ?

I think you have to wait awhile. Its not that all kinds of lenses we wish for is there and this news just came in today. What i've been said is that there are still lenses for this product. Pending release.

Last edited by Kenn100D; 06-23-2011 at 02:55 PM. Reason: I to I've

Kenn100D · 06-23-2011, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

slip in a spare memory card and take some pictures

Thats a good one. Since the sample shots on the other website has been put down.

glanglois · 06-23-2011, 03:52 PM

Originally posted by fstdslrkx

Well, i am certainly an amateur in this photography thingy, but i always considered that the end result - aka the picture - is the important bit.
Maybe we should wait for those and only then let slip the dogs of war?

<snip>

It's more fun to run about, crying "Havoc!"

I agree, let's wait for JPEG and raw. The end product image may be very acceptable - to the target market.

normhead · 06-23-2011, 03:53 PM

This is really simple. a lot of Pentaxians for a lot of reasons don't want this camera to succeed, and are willing to say and do anything and everything that pops in to their heads to make sure that happens. As one reviewer said, they have the 645, they have no need to impress the bigger is better crowd, although we still have a considerable nattering from people who want full frame but won't go to 645, now they have something for people who want something small...

I'm not going to allow myself to be prejudiced by all this nay saying. I'm going to go to the camera store with my lap top, snap off a few shots, snap off a few with my K20D from the same tripod, move the tripod outside and do it again, go home and look at the results. I get tired of hearing what a full frame or a 1/2.3 or a 645 or a whatever can and can't do. I want to see how the Pentax implementation of this works. After all, if you looked at how other camera manufacturers with a similar sensor worked, would you have ever looked at a K-5. That stuff is irrelevant. The mindless muttering of people who think they know something.

When it comes out, I'll give it a fair shot. If others have their reason for dismissing it without seeing it.. fine, but really, what does that have to do with me? Not to give away too much about my age.. but , you wouldn't believe the crap I heard about the limitations of through the lens metering when the Spotmatic came out... a built in meter could never be as good as a $500 hand held meter, blah, blah, blah,... as I said, I want to see if I can make it work.

As for the rest of these nay sayers..... what the heck is wrong with you? I mean, you might be right... and the guys who invested in the $500 hand light meters instead of paying an extra 50 bucks for the built in meter might have been right too...

Zarkon · 06-23-2011, 05:55 PM

One thing is for sure - this new Pentax Q system has generated a lot of controversy. I am impressed by the construction of the camera, DRII, shutter mechanism and lenses. Every point and shoot digicam I've ever used has the lens wobble a bit when extending etc. When I was a starving student (some time back), I could only afford crummy P&S 35mm cameras - the difference in performance compared to a 35mm SLR was enormous even when using the exact same film and settings. With a real lens and a responsive body, a 1/2.3" sensor based camera might just fit the bill for an ultraportable camera. I am encouraged that this camera has a fast prime lens as its standard kit. It reminds me of the time when SLRs had a fast fifty as the standard kit instead of the boring and slow 18-55mm lenses. As far as the DOF argument goes, I find that I often need more DOF than available light allows (sometimes the opposite - portraits etc but that what our DSLRs are for). Handling is very important - my Pen E-P1 doesn't get used as much as it should because it behaves like a P&S (not very responsive). The Pentax Q react like a DSLR or rangefinder in terms of response.

I'll wait to see the street prices for the Q and the new Pentax APS mirrorless but I am quite certainly getting one of them. Now there is the agonizing (not really) wait for the release and comparisons of both systems...

detritus · 06-23-2011, 06:09 PM

i actually see the Q going somewhere.

cuteness, novelty and playfulness.

3 big, non-technical factors that sells to an UN-serious photographer with budget.

serious photographers may not like it, and will not buy it. there'll be others who may be interested and who're willing to spend money on it.

kenyee · 06-23-2011, 06:39 PM

It'll sell well in pink...maybe chromed up a bit more ;-)

detritus · 06-23-2011, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by kenyee

It'll sell well in pink...maybe chromed up a bit more ;-)

totally agree! pink, baby blue, with hello kitty motifs on them. pair it with the toy lenses and voila! kawaii neh!

it'll fly of the shelves in japan

every schoolgirl will crave one!

for mass market, a more sedate black / silver would be best.

junyo · 06-23-2011, 07:01 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by normhead

This is really simple. a lot of Pentaxians for a lot of reasons don't want this camera to succeed, and are willing to say and do anything and everything that pops in to their heads to make sure that happens.

Please get over yourself. The criticisms have nothing to do with wanting Pentax or the camera to fail, and everything to do with the reasonable fear that it will, and thus damage their access to products they enjoy. Uncritical fanboy-ism and pretending not to have doubts doesn't make the camera any more or less viable than stating an honest impression. People are mostly stating rational objective concerns, and if you can't voice an opinion without being accused of malice, then maybe this should be changed from a forum to a marketing newsletter.

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

06-23-2011, 01:49 PM	#286
fstdslrkx Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Israel Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 55	Well, i am certainly an amateur in this photography thingy, but i always considered that the end result - aka the picture - is the important bit. Maybe we should wait for those and only then let slip the dogs of war? Of course it will not compete with ASP-C DSLR or mirrorless in image quality. It was not designed for it. Given the 800$ it should however outperform high-end compacts and maybe it is capable of this in which case the size might make it attractive for some,and if price will drop there might be enough people to keep this curious system afloat.

06-23-2011, 01:55 PM	#287
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	The disappointment in this system seems to be chiefly over what the disappointed would have wanted for themselves and/or what they think Pentax should stand for. Perhaps Pentax as a system is not suited to them and they should give up trying to make Pentax suit them. You want an APS-C EVIL camera, there are some available elsewhere - get one. You want a FF camera now, there are many around to buy - get yourself one. But you can switch the whine mode off now, because it's getting very boring. This thread is about the Q-mount in the flesh, and I'd like to see more contributions of this very subject if someone has that experience thus far...

06-23-2011, 01:58 PM	#288
juu Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 680	Strangely, two of my enthusiast friends (one shooting with a K10D and another with an EPL-1) say they'd want the Q.

06-23-2011, 02:04 PM	#289
Art Vandelay II Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 886	Originally posted by krebsy97 I think most of us shoot Pentax because it's different and FUN to shoot with. Heaven forbid that Pentax introduce something that is, yet again, quite different from the competition. I think the problem most everyone is having is not that Pentax has tried something different, different is fine, however a 1/2.3 sensor camera for $800 is borderline insane. A person could get a GF3 + 20mm/1.7 for about that same price..and there is hardly any size difference between them. Further, I have no issue with them trying something different, but do something different that actually makes sense; like Fuji did with the X100. I could understand the Q if it had a 1/1.6 or 2/3 sensor, but 1/2.3? 1/2.3 is the realm of $100 P&S's. Nikon recently put one in a "serious" compact as well with their P300 and got equally ridiculed for it. Speaking of the P300, it also uses a backside illuminated 12mp sensor. I assume it is the same one that's in the Q. So I imagine this is the IQ we can expect: Nikon P300 Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

06-23-2011, 02:11 PM	#290
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by Christine Tham I'll have too see it in the flesh (hopefully at PMA on Sat - I will be heading straight to the Pentax stand!) to decide between black or silver - I'm inclining for silver at this stage. slip in a spare memory card and take some pictures

06-23-2011, 02:12 PM - 1 Like	#291
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,650	Originally posted by Michael Barkowski To all the people comparing the Q body to NEX and m43 ... try comparing the lens sizes ... and take a look at how much more physical control the Q has vs. these cameras. As the Panasonic 100-300 is way smaller than a 135-400mm APS-C lens, so will telephotos on this mount be super small. Large-sensor kit zooms are generally slower than f/2.8-4.5. Even the NEX 18-55mm is 2/3 of a stop slower than the Q 5-15mm, and 120g heavier. And the 100mm-equivalent toy lens gives you some idea of how small the telephotos could be. Pie-in-the-sky, I know. When I had a Canon G11, I spent a lot of time using the Custom mode with 50mm-equivalent zoom setting recall. I'd turn the camera on and wait for the lens motor to zoom me to 50mm, where, by the way, it was not f/1.9. Canon sold a lot of Canon G10s, and that camera had worse high ISO performance than G11. Yes, a small sensor camera has poor high ISO. High ISO is useful for two things: extending your ability to shoot with decent shutter speed in lower light (but faster kit zoom does the same), increasing depth of field when you have a bit more light (but smaller sensor makes this unnecessary). So I'm a bit surprised at the prevalence of negative reaction to this thing. I think clearly Pentax was wanting to keep the package small. The NEX model doesn't make sense, because while the camera body is small, the lenses stay big and the whole contraption ends up an ergonomic nightmare. I think that is why Pentax kept the zoom covering as small focal lengths as it does. Sticking a super zoom on a tiny camera defeats the purpose. Why not just buy a bridge camera then? I don't think it is a bad package except for the price (which will come down with time). Hoya always prices things high in the beginning to stick the early adopters and then prices drop by 10 to 20 percent fairly rapidly.

06-23-2011, 02:55 PM	#292
Kenn100D Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Paranaque City, Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 697 Original Poster	Originally posted by redpigeons no wide prime ? are they kidding me . what am I going to do ? I want this camera I would get it over the LX-5 but the LX 5 goes to 28mm. a normal pancake is useless to me . fix it please pentax give me 28mm or 35mm something I could use on the street . I guess I could get the Zoom but then why am I a Pentax shooter ? I think you have to wait awhile. Its not that all kinds of lenses we wish for is there and this news just came in today. What i've been said is that there are still lenses for this product. Pending release. Last edited by Kenn100D; 06-23-2011 at 02:55 PM. Reason: I to I've

06-23-2011, 02:57 PM	#293
Kenn100D Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Paranaque City, Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 697 Original Poster	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 slip in a spare memory card and take some pictures Thats a good one. Since the sample shots on the other website has been put down.

06-23-2011, 03:52 PM	#294
glanglois Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Madison, Wis., USA Posts: 1,506	Originally posted by fstdslrkx Well, i am certainly an amateur in this photography thingy, but i always considered that the end result - aka the picture - is the important bit. Maybe we should wait for those and only then let slip the dogs of war? <snip> It's more fun to run about, crying "Havoc!" I agree, let's wait for JPEG and raw. The end product image may be very acceptable - to the target market.

06-23-2011, 03:53 PM	#295
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	This is really simple. a lot of Pentaxians for a lot of reasons don't want this camera to succeed, and are willing to say and do anything and everything that pops in to their heads to make sure that happens. As one reviewer said, they have the 645, they have no need to impress the bigger is better crowd, although we still have a considerable nattering from people who want full frame but won't go to 645, now they have something for people who want something small... I'm not going to allow myself to be prejudiced by all this nay saying. I'm going to go to the camera store with my lap top, snap off a few shots, snap off a few with my K20D from the same tripod, move the tripod outside and do it again, go home and look at the results. I get tired of hearing what a full frame or a 1/2.3 or a 645 or a whatever can and can't do. I want to see how the Pentax implementation of this works. After all, if you looked at how other camera manufacturers with a similar sensor worked, would you have ever looked at a K-5. That stuff is irrelevant. The mindless muttering of people who think they know something. When it comes out, I'll give it a fair shot. If others have their reason for dismissing it without seeing it.. fine, but really, what does that have to do with me? Not to give away too much about my age.. but , you wouldn't believe the crap I heard about the limitations of through the lens metering when the Spotmatic came out... a built in meter could never be as good as a $500 hand held meter, blah, blah, blah,... as I said, I want to see if I can make it work. As for the rest of these nay sayers..... what the heck is wrong with you? I mean, you might be right... and the guys who invested in the $500 hand light meters instead of paying an extra 50 bucks for the built in meter might have been right too...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-23-2011, 05:55 PM	#296
Zarkon Forum Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Dallas, TX Photos: Gallery Posts: 76	One thing is for sure - this new Pentax Q system has generated a lot of controversy. I am impressed by the construction of the camera, DRII, shutter mechanism and lenses. Every point and shoot digicam I've ever used has the lens wobble a bit when extending etc. When I was a starving student (some time back), I could only afford crummy P&S 35mm cameras - the difference in performance compared to a 35mm SLR was enormous even when using the exact same film and settings. With a real lens and a responsive body, a 1/2.3" sensor based camera might just fit the bill for an ultraportable camera. I am encouraged that this camera has a fast prime lens as its standard kit. It reminds me of the time when SLRs had a fast fifty as the standard kit instead of the boring and slow 18-55mm lenses. As far as the DOF argument goes, I find that I often need more DOF than available light allows (sometimes the opposite - portraits etc but that what our DSLRs are for). Handling is very important - my Pen E-P1 doesn't get used as much as it should because it behaves like a P&S (not very responsive). The Pentax Q react like a DSLR or rangefinder in terms of response. I'll wait to see the street prices for the Q and the new Pentax APS mirrorless but I am quite certainly getting one of them. Now there is the agonizing (not really) wait for the release and comparisons of both systems...

06-23-2011, 06:09 PM	#297
detritus Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 54	i actually see the Q going somewhere. cuteness, novelty and playfulness. 3 big, non-technical factors that sells to an UN-serious photographer with budget. serious photographers may not like it, and will not buy it. there'll be others who may be interested and who're willing to spend money on it.

06-23-2011, 06:39 PM	#298
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	It'll sell well in pink...maybe chromed up a bit more ;-)

06-23-2011, 06:58 PM	#299
detritus Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 54	Originally posted by kenyee It'll sell well in pink...maybe chromed up a bit more ;-) totally agree! pink, baby blue, with hello kitty motifs on them. pair it with the toy lenses and voila! kawaii neh! it'll fly of the shelves in japan every schoolgirl will crave one! for mass market, a more sedate black / silver would be best.

06-23-2011, 07:01 PM - 2 Likes	#300
junyo Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 418	Originally posted by normhead This is really simple. a lot of Pentaxians for a lot of reasons don't want this camera to succeed, and are willing to say and do anything and everything that pops in to their heads to make sure that happens. Please get over yourself. The criticisms have nothing to do with wanting Pentax or the camera to fail, and everything to do with the reasonable fear that it will, and thus damage their access to products they enjoy. Uncritical fanboy-ism and pretending not to have doubts doesn't make the camera any more or less viable than stating an honest impression. People are mostly stating rational objective concerns, and if you can't voice an opinion without being accused of malice, then maybe this should be changed from a forum to a marketing newsletter.