Pentax Q in the Flesh

creampuff · 06-23-2011, 07:10 PM

Originally posted by normhead

This is really simple. a lot of Pentaxians for a lot of reasons don't want this camera to succeed, and are willing to say and do anything and everything that pops in to their heads to make sure that happens.

I do think you have a point.
Most are too quick to dismiss this camera out of hand without even seeing/handling it in person or trying it out in the flesh. Perhaps they are too set in their thinking on what should be the ideal camera (if there is such a thing) or maybe too entrenched to consider something new. I too might have pooh-poohed at such a camera a year ago but I can definitely see myself owning the Pentax Q.

wll · 06-23-2011, 07:16 PM

Originally posted by twitch

Hey, we agree Pentax is not going FF in the near future, that was the whole point of my post

Sorry twitch, I read your post wrong, my apologies.

wll

**bushwhacker09** · 06-23-2011, 07:20 PM

Echoing junyo's feelings, IT'S OK FOR PEOPLE TO DISCUSS ISSUES-- it doesn't necessarily mean they want the camera to fail. I sincerely hope the camera flys off of the shelf. However, when you see so many people at rock concerts using a tiny P&S with the flash on trying to take pictures of the stage from 200 feet away, you might wonder if a tiny sensor interchangeable lens compact will have a huge market. I've used Nikon, Canon, and Pentax. I love Pentax lenses, but all of these companies have good products. I think someone of the negative comments stem only from hoping that Pentax might make something to give the big boys pause--most of us love and root for an underdog. At first glance, given the history of small sensors and the suggested MSRP, it is reasonable for people to question whether or not this camera will be a winner. Pentax could indeed have it right--a Fuji X100 with interchangeable lenses would look seriously like a full-sized camera. Personally, I was hoping for a smaller vacation camera than the K-7--good image quality in a relatively small body. Here's hoping the Q is it!

steve1307 · 06-23-2011, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

slip in a spare memory card and take some pictures

I remember reading somewhere that at Photokina (Sept 2010), the sample K-5's had their memory card door glued shut.

I'm taking in a spare SD card anyway.

pinholecam · 06-23-2011, 07:43 PM

Originally posted by normhead

This is really simple. a lot of Pentaxians for a lot of reasons don't want this camera to succeed, and are willing to say and do anything and everything that pops in to their heads to make sure that happens. As one reviewer said, they have the 645, they have no need to impress the bigger is better crowd, although we still have a considerable nattering from people who want full frame but won't go to 645, now they have something for people who want something small...

I'm not going to allow myself to be prejudiced by all this nay saying. I'm going to go to the camera store with my lap top, snap off a few shots, snap off a few with my K20D from the same tripod, move the tripod outside and do it again, go home and look at the results. I get tired of hearing what a full frame or a 1/2.3 or a 645 or a whatever can and can't do. I want to see how the Pentax implementation of this works. After all, if you looked at how other camera manufacturers with a similar sensor worked, would you have ever looked at a K-5. That stuff is irrelevant. The mindless muttering of people who think they know something.

When it comes out, I'll give it a fair shot. If others have their reason for dismissing it without seeing it.. fine, but really, what does that have to do with me? Not to give away too much about my age.. but , you wouldn't believe the crap I heard about the limitations of through the lens metering when the Spotmatic came out... a built in meter could never be as good as a $500 hand held meter, blah, blah, blah,... as I said, I want to see if I can make it work.

As for the rest of these nay sayers..... what the heck is wrong with you? I mean, you might be right... and the guys who invested in the $500 hand light meters instead of paying an extra 50 bucks for the built in meter might have been right too...

+1 to this.
Though I have my doubts, I can see that its not targeted at the same market/performance as DSLR users, and can accept it for what it is (competitor to G13, LX5, GXR, etc)
I can see myself using one if the APS-C version does not turn up.

The problem here (ie. PF) is that we can have lots of insight as well as discussions, but sometimes its too DSLR orientated (driven by individual 'vision' of what a camera should be). This camera belongs to a pns category if this forum had one. So discussing that its sensor/performance is not DSLR like is really moot.

wll · 06-23-2011, 07:48 PM

Originally posted by glanglois

There was speculation someplace that it's the same sensor as found in the Sony travel zoom, DSC-HX9V if I have it right. That would make sense - the chip is new in 2011.

But the image set you'll find for that camera is limited to JPEGs that went through the Sony imaging engine. They do not offer a raw option so there's little we can be certain of in regard to that chip.

I'm more interested in the imaging engine for this new Q series. It seems far more capable than found in the P&S line, much more in line with an entry-level DLSR.

We may find that the Pentax engineers have once again out-done Sony with their own sensor. If that's the case, we may have more fun here than those here with apoplexy are predicting. I'm staying optimistic. Not that anyone cares ......

Man alive, I hope it is NOT the same sensor used in the HX9V ... that thing stinks. I tried that camera out about a month or so ago and all images looked like watercolors ... just horrible.

It's my bet Pentax had a sensor made by Sony to their specs. I can tell ya, if it is the same sensor as SonyHX9V we will be looking at very poor performance on an expensive little camera.

I hope that is not the case, as I would like this camera to be a hit for its intended market.

wll

pop4 · 06-23-2011, 07:54 PM

I've got absolutely no interest in getting the Pentax Q myself, but if the image quality is up to scratch, I can see the Pentax Q doing quite well in the Japanese domestic market, especially once the colour versions of the camera are released (judging from recent history, the colour versions are more a question of "when", rather than "if").

**bushwhacker09** · 06-23-2011, 07:56 PM

I disagree that this camera belongs to a pns category--much of the discussion here has been the natural attempt to determine just who Pentax had in mind as their target consumers. I doubt seriously any discussion here will dissuade or convince anyone as to whether or not to purchase. It is a discussion forum--respectfully, I find the complaints about the debate itself much more troubling than the overall negative tone of the discussions.

detritus · 06-23-2011, 08:39 PM

Originally posted by bushwhacker09

I disagree that this camera belongs to a pns category--much of the discussion here has been the natural attempt to determine just who Pentax had in mind as their target consumers. I doubt seriously any discussion here will dissuade or convince anyone as to whether or not to purchase. It is a discussion forum--respectfully, I find the complaints about the debate itself much more troubling than the overall negative tone of the discussions.

it has a PNS sensor
its sized like a PNS
its aesthetics is more like a PNS (albeit with DSLR type dials and functions)
it has fun digital filters (just like the recent DSLRs) that appeals to more casual / artistic shooters
the line-up includes "toy" lenses that may appeal to lomo / toy camera users

the only thing that doesn't fit imo, is the price. but that can change.

so why is it not a PNS category? a unique PNS, but a PNS nevertheless imo

UdonUdon · 06-23-2011, 09:04 PM

Unfortunately, you can't put it in the DSLR category either. Unless PF makes an EVIL category, this is the best place for it.

liukaitc · 06-23-2011, 09:16 PM

i like the looking a lot.
i just wonder why not at least use a 1/1.7 sensor. is that because pentax lacking the technology of making 1/1.7 sensor?
28-83 f2.8-4.5 is slow and for 300 bucks... make it faster that can compete lx5...ok???

**bushwhacker09** · 06-23-2011, 09:17 PM

Maybe it's the platypus of cameras, and will get PopPhoto to call it a "MILC" (not to be confused with MILF). Micro Interchangeable Lens Compact, btw. Sorta redundant, I guess...

I suppose my doubts about this camera center around my possibly impossible wish of a small-body camera that could somehow support my 43mm and 77mm lenses. Good luck Pentax--hope you've come up with a camera that finds it place on the shelves.

UdonUdon · 06-23-2011, 09:47 PM

Originally posted by liukaitc

i just wonder why not at least use a 1/1.7 sensor. is that because pentax lacking the technology of making 1/1.7 sensor?

Many camera sensors are made by a different brand than the camera body. For instance, the Q uses a sensor made by Sony, the k20d uses a sensor made by Samsung, and I think Fujifilm x100 uses a Sony sensor.

GordonZA · 06-23-2011, 10:22 PM

Personally I think this camera is going to sell very well!

More conservative traditional photographers found on this forum like myself are unlikely to buy it... I certainly have no use for it... however there are millions of people out there that would buy it for the same reason they bought a mobile phone with a camera... it is small and portable and has a huge advantage over a mobile phone in that it has the added benefit of using an interchangeable lens system.

Just my two cents worth...

Now Pentax where the F... is my 500mm F4 SDM ED IF..... (for K mount)

pop4 · 06-23-2011, 10:40 PM

Originally posted by bushwhacker09

Maybe it's the platypus of cameras, and will get PopPhoto to call it a "MILC" (not to be confused with MILF). Micro Interchangeable Lens Compact, btw. Sorta redundant, I guess...

I actually like the acronym MILC, but for "Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera".

I mean, the Q, and many of the Micro 4/3 cameras out there aren't exactly "EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder Interchangable Lens)" because they don't actually have Electronic Viewfinders, but can be categorised as MILCs.

Originally posted by GordonZA

Now Pentax where the F... is my 500mm F4 SDM ED IF..... (for K mount)

And I'm still waiting for something like a 250-600mm F5.6!

06-23-2011, 07:16 PM	#302
wll Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Mission Hills, CA Posts: 773	Oops ! Originally posted by twitch Hey, we agree Pentax is not going FF in the near future, that was the whole point of my post Sorry twitch, I read your post wrong, my apologies. wll

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

06-23-2011, 07:10 PM	#301
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	Originally posted by normhead This is really simple. a lot of Pentaxians for a lot of reasons don't want this camera to succeed, and are willing to say and do anything and everything that pops in to their heads to make sure that happens. I do think you have a point. Most are too quick to dismiss this camera out of hand without even seeing/handling it in person or trying it out in the flesh. Perhaps they are too set in their thinking on what should be the ideal camera (if there is such a thing) or maybe too entrenched to consider something new. I too might have pooh-poohed at such a camera a year ago but I can definitely see myself owning the Pentax Q.

06-23-2011, 07:20 PM	#303
bushwhacker09 Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Blue Ridge Parkway Posts: 67	Echoing junyo's feelings, IT'S OK FOR PEOPLE TO DISCUSS ISSUES-- it doesn't necessarily mean they want the camera to fail. I sincerely hope the camera flys off of the shelf. However, when you see so many people at rock concerts using a tiny P&S with the flash on trying to take pictures of the stage from 200 feet away, you might wonder if a tiny sensor interchangeable lens compact will have a huge market. I've used Nikon, Canon, and Pentax. I love Pentax lenses, but all of these companies have good products. I think someone of the negative comments stem only from hoping that Pentax might make something to give the big boys pause--most of us love and root for an underdog. At first glance, given the history of small sensors and the suggested MSRP, it is reasonable for people to question whether or not this camera will be a winner. Pentax could indeed have it right--a Fuji X100 with interchangeable lenses would look seriously like a full-sized camera. Personally, I was hoping for a smaller vacation camera than the K-7--good image quality in a relatively small body. Here's hoping the Q is it!

06-23-2011, 07:20 PM	#304
steve1307 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,130	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 slip in a spare memory card and take some pictures I remember reading somewhere that at Photokina (Sept 2010), the sample K-5's had their memory card door glued shut. I'm taking in a spare SD card anyway.

06-23-2011, 07:43 PM	#305
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,706	Originally posted by normhead This is really simple. a lot of Pentaxians for a lot of reasons don't want this camera to succeed, and are willing to say and do anything and everything that pops in to their heads to make sure that happens. As one reviewer said, they have the 645, they have no need to impress the bigger is better crowd, although we still have a considerable nattering from people who want full frame but won't go to 645, now they have something for people who want something small... I'm not going to allow myself to be prejudiced by all this nay saying. I'm going to go to the camera store with my lap top, snap off a few shots, snap off a few with my K20D from the same tripod, move the tripod outside and do it again, go home and look at the results. I get tired of hearing what a full frame or a 1/2.3 or a 645 or a whatever can and can't do. I want to see how the Pentax implementation of this works. After all, if you looked at how other camera manufacturers with a similar sensor worked, would you have ever looked at a K-5. That stuff is irrelevant. The mindless muttering of people who think they know something. When it comes out, I'll give it a fair shot. If others have their reason for dismissing it without seeing it.. fine, but really, what does that have to do with me? Not to give away too much about my age.. but , you wouldn't believe the crap I heard about the limitations of through the lens metering when the Spotmatic came out... a built in meter could never be as good as a $500 hand held meter, blah, blah, blah,... as I said, I want to see if I can make it work. As for the rest of these nay sayers..... what the heck is wrong with you? I mean, you might be right... and the guys who invested in the $500 hand light meters instead of paying an extra 50 bucks for the built in meter might have been right too... +1 to this. Though I have my doubts, I can see that its not targeted at the same market/performance as DSLR users, and can accept it for what it is (competitor to G13, LX5, GXR, etc) I can see myself using one if the APS-C version does not turn up. The problem here (ie. PF) is that we can have lots of insight as well as discussions, but sometimes its too DSLR orientated (driven by individual 'vision' of what a camera should be). This camera belongs to a pns category if this forum had one. So discussing that its sensor/performance is not DSLR like is really moot.

06-23-2011, 07:48 PM	#306
wll Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Mission Hills, CA Posts: 773	Originally posted by glanglois There was speculation someplace that it's the same sensor as found in the Sony travel zoom, DSC-HX9V if I have it right. That would make sense - the chip is new in 2011. But the image set you'll find for that camera is limited to JPEGs that went through the Sony imaging engine. They do not offer a raw option so there's little we can be certain of in regard to that chip. I'm more interested in the imaging engine for this new Q series. It seems far more capable than found in the P&S line, much more in line with an entry-level DLSR. We may find that the Pentax engineers have once again out-done Sony with their own sensor. If that's the case, we may have more fun here than those here with apoplexy are predicting. I'm staying optimistic. Not that anyone cares ...... Man alive, I hope it is NOT the same sensor used in the HX9V ... that thing stinks. I tried that camera out about a month or so ago and all images looked like watercolors ... just horrible. It's my bet Pentax had a sensor made by Sony to their specs. I can tell ya, if it is the same sensor as SonyHX9V we will be looking at very poor performance on an expensive little camera. I hope that is not the case, as I would like this camera to be a hit for its intended market. wll

06-23-2011, 07:54 PM	#307
pop4 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: YMML Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,879	I've got absolutely no interest in getting the Pentax Q myself, but if the image quality is up to scratch, I can see the Pentax Q doing quite well in the Japanese domestic market, especially once the colour versions of the camera are released (judging from recent history, the colour versions are more a question of "when", rather than "if").

06-23-2011, 07:56 PM	#308
bushwhacker09 Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Blue Ridge Parkway Posts: 67	I disagree that this camera belongs to a pns category--much of the discussion here has been the natural attempt to determine just who Pentax had in mind as their target consumers. I doubt seriously any discussion here will dissuade or convince anyone as to whether or not to purchase. It is a discussion forum--respectfully, I find the complaints about the debate itself much more troubling than the overall negative tone of the discussions.

06-23-2011, 08:39 PM	#309
detritus Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 54	Originally posted by bushwhacker09 I disagree that this camera belongs to a pns category--much of the discussion here has been the natural attempt to determine just who Pentax had in mind as their target consumers. I doubt seriously any discussion here will dissuade or convince anyone as to whether or not to purchase. It is a discussion forum--respectfully, I find the complaints about the debate itself much more troubling than the overall negative tone of the discussions. it has a PNS sensor its sized like a PNS its aesthetics is more like a PNS (albeit with DSLR type dials and functions) it has fun digital filters (just like the recent DSLRs) that appeals to more casual / artistic shooters the line-up includes "toy" lenses that may appeal to lomo / toy camera users the only thing that doesn't fit imo, is the price. but that can change. so why is it not a PNS category? a unique PNS, but a PNS nevertheless imo

06-23-2011, 09:04 PM	#310
UdonUdon Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Albums Posts: 90	Unfortunately, you can't put it in the DSLR category either. Unless PF makes an EVIL category, this is the best place for it.

06-23-2011, 09:16 PM	#311
liukaitc Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: New York Photos: Albums Posts: 1,008	i like the looking a lot. i just wonder why not at least use a 1/1.7 sensor. is that because pentax lacking the technology of making 1/1.7 sensor? 28-83 f2.8-4.5 is slow and for 300 bucks... make it faster that can compete lx5...ok???

06-23-2011, 09:17 PM	#312
bushwhacker09 Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Blue Ridge Parkway Posts: 67	Maybe it's the platypus of cameras, and will get PopPhoto to call it a "MILC" (not to be confused with MILF). Micro Interchangeable Lens Compact, btw. Sorta redundant, I guess... I suppose my doubts about this camera center around my possibly impossible wish of a small-body camera that could somehow support my 43mm and 77mm lenses. Good luck Pentax--hope you've come up with a camera that finds it place on the shelves.

06-23-2011, 09:47 PM	#313
UdonUdon Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Albums Posts: 90	Originally posted by liukaitc i just wonder why not at least use a 1/1.7 sensor. is that because pentax lacking the technology of making 1/1.7 sensor? Many camera sensors are made by a different brand than the camera body. For instance, the Q uses a sensor made by Sony, the k20d uses a sensor made by Samsung, and I think Fujifilm x100 uses a Sony sensor.

06-23-2011, 10:22 PM	#314
GordonZA Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Planet Earth Photos: Albums Posts: 351	Personally I think this camera is going to sell very well! More conservative traditional photographers found on this forum like myself are unlikely to buy it... I certainly have no use for it... however there are millions of people out there that would buy it for the same reason they bought a mobile phone with a camera... it is small and portable and has a huge advantage over a mobile phone in that it has the added benefit of using an interchangeable lens system. Just my two cents worth... Now Pentax where the F... is my 500mm F4 SDM ED IF..... (for K mount)

06-23-2011, 10:40 PM	#315
pop4 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: YMML Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,879	Originally posted by bushwhacker09 Maybe it's the platypus of cameras, and will get PopPhoto to call it a "MILC" (not to be confused with MILF). Micro Interchangeable Lens Compact, btw. Sorta redundant, I guess... I actually like the acronym MILC, but for "Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera". I mean, the Q, and many of the Micro 4/3 cameras out there aren't exactly "EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder Interchangable Lens)" because they don't actually have Electronic Viewfinders, but can be categorised as MILCs. Originally posted by GordonZA Now Pentax where the F... is my 500mm F4 SDM ED IF..... (for K mount) And I'm still waiting for something like a 250-600mm F5.6!