Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-26-2011, 03:36 PM   #421
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,678
QuoteOriginally posted by Macario Quote
Apple got there by making people believe they needed the products apple was making.
That's just marketing genius.
The ubiquitousness of the iPhone and iPads spills over to the 'need' to get other Apple products.

Pentax aren't quite in this league, and it's unfair to compare comupters, phones and music devices to cameras, but Pentax are continually forging *their own* niche market and success in their field. The Q system is one more step in this direction, and as with just about every other development they've announced, it has come with the usual resistance from a portion of the userbase (typically those who their products aren't suited for)...

06-26-2011, 04:48 PM   #422
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,951
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
And smaller, with much faster AF lock, better relative ISO performance, much faster shot-to-shot response time, faster buffer write, and the ability to mount and use almost all K-mount lenses, save a few DA zooms and a couple DA primes. And it would cost 1/4 or 1/5 the price of the 645D.


.
Where is this faster autofocus coming from? For the 645D, Pentax just slapped the K7 autofocus module in it. The K5 and kr have a newer autofocus module, but I certainly haven't seen rave reviews about it -- more a trickle of on going complaints about front focusing, etc. We need to face the fact that auto focus isn't Pentax's strong point, but it is part of what people expect from a full frame camera.
06-26-2011, 05:09 PM   #423
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,545
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
it is part of what people expect from a full frame camera.
What about the 5D Mk II?????????
06-26-2011, 05:11 PM   #424
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,545
QuoteOriginally posted by Christine Tham Quote
Thanks a lot - that site has some really interesting photos of slides from a presentation.

I can't quite make out all the characters as the pics are a bit blurry, but this slide explains the market that Pentax is trying to address:


According to this, 71% of the people surveyed about their views of digital cameras say they want to be able to take beautiful pictures, but 35% say they find an SLR too big and too heavy, and 32% hard to carry (the two bars outlined in blue). The bottom bar is about something (usage?) being "difficult"

There's another slide that shows compact camera sales flattening out, so it seems Pentax is trying to address people who want to upgrade from a compact camera but find a traditional DSLR "too heavy", "too big", "too difficult to carry" and "too difficult to use."

There's another slide which I can't read properly that shows 67% are happy to take pictures using an LCD screen as viewfinder, a massive 60% want the ability to swap lenses, 61% want the ability to control camera parameters, and only 47% want very high quality lenses.

There's another slide after that which is even harder to read but it's about secondary issues like appearance, colour, individuality, ...

Sounds like Pentax have done the marketing research well, and are designing a camera to what they perceive to be a gap in the market.

Well, I clearly am in the target market segment - I want to step up from my iPhone and Canon compact, but I find the K-5 too big, too heavy, too cumbersome to carry. I want the ability to swap lens and camera controls, and willing to sacrifice image and lens quality. I do care about a camera that looks elegant, and reflects my personality.

There's also some interesting slides that show that Pentax is positioning the Q as a "miniaturised" K-r - at 1/3 the weight and halving of some dimensions.

There are also some slides comparing image quality with three "competitor" cameras - I would love to know what Competitors A, B, C are but I wouldn't be surprised if A was NEX, B was Panasonic and C was Olympus. I noticed Pentax are claiming superior quality to B and C and didn't compare with A.
There's no doubt about it that Pentax knows what they are doing. I'm sure they would laugh if they saw what a lot of us have said here...

Thanks Christine, that's very useful!

06-26-2011, 05:44 PM   #425
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Ontario
Posts: 550
QuoteOriginally posted by Ubuntu_user Quote
There's no doubt about it that Pentax knows what they are doing. I'm sure they would laugh if they saw what a lot of us have said here...

Thanks Christine, that's very useful!
I wouldnt be surorised if they are chuckling. We are being harsh on something that none of us have actually played with yet. But most of the issues that people are posting about is because it doesnt fit their needs. I have no issue with the Q. I think it should do alright in the general public but for people doing photography for work the Q just really isnt made for them. And thanks Christine good translation for us.
06-26-2011, 06:10 PM   #426
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Where is this faster autofocus coming from? For the 645D, Pentax just slapped the K7 autofocus module in it. The K5 and kr have a newer autofocus module, but I certainly haven't seen rave reviews about it -- more a trickle of on going complaints about front focusing, etc. We need to face the fact that auto focus isn't Pentax's strong point, but it is part of what people expect from a full frame camera.
It would come from a capital investment from Hoya. There is no inherent reason Pentax can't have an AF system as good as Nikon - the gods didn't come down and give Nikon engineers a magical parchment that holds all the phase-detect secrets of the Universe. Pentax could match it (or come extremely close) with a funded project.

Joseph Wisniewski has pointed out that Pentax is basically using the same AF system it was using in 2005, just tweaked a bit for every new body. It's ripe for a real update.

A highly-successful FF product from Pentax would require that, and would require probably at least 4 new lenses - they mainly need the lenses for a quicker ROI, as the lenses tend to make great profits per unit.

Both the new AF system and the lenses could be used in the aps-c space, possibly with the AF module being handed down a single body generation later (this is how Nikon did it.)

A new AF system is something Pentax needs to do anyway, even if they don't bother with FF.


.
06-26-2011, 06:27 PM   #427
Senior Member
Internetpilot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NE Florida
Posts: 130
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
There's irony here aplenty!

The bane of the Auto 110 IIRC was not SLR snubs, but the evolution of advanced 35mm P&S's with terrific lenses, such as the Olympus XA series. The latter used superior film and people accepted the tradeoffs of the limited lens reach.
I never said that SLR snobbery killed the Auto 110 -- it most definitely was the advancements in 35mm film handling in the P&S cameras (automatic loading, advance, rewind, etc.). That killed the 110 and 126 film cartridge for convenience, and subsequently most camera models using cartridge film quickly fizzled.

My comment about SLR snobbery was just that -- people mocking or scoffing at my Auto 110 system when the funny part was that I was getting the same shots they were -- better shots in some situations because the only zoom or wideangle they could afford was their feet.

A lot of the same is happening with the Q. The camera isn't even released yet, and it's already being mocked by people who mention wanting full frame in the same message...?

I can guarantee you one way the Q will be a failure -- if all the Pentax owners on the various forums keep bashing it. Most people do not come to these forums except for research when shopping for a camera. What do you think people researching the Q are going to find? Thread after thread bashing it as a toy. Who do you think is going to buy it with all this ridiculous negative feedback from Pentax owners? What a great way to stand behind your brand of choice, people!
06-26-2011, 07:05 PM   #428
Loyal Site Supporter
SteveM's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,295
The only thing to get bashed more would have been if Pentax has released a FF...... Bashing seems to be the norm here, regardless of the product or brand.

06-26-2011, 07:48 PM   #429
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,112
QuoteOriginally posted by Christine Tham Quote

There's another slide that shows compact camera sales flattening out, so it seems Pentax is trying to address people who want to upgrade from a compact camera but find a traditional DSLR "too heavy", "too big", "too difficult to carry" and "too difficult to use."
VERY HIGH RISK...I see overestimation of such niche by HOYA marketing department.
It's very big mistake.
m4/3 is much stronger in this niche. And...it doesn't mean that
people who find a traditional DSLR "too heavy", "too big", "too difficult to carry" will buy Pentax Q...


I know several FACTS about HOYA (and Pentax) and new Pentax Q :
1. HOYA (Pentax) is the most Japanese photo company between other brands.
2. HOYA (Pentax) is working hard for Japanese market first of all, and becomes more and more Japanese mind company.
3. We are not Japanese, and there is huge gap in mutual understanding.

(Remember Fear and Trembling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear_and_Trembling_(film) or
Lost in Translation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_in_Translation_(film))


4. Pentax Q is product of 100% (to the bones) Japanese ideas.

Last edited by ogl; 06-26-2011 at 07:57 PM.
06-26-2011, 07:49 PM - 1 Like   #430
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Internetpilot Quote
I can guarantee you one way the Q will be a failure -- if all the Pentax owners on the various forums keep bashing it. Most people do not come to these forums except for research when shopping for a camera. What do you think people researching the Q are going to find? Thread after thread bashing it as a toy. Who do you think is going to buy it with all this ridiculous negative feedback from Pentax owners? What a great way to stand behind your brand of choice, people!
The richness and legitimacy of an online forum is compromised if people can't give their true opinions on a product for fear that it will harm their vendor of choice.

Lying about things to boost a product is incredibly unseemly and doesn't jive with the spirit of this forum.

We're not paid by Pentax, we buy their products, happily so, and we only ask in return that they keep our 'investment' at least viable.


.
06-26-2011, 08:23 PM   #431
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,112
I ask Pentaxian to have a look at Pentax Q lenses - yes, the lenses are small...BUT...there are no any thin lenses - pancakes, like Samsung or m4/3 could offer...
The thickness of lens for compact system is MORE significant thing.
06-26-2011, 08:45 PM   #432
Loyal Site Supporter
SteveM's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,295
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
The richness and legitimacy of an online forum is compromised if people can't give their true opinions on a product for fear that it will harm their vendor of choice.

Lying about things to boost a product is incredibly unseemly and doesn't jive with the spirit of this forum.

We're not paid by Pentax, we buy their products, happily so, and we only ask in return that they keep our 'investment' at least viable.


.
True, and I think someone being disappointed that the effort wasn't put into a FF body is appropriate. Comparing the Q to others in the market is also valuable, as is bringing forward issues with any Pentax product.

Objectivity works both ways. While I am not inferring anyone in this tread, pointing out flaws is a way of raising ones profile. One is much more likely to take the time to make a post (and be vocal about it) if they have a problem, than if they don't.

I was surprised to hear that Pentax wouldn't pony up for a few prizes here, especially with the amount of exposure they get and the amount of effort Adam and the mods put out. As this thread point out, if we are a smaller vocal segment of their customer base and the larger segment looks at these posts before deciding between a Pentax and something else, does the forum have a net negative impact for Pentax? They way the K-5 posts went for the first few months, did this have a positive or negative impact for the credibility of the forum beyond the internal members? I don't know.
06-26-2011, 08:51 PM   #433
Pentaxian
Clicker's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,241
QuoteOriginally posted by Ubuntu_user Quote
There's no doubt about it that Pentax knows what they are doing. I'm sure they would laugh if they saw what a lot of us have said here...

Thanks Christine, that's very useful!
Ned and John both read here.
06-26-2011, 09:03 PM   #434
Site Supporter
Biro's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,159
QuoteOriginally posted by Clicker Quote
Ned and John both read here.
This is good. John... Ned... talk to Japan. Tell them they need to make the Q weather resistant before the production versions hit the street. To date, not a single camera in the new mirror less, interchangeable lens segment offers WR. Adding it to the Q would instantly give the camera and system something beyond size novelty... and make it a player with the outdoor crowd. A weather-resistant Q would be an interesting proposition for backpackers and bikers who shoot a lot of landscapes and nature shots.
06-26-2011, 09:22 PM   #435
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
If the market for the Pentax Q wasn't niche enough, now we need a WR version as well?
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 06:55 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