Pentax Q in the Flesh

Unsinkable II · 06-22-2011, 11:20 PM

I think Hoya hired the same consultants to price the Q system as Sigma did to price the SD1!

At 1/3 of the price, appropriately undercutting M4/3 and NEX, for a lesser product, then they'd have a lot of interest. $800?!? $300 for essentially a kit zoom?!? Pass the bong please.

hawk1500 · 06-22-2011, 11:20 PM

I don't know, I mean, this is very small, but who wouldn't buy an Olympus EPL-1 plus a Panasonic 20mm f1.7 for $770 instead of this camera with a 47mm f11 or whatever for $800? Even at $600 the Olympus is probably a way better choice. I think anything costing more than a S95 or a XZ-1 is too much.

Originally posted by AndrewG NY

Obviously I'm in the minority here but I find this quite appealing though the price appears a little steep, I think $600 would have been a little more reasonable--I think that some price premium over LX5, XZ1, G12 might be warranted if the construction and glass are as good as they appear to be. I like my LX-5 but really was hoping that Pentax would make something in the same class, and it looks like this is their answer, and it looks like it might address some of my biggest complaints about LX5--a little more plastic-y than I'd like, and no remote control (I believe Q has IR remote capability), plus I believe it's compatible with P-TTL flashes of which I already own three. (I really hope it can do P-TTL wireless but I suspect they may have left that out). The control scheme and ergonomics look better, more Pentax-like than LX5, and I am hoping that metering/white balance/colors are more like my K-7 than LX5.

I hope the system does well enough for continued development (UWA and tele zooms) and that those who invest in it don't get punished by the system being orphaned.

Oh, and I think it looks great, though you just know that they're going to bring out an impossible-to-find limited-edition chrome version in a year or so that will look better than either the black or white ones.

hcarvalhoalves · 06-22-2011, 11:21 PM

Originally posted by AndrewG NY

Obviously I'm in the minority here but I find this quite appealing though the price appears a little steep, I think $600 would have been a little more reasonable--I think that some price premium over LX5, XZ1, G12 might be warranted if the construction and glass are as good as they appear to be. I like my LX-5 but really was hoping that Pentax would make something in the same class, and it looks like this is their answer, and it looks like it might address some of my biggest complaints about LX5--a little more plastic-y than I'd like, and no remote control (I believe Q has IR remote capability), plus I believe it's compatible with P-TTL flashes of which I already own three. (I really hope it can do P-TTL wireless but I suspect they may have left that out). The control scheme and ergonomics look better, more Pentax-like than LX5, and I am hoping that metering/white balance/colors are more like my K-7 than LX5.

I hope the system does well enough for continued development (UWA and tele zooms) and that those who invest in it don't get punished by the system being orphaned.

Oh, and I think it looks great, though you just know that they're going to bring out an impossible-to-find limited-edition chrome version in a year or so that will look better than either the black or white ones.

I don't think anyone disregarded it about built quality or design. Also, knowing Pentax glass, I don't believe it will be a letdown.

The only problem is that all that is amazing about this camera is completely wasted beyond hope because of two little things:

1. The sensor is crap
2. The price is absurd

Kenn100D · 06-22-2011, 11:23 PM

Its an eccentric step by Pentax but will see what this sensor does.
If you can see smartphone trend, they are pushing the limits of camera in a phone. take Nokia N8/N9.

minahasa · 06-22-2011, 11:24 PM

For M42 & K fans...definitely a NO GO on this..

ogl · 06-22-2011, 11:25 PM

TOY lenses For LOMO effect are with plastic mount and fixed diaphragm.
Five Q mount interchangeable lenses designed for exclusive use with the PENTAX Q digital camera; a choice of High-performance or Unique series to satisfy diversified photographic requirements

LFLee · 06-22-2011, 11:27 PM

OK... reading too much negative comments.

Have some faith people.

after all, Pentax bring us the awesome K-5 (minus video part).

Hope to see it beat Fujifilm, Sony, Panasonic, in images.

Skymist · 06-22-2011, 11:30 PM

This is what appeared in Facebook. You can see 4 or 5 lenses and two colors.

gazonk · 06-22-2011, 11:40 PM

Originally posted by Aristophanes

I think the design (from what I can see) is excellent. It's retro and eye-catching. The dials look tactile (I reserve judgement on quality of build at this point) and well-marked in the Pentax way.

Agree, I don't understand the negative comments.

Quote:

Again, where this competes will have a lot to do with price. We'll see if Hoya pulls a Sigma and falls down the world's longest flight of stairs.

Yes, I'm wondering if they are really going to be able to sell it for that price. On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if the Sony 1/2.33" sensor gives similar results to e.g. the LX5 sensor - the size difference isn't that big.

Quote:

If you want miniature, an iPhone has a pretty decent camera attached to a computer that can do 10x more than a 1995 Pentium ever could.

I was pleasantly surprised when I got an iPhone 4 some months ago, the camera is not bad. BUT it's a wide-angle only solution! Useful for a lot of snaps, but quite limiting for general use.

kyteflyer · 06-22-2011, 11:48 PM

Woeful.

**Ash** · 06-23-2011, 12:12 AM

Originally posted by minahasa

For M42 & K fans...definitely a NO GO on this

Wrong target audience anyway.
I get the impression here that users here, particularly dSLR users, expecting it to be suitable for everyone.

hcarvalhoalves · 06-23-2011, 12:23 AM

Originally posted by Ash

Wrong target audience anyway.
I get the impression here that users here, particularly dSLR users, expecting it to be suitable for everyone.

I guess most here expect it to be suitable for... us. Who else?

That's reasonable considering that's an interchangeable camera to being with. The other half of the market just buys P&Ss, which are cheaper, same image quality (considering the crappy sensor they put inside) and none of the troubles. But this camera is, from what I see on the reviews, effectively offering sensor dust for USD 800.

Edvinas · 06-23-2011, 12:23 AM

Originally posted by Ash

Wrong target audience anyway.
I get the impression here that users here, particularly dSLR users, expecting it to be suitable for everyone.

However what is their target audience?

Couscousdelight · 06-23-2011, 01:33 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by vcheng9

Imaging Resource has the hi iso samples. Looks to me ISO 800-1600 is not bad
Pentax Q Compact System Camera Samples - Hands-On Preview

$800 is incl the 47mm F/1.9. I think the body only is $600 MSRP and there will be 20-30% discount online real quick...

Yep, 1600 iso looks impressive.
If the price drops heavily, for macro & tele, why not ?

Arpe · 06-23-2011, 01:38 AM

Looks nice. Obviously that is subjective, which some people here don't seem to be able to comprehend.

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

06-22-2011, 11:20 PM	#121
Unsinkable II Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 1,352	I think Hoya hired the same consultants to price the Q system as Sigma did to price the SD1! At 1/3 of the price, appropriately undercutting M4/3 and NEX, for a lesser product, then they'd have a lot of interest. $800?!? $300 for essentially a kit zoom?!? Pass the bong please.

06-22-2011, 11:20 PM	#122
hawk1500 Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 270	I don't know, I mean, this is very small, but who wouldn't buy an Olympus EPL-1 plus a Panasonic 20mm f1.7 for $770 instead of this camera with a 47mm f11 or whatever for $800? Even at $600 the Olympus is probably a way better choice. I think anything costing more than a S95 or a XZ-1 is too much. Originally posted by AndrewG NY Obviously I'm in the minority here but I find this quite appealing though the price appears a little steep, I think $600 would have been a little more reasonable--I think that some price premium over LX5, XZ1, G12 might be warranted if the construction and glass are as good as they appear to be. I like my LX-5 but really was hoping that Pentax would make something in the same class, and it looks like this is their answer, and it looks like it might address some of my biggest complaints about LX5--a little more plastic-y than I'd like, and no remote control (I believe Q has IR remote capability), plus I believe it's compatible with P-TTL flashes of which I already own three. (I really hope it can do P-TTL wireless but I suspect they may have left that out). The control scheme and ergonomics look better, more Pentax-like than LX5, and I am hoping that metering/white balance/colors are more like my K-7 than LX5. I hope the system does well enough for continued development (UWA and tele zooms) and that those who invest in it don't get punished by the system being orphaned. Oh, and I think it looks great, though you just know that they're going to bring out an impossible-to-find limited-edition chrome version in a year or so that will look better than either the black or white ones.

06-22-2011, 11:21 PM	#123
hcarvalhoalves Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: São Paulo, Brazil Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,019	Originally posted by AndrewG NY Obviously I'm in the minority here but I find this quite appealing though the price appears a little steep, I think $600 would have been a little more reasonable--I think that some price premium over LX5, XZ1, G12 might be warranted if the construction and glass are as good as they appear to be. I like my LX-5 but really was hoping that Pentax would make something in the same class, and it looks like this is their answer, and it looks like it might address some of my biggest complaints about LX5--a little more plastic-y than I'd like, and no remote control (I believe Q has IR remote capability), plus I believe it's compatible with P-TTL flashes of which I already own three. (I really hope it can do P-TTL wireless but I suspect they may have left that out). The control scheme and ergonomics look better, more Pentax-like than LX5, and I am hoping that metering/white balance/colors are more like my K-7 than LX5. I hope the system does well enough for continued development (UWA and tele zooms) and that those who invest in it don't get punished by the system being orphaned. Oh, and I think it looks great, though you just know that they're going to bring out an impossible-to-find limited-edition chrome version in a year or so that will look better than either the black or white ones. I don't think anyone disregarded it about built quality or design. Also, knowing Pentax glass, I don't believe it will be a letdown. The only problem is that all that is amazing about this camera is completely wasted beyond hope because of two little things: 1. The sensor is crap 2. The price is absurd

06-22-2011, 11:23 PM	#124
Kenn100D Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Paranaque City, Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 697 Original Poster	Its an eccentric step by Pentax but will see what this sensor does. If you can see smartphone trend, they are pushing the limits of camera in a phone. take Nokia N8/N9.

06-22-2011, 11:24 PM	#125
minahasa Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Minahasa, North Celebes (Sulawesi) Photos: Albums Posts: 586	For M42 & K fans...definitely a NO GO on this..

06-22-2011, 11:25 PM	#126
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	TOY lenses For LOMO effect are with plastic mount and fixed diaphragm. Five Q mount interchangeable lenses designed for exclusive use with the PENTAX Q digital camera; a choice of High-performance or Unique series to satisfy diversified photographic requirements

06-22-2011, 11:27 PM	#127
LFLee Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,292	OK... reading too much negative comments. Have some faith people. after all, Pentax bring us the awesome K-5 (minus video part). Hope to see it beat Fujifilm, Sony, Panasonic, in images.

06-22-2011, 11:30 PM	#128
Skymist Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Monterey Bay, Callifornia Posts: 107	This is what appeared in Facebook. You can see 4 or 5 lenses and two colors.

06-22-2011, 11:40 PM	#129
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by Aristophanes I think the design (from what I can see) is excellent. It's retro and eye-catching. The dials look tactile (I reserve judgement on quality of build at this point) and well-marked in the Pentax way. Agree, I don't understand the negative comments. Quote: Again, where this competes will have a lot to do with price. We'll see if Hoya pulls a Sigma and falls down the world's longest flight of stairs. Yes, I'm wondering if they are really going to be able to sell it for that price. On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if the Sony 1/2.33" sensor gives similar results to e.g. the LX5 sensor - the size difference isn't that big. Quote: If you want miniature, an iPhone has a pretty decent camera attached to a computer that can do 10x more than a 1995 Pentium ever could. I was pleasantly surprised when I got an iPhone 4 some months ago, the camera is not bad. BUT it's a wide-angle only solution! Useful for a lot of snaps, but quite limiting for general use.

06-22-2011, 11:48 PM	#130
kyteflyer Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Newcastle, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,444	Woeful.

06-23-2011, 12:12 AM	#131
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Originally posted by minahasa For M42 & K fans...definitely a NO GO on this Wrong target audience anyway. I get the impression here that users here, particularly dSLR users, expecting it to be suitable for everyone.

06-23-2011, 12:23 AM	#132
hcarvalhoalves Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: São Paulo, Brazil Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,019	Originally posted by Ash Wrong target audience anyway. I get the impression here that users here, particularly dSLR users, expecting it to be suitable for everyone. I guess most here expect it to be suitable for... us. Who else? That's reasonable considering that's an interchangeable camera to being with. The other half of the market just buys P&Ss, which are cheaper, same image quality (considering the crappy sensor they put inside) and none of the troubles. But this camera is, from what I see on the reviews, effectively offering sensor dust for USD 800.

06-23-2011, 12:23 AM	#133
Edvinas Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kaunas Posts: 1,458	Originally posted by Ash Wrong target audience anyway. I get the impression here that users here, particularly dSLR users, expecting it to be suitable for everyone. However what is their target audience?

06-23-2011, 01:33 AM - 1 Like	#134
Couscousdelight Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Frog-eaters country Photos: Gallery Posts: 357	Originally posted by vcheng9 Imaging Resource has the hi iso samples. Looks to me ISO 800-1600 is not bad Pentax Q Compact System Camera Samples - Hands-On Preview $800 is incl the 47mm F/1.9. I think the body only is $600 MSRP and there will be 20-30% discount online real quick... Yep, 1600 iso looks impressive. If the price drops heavily, for macro & tele, why not ?

06-23-2011, 01:38 AM	#135
Arpe Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,452	Looks nice. Obviously that is subjective, which some people here don't seem to be able to comprehend.