Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-05-2011, 11:07 PM   #1186
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by Fontan Quote
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.
I thought about the printing part. And I concluded that for the usual size that i print (30.5 x 25.4 cm x cm) IQ is pretty usuable. In fact , there was a print in touch and try event that was around 60 cm wide and it looked fantastic. So in the end for printing small enough Q is not a problem. When someone is printing large , it might be an issue.

But many of us do not print large or not print at all.

09-05-2011, 11:28 PM   #1187
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,112
Imagine...A lot of us make from 5 000 till 20 000 photos per year. Even 1000 photos.
You can print several photos for year which you like very much. Maybe to present some photos to the friends...
But we have no endless walls in our houses. it's unreal to print more than 50 big photos per year.
If you print small photos for albums - you should spend money for printing in labs or at home with printer.
None want to pay money if we can look at the photos at good monitors or photo frames.
09-05-2011, 11:36 PM   #1188
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: 5th floor
Posts: 1,322
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Imagine...A lot of us make from 5 000 till 20 000 photos per year. Even 1000 photos.
You can print several photos for year which you like very much. Maybe to present some photos to the friends...
But we have no endless walls in our houses. it's unreal to print more than 50 big photos per year.
If you print small photos for albums - you should spend money for printing in labs or at home with printer.
None want to pay money if we can look at the photos at good monitors or photo frames.
If that is all you do, then Q ought to be more than adequate for you.
09-05-2011, 11:39 PM   #1189
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: 5th floor
Posts: 1,322
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
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.
Eh, why Did you quote me here? Not getting it . . . .

09-06-2011, 12:43 AM   #1190
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by Fontan Quote
If that is all you do, then Q ought to be more than adequate for you.
That is why going to buy it. If I were making money out of selling prints, might be thinking of buying top of grade cams, but since i do not make money out of it Q shall be not much of an issue.
09-06-2011, 02:36 AM - 1 Like   #1191
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Pentax had invested in this system 5 years of work and money. It could be the bomb 3 years ago. But not now IMO.
ogl, I see your mood.

You are not disappointed about what Pentax did with the Q, you are disappointed about what Pentax did not do otherwise.

Actually, as it turns out, the Q seems to be the best camera in its size class (enthusiast compacts). I agree it is expensive. But best in class is allowed to be expensive; because w/o alternative. It is not even the most expensive in its class if you think about the D-Lux 4 or Fuji X10 (all three are about the same price and as I said, only Q can turn a DA*300 into a 1000mm equivalent ...).

I agree the Q would have more success if less expensive. But Pentax' pricing strategy is not completely out of this world.

I think, with all the enthusiast buyers from Japan, the Q will earn good money for Pentax. A bit cheaper it could earn more. But still it will earn good money. Judging from the positive feedback I've seen to date.


And that is the point, ogl, my friend: The Q may not be your camera. But it is a good camera for Pentax. Like the Auto 110 in SLR times. Only Pentax did it. And we love Pentax for doing such things. The Auto 100 became cult for some.


Only if Pentax earns credit for doing stuff nobody else does can we hope Pentax returns to become the innovative maker we all love them to be. To become a technological leader rather than a follower again.


And this is why I welcome the Q.


ogl, the Q may not be for you. But you should welcome the Q. Be in peace with the Q, not at war. Not you. And watch out what will be next.

Last edited by falconeye; 09-06-2011 at 02:48 AM.
09-06-2011, 02:47 AM   #1192
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,112
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
ogl, I see your mood.

You are not disappointed about what Pentax did with the Q, you are disappointed about what Pentax did not do otherwise.

.
Yes...+1.
I hope Pentax under Ricoh's wing will be more interesting than with HOYA managers. Pentax Q is not bad idea...But too late. IMO. And too limited.
09-06-2011, 05:25 AM   #1193
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Madison, Wis., USA
Posts: 1,510
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
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 have a great deal of respect for development engineers but they are the last group that should be allowed to project the camera's market price. I am confident that Pentax, regardless of who owns the brand, has product management and product development staff who provide direction to the engineers.

I have enjoyed a distant relationship with Bell Laboratories at AT&T over a period of 30 years. One of the problems they faced was that researchers and engineers had great ideas whose value they were confident of. The market, in the end, decided the real value and often it wasn't what the engineers supposed. That did a lot of damage to a fine organization, however well-intentioned the Labs staff was.

I don't know who directs Pentax now as I just haven't looked into the subject. But those are the people who decide if the product is worth the development effort. Perhaps we should be discussing them more?

09-06-2011, 06:36 AM - 1 Like   #1194
Veteran Member
ManuH's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,209
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Pentax Q is not bad idea...But too late. IMO. And too limited.
Too little too late is almost a Pentax signature these last years. Because the Q idea is not bad, it just seems to be under-delivered IMHO and as already said late in the game.

The disappointment comes also from the fact that, except for the K-5, nothing really new came in 2 years. No really new lenses except the boring 18-135 and DA35. Always the same 2 cameras models. No FF on the horizon. And the Q gives the impression that during all this time they were working on a toy camera!
09-06-2011, 11:08 AM   #1195
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 2,951
I regret, but BSI sensors just didn't exist 18 months back from now...

Last edited by Zygonyx; 09-06-2011 at 11:28 PM.
09-06-2011, 11:41 AM   #1196
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
ogl, I see your mood.

You are not disappointed about what Pentax did with the Q, you are disappointed about what Pentax did not do otherwise.

Actually, as it turns out, the Q seems to be the best camera in its size class (enthusiast compacts). I agree it is expensive. But best in class is allowed to be expensive; because w/o alternative. It is not even the most expensive in its class if you think about the D-Lux 4 or Fuji X10 (all three are about the same price and as I said, only Q can turn a DA*300 into a 1000mm equivalent ...).

I agree the Q would have more success if less expensive. But Pentax' pricing strategy is not completely out of this world.

I think, with all the enthusiast buyers from Japan, the Q will earn good money for Pentax. A bit cheaper it could earn more. But still it will earn good money. Judging from the positive feedback I've seen to date.


And that is the point, ogl, my friend: The Q may not be your camera. But it is a good camera for Pentax. Like the Auto 110 in SLR times. Only Pentax did it. And we love Pentax for doing such things. The Auto 100 became cult for some.


Only if Pentax earns credit for doing stuff nobody else does can we hope Pentax returns to become the innovative maker we all love them to be. To become a technological leader rather than a follower again.


And this is why I welcome the Q.


ogl, the Q may not be for you. But you should welcome the Q. Be in peace with the Q, not at war. Not you. And watch out what will be next.

Very good points Falk. The Auto 110 was a camera system in search of a good film and perhaps the Q is system that will grow into a senosr. Unfortunately for the 110, decent film didn't come along unto 10-15 years after it was discontinued.
09-06-2011, 01:05 PM   #1197
Senior Member
stevbike's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Newbury, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 268
QuoteOriginally posted by ManuH Quote
Too little too late is almost a Pentax signature these last years. Because the Q idea is not bad, it just seems to be under-delivered IMHO and as already said late in the game.

The disappointment comes also from the fact that, except for the K-5, nothing really new came in 2 years. No really new lenses except the boring 18-135 and DA35. Always the same 2 cameras models. No FF on the horizon. And the Q gives the impression that during all this time they were working on a toy camera!

Give Pentax a bit of time. I think the D-slrs a due to get updated soon. Given the market place, they have the basics to keep them going without too much product in the mix for development costs. Sure the Q cost a lot the develop but I think they know the market place. It is a bit of taking a chance to see it is works out but I hope it works out for them. When the new D-slr models come out, the focus will turn to them. In the mean time for those interested in the Q, let them enjoy the moment while the camera is new.
09-06-2011, 02:28 PM   #1198
Veteran Member
devorama's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 638
Looks like Adorama has them in stock now. I'm guessing B&H will follow close behind. I'll have mine by Thursday. Then I'll post some pics and some comparison shots. I think I'll do another ISO elevator shot comparing with my Olympus XZ-1. :-)
09-06-2011, 02:29 PM - 1 Like   #1199
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,413
QuoteOriginally posted by ManuH Quote
Too little too late is almost a Pentax signature these last years. Because the Q idea is not bad, it just seems to be under-delivered IMHO and as already said late in the game.
If Pentax is late, who was the first?
09-06-2011, 04:05 PM   #1200
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Frog-eaters country
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 359
QuoteOriginally posted by ManuH Quote
The disappointment comes also from the fact that, except for the K-5, nothing really new came in 2 years. No really new lenses except the boring 18-135 and DA35. Always the same 2 cameras models. No FF on the horizon.
  • Pentax 645 D, a new system with one lens.
  • Pentax Q, a new system with 5 lenses.
  • K-5, K-X, K-R....
But there is a big lack of lenses these last 2 year, for sure.

QuoteOriginally posted by ManuH Quote
And the Q gives the impression that during all this time they were working on a toy camera!
I don't share the same impression...

Regards,
Arno
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 01:34 PM. | 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