[Blue]

You'd argue till you are Blue (pun intended in the face. Seriously, a P&S is a camera with limited controls. As such I wouldn't count a Lx-5 as a P&S even if it's small. And the Q is definitely not a P&S.

O.k. I didn't jerk your chain and zxaar and I moved beyond this so However, if you apply your strict rule to define a P&S you will find that many cameras will then be dismissed from the P&S pigeon hole including the WG-1 and W90 and many of the Lumix compacts. The whole point I was making is that the gray area between a "serious camera" and "p&s" is more vast and ambiguous as ever. As far as arguing goes, look in the mirror hoss.

---

Last edited by Blue; 09-04-2011 at 08:38 PM.

[ManuH]

The whole point I was making is that the gray area between a "serious camera" and "p&s" is more vast and ambiguous as ever.

That's true. In the end it doesn't really matter you can call a camera whatever you like it's still the same camera. I don't see offense in the "P&S" term, different type of camera for different uses. You can also use a DSLR as a P&S which would mean, you don't care about camera settings, leave everything as automatic and not caring too much about ultimate IQ. The term P&S is quite explicit after all. Now the Q doesn't have to be used that way. It has full manual controls, 2 dials, interchangeable lenses. It gives full control to the photographer if he wishes so. Yes DOF control is quite limited due to the small sensor but Pentax tried to overcome that with software defocussing.

It's a pity that Pentax didn't at least chose a sensor the size of the S95 or LX-5 type of camera. Some people pretend that the Q mount could accept a bigger sensor, but what about the lenses? They would have their FOV changed, not desirable so I'm very skeptical that Pentax would use a bigger sensor in the future.

I, like others, hope for some more interesting lenses that are truly unique in the compact world: a good ultrawide, maybe a macro, a tele, fast primes etc. The current lens line-up is rather boring from my point-of-view.

[stevbike]

At times I have used my Fuji A700 as a easy to carry in Programed mode all of time. You have the control of plus or minus of 2 stops and you can get some great looking pictures. The small size of the camera allows me get into places that a larger camera would not get into. Having improved controls and imaging on the Pentax Q would have even better result then my simple Fuji. It sad to say but there are people that are D-slr users that treat it like a point and shoot camera. They will never get past this stage. But they are happy getting the pictures they take.

There are times I really do not need to have complete control over every picture I take. When you need that type control, it is nice have built into the camera. Give the Q some time to see if it takes to active users. Hopefully it will have a long production run with improvements on the base design.

[Kunzite]

FYI: Pentax Q, #11 and 17 in Japan:
????????????????BCN?????????
(thanks, Radu)

[zxaar]

I don't see offense in the "P&S" term, different type of camera for different uses.

I also do not see offense in term P&S.

But the issue originated from OGL's trolling and calling Q a P&S to suggest that camera has poor IQ and is an inferior camera. He is still busy doing so.

[stevbike]

I also do not see offense in term P&S.

But the issue originated from OGL's trolling and calling Q a P&S to suggest that camera has poor IQ and is an inferior camera. He is still busy doing so.

I too do not take any offense to the term P&S as well. All cameras basiclly doing the same thing. Whether you are taking an image thought out after months in advance or just finding seeing a fast paced moment you are aiming a camera to the point of interest and shooting a picture of the scene. Hence, the term "point and shoot". It really makes all models of cameras in the same class. Just my thoughts on this subject.

[rawr]

I treat my NEX-5 as just a big point-and-shoot, and use it the same way I use my Fujifilm F200EXR point-and-shoot. There's no stigma attached to the term for me. It just refers to how you use your camera more than anything else, imho, as well as perhaps alluding to the camera being cheap, automated and compact.

However anyone who has been watching the recent IAAF world championships would also have observed lots of pro photogs using their $10000 FF Canon and Nikon rigs as mere point-and-shoots too a lot of times, shooting from the hip, or from overhead, without even bothering to compose as a pack of them chased shots of the winning athletes after the race. Ditto for a lot of press photogs and paparazzi.

[Blue]

I also do not see offense in term P&S.

But the issue originated from OGL's trolling and calling Q a P&S to suggest that camera has poor IQ and is an inferior camera. He is still busy doing so.

I agree. A better term would be serious compacts.

[stevbike]

Here is an image taken with my Fuji A700. I was walking the dogs myself and girlfriend own. This is the reason way I like carrying this type of camera around when a D-slr is too much to carry with me. The Q would would allow a bit better image quality in terms of controls. The small sizing would be a asset as well.

https://skydrive.live.com/?sc=photos&cid=f7ee1cf34092cc77#!/?cid=f7ee1cf3409...1389&sc=photos

[ogl]

I also do not see offense in term P&S.

But the issue originated from OGL's trolling and calling Q a P&S to suggest that camera has poor IQ and is an inferior camera. He is still busy doing so.

I don't say that Pentax Q has bad IQ for P&S cameras with tiny sensor. Good level. But camera is rather expensive fo such IQ and such tiny sensor.

But I don't have any interest to such IQ at all. It's good system for Japanese. Another mentality.

[zxaar]

I don't say that Pentax Q has bad IQ for P&S cameras with tiny sensor. Good level. But camera is rather expensive fo such IQ and such tiny sensor.

But I don't have any interest to such IQ at all. It's good system for Japanese. Another mentality.

This is only one thing that i tend to agree with you that it is bit expensive for its class. But it seems pentax engineers have worked hard on it, so may be they think it is worth this much of money.

[Fontan]

Why is IQ so important when most of you don't print? To me it is nothing more than tedious bean counting. This camera is for people who want to post pics on the web. Bad IQ is perfectly fine for that. As for the pricing, sure it is pricy but who give a shit? It is not going to hurt you in any ways. Just don't buy it.

[UdonUdon]

FYI: Pentax Q, #11 and 17 in Japan:
????????????????BCN?????????
(thanks, Radu)

lol. It seems that Japanese prefer the non-black version of a camera when given the choice. All of the camera models that come in a white/silver color scheme have a significantly higher ranking than the corresponding black model.

[ogl]

This is only one thing that i tend to agree with you that it is bit expensive for its class. But it seems pentax engineers have worked hard on it, so may be they think it is worth this much of money.

I said it so many times...Strange that you couldn't see my words before.

[ogl]

This camera is for people who want to post pics on the web. Bad IQ is perfectly fine for that. As for the pricing, sure it is pricy but who give a shit? It is not going to hurt you in any ways. Just don't buy it.

Pentax had invested in this system 5 years of work and money. It could be the bomb 3 years ago. But not now IMO.
It seems to me that it could be more reasonably to invest in R&D of new fast primes for K-mount, FF and high-end compact without interchangeable lenses.
For example, to make weather-sealed version Pentax Q with bigger sensor, OVF and fast zoom like Fuji X10. For the same USD800. None offers such camera now.

Pentax Q is rather interesting move for Japanese market. I've heard that Pentax Q would be only for Japanese and Asian market from Pentax's dealers before announcement of Q.
But they decided to move Pentax Q world-wide.
It seems to me it's rather marginal system. Limited by sensor and price and by size and possibilities. Prime is good, but zoom for Q is not small. it's not pancake or folding zoom. It limits Q too.
Dust. Tiny sensor. Toy-lenses are just toy-lenses. Too many compromises.

It's my stance towards Pentax Q.