[Verglace]

It pains me to know that they were working on this instead of a full frame camera. I'm pretty sure they would sell more full frames than these things...

[ogl]

[I]"Here's another fun fact about the Q system: Pentax engineers have actually been working on it for five years.

I'm shocked... It's failure. IMO.

[Clinton]

I hope we are hearing incorrectly about the price. At $400 I can see this camera flying off the shelves at Costco. At $800, I can buy a K-r.

I'm sure it will come down. But even at $600, I'm not sure that most consumers will be interested. Most prosumers will stick to the dlsr.

That is of course, unless this takes unbelievable images, and then I suppose everything is out the window.

[Aristophanes]

It pains me to know that they were working on this instead of a full frame camera. I'm pretty sure they would sell more full frames than these things...

Not even close. The market for Pentax FF *might* be a few thousand units per year at 5x the price of the Q system (over-priced as it is).

Totally different market comparisons. You will never get a Pentax FF unless Pentax is selling large amounts of other product to justify the revenues and cost-shift their capital.

[hoanpham]

Too bad. How can pentax maintain a new lens line?
The ship is sinking... The captain ignores the ice berg... That may explain many K5 selling lately. I haven't seen so many jump ship in a short time period...

[UdonUdon]

It pains me to know that they were working on this instead of a full frame camera. I'm pretty sure they would sell more full frames than these things...

Actually, I am pretty sure they would not. How many people who already own the K-5 (maybe even K-x/r) would be willing to shell out a few grands for a body with a small boost in IQ, small boost in ISO, easier wide-angle, more difficult telephoto, decreased fps, and bulkier body? Also, how many people are willing to ditch their APS-C DA lenses for a FF? Lastly, how many people unfamiliar with Pentax would be willing to choose a Pentax FF over Canon or Nikon?

I am willing to bet that the Pentax Q won't sell too well in the U.S., but it may be a hit in Japan. A Pentax FF stands no chance in both the U.S. and Japan.

[Aristophanes]

It's not that tiny:

I'm a huge advocate of small, 'good enough' cameras, but this makes zero sense to me, or any person who does the slightest research. I can get nearly as small, with a much better IQ potential, for less. Unless size is my only consideration, why would I buy this? For the novelty of carrying around a bunch of metal and glass baubles in my pocket? To finally have a camera smaller than the hot shoe flash? Because my arms are too weak to hold up the extra .9 ounces the Nex weighs?

It's cute and all, and perhaps in the Japanese home market that will work, but as you mention, it's a bit dear for cute. And it's kind of disappointing that Pentax would release something that, in the most charitable read, is more about style than substance.

Look that lens size difference!

The circumference of the mount alone tells the story. The lenses are 1/3 the size of NEX or M43 making the whole kit far less burdensome.

But the price...

---

Last edited by Aristophanes; 06-23-2011 at 07:11 AM.

[junyo]

Exactly

Every time they release a crazy ass limited in multiple colours there is a great wailing and gnashing of teeth here saying it's a bad idea it'll kill sales .....
then it sells out in a heartbeat and generates brand awareness. it positions Pentax as the brand for someone different who isn't going with the crowd. how is the Q any different than that.
anything that makes the brand sales stronger is fine with me, even if it's not the camera I want
I didn't want a Superzoom like the X90 either, but it did OK for Pentax
I don't want a rugged waterproof ps either but those seem to sell pretty well
I'd give my right n*t for a 645d but i would hardly call that a high volume mass market piece of gear. in unit's i'm guessing this will outsell the total 645d units in about 2 days max

There's a slight difference between a solid camera in a wacky color and a wacky camera. The K-x/K-r is, at the end of the day a camera that can go toe to toe, spec for spec with class leading cameras. The Q can't, on any ground other than being the smallest interchangeable lens system which, frankly, is a bit like being the finest moonshine jug player in the symphony orchestra.

[adr1an]

I'm shocked... It's failure. IMO.

Lol - I hadn't got that gist from you in your 29 other posts of the same nature to this thread (or the other thread of an almost identical nature)
At least you just said IMO instead of IMHO... You really want everyone to know you don't like this system....

Seriously - Why the hatred ? Did Pentax run over your dog this morning ?

[eddie1960]

OK. Who can explain the value of interchangeable lenses for such tiny sensor?
No any value at all. ZERO.
It's absurd idea. No need to make 8.5/1.9 fixed lens and 5-15/2.8-4.5...
No 24 mm and no tele (just 83 mm)...If it's top compact, fixed lens is too slow...Zoom is too ordinary andslow too...27.5mm-83.0mm/f16-f25....

you are thinking in DOF terms again
For many shooter The Light aspect is just as important if not more so
new mom and dad trying to shoot a baby in low light end up bitching how hard it is to get an in focus shot. not any more
it would also make shooting basic video in low light very simple, something that while shooting my 1.7 lens on my k7 is difficult to keep the focus on moving subjects.

[Aristophanes]

I'm sure it will come down. But even at $600, I'm not sure that most consumers will be interested. Most prosumers will stick to the dlsr.

No.

They'll buy both.

That's the strategy here.

Seeing the Q as "one or the other" is flat out wrong and not how the camera market operates or ever did. How many old school SLR users had a decent rangefinder as well?

Most.

Same concept here.

Form factor matters, and the necessitates a repeat image:

[Verglace]

Actually, I am pretty sure they would not. How many people who already own the K-5 (maybe even K-x/r) would be willing to shell out a few grands for a body with a small boost in IQ, small boost in ISO, easier wide-angle, more difficult telephoto, decreased fps, and bulkier body? Also, how many people are willing to ditch their APS-C DA lenses for a FF? Lastly, how many people unfamiliar with Pentax would be willing to choose a Pentax FF over Canon or Nikon?

I am willing to bet that the Pentax Q won't sell too well in the U.S., but it may be a hit in Japan. A Pentax FF stands no chance in both the U.S. and Japan.

According to engadget, this thing costs $800... that's more tha a K-r. A nex is only ever slightly larger, and has a larger sensor. Heck a K-r is cheaper likely takes better photos. This thing is going to be the laughing stock of the online camera community.

[Clinton]

Has there been any mention of if it is weather sealed?

[steve1307]

OK. Who can explain the value of interchangeable lenses for such tiny sensor?
No any value at all. ZERO.
It's absurd idea. No need to make 8.5/1.9 fixed lens and 5-15/2.8-4.5...
No 24 mm and no tele (just 83 mm)...If it's top compact, fixed lens is too slow...Zoom is too ordinary andslow too...27.5mm-83.0mm/f16-f25....

So ..... ogl .... 20+ pretty much identical posts today here and another dozen or so at dpreview, for a camera you probably haven't even seen or held.
Not to mention countless others in your own NC-1 thread over the past 6 months.

Aren't you getting bored repeating yourself? Nothing else better to do?
I understand everyone is entitled to an opinion and I agree with you on some technical level but this is getting pretty high on my SPAM meter

Not sure why Pentax came up with this design, and must admit that I'm not really interested to buy into this system.... but before making any statements I will have a look at it in real life at PMA this weekend, and wait to see some proper sample shots and the real pricing.

[juu]

Has there been any mention of if it is weather sealed?

No, which means it isn't.