[ogl]

Prices. Officially.

???????/?????????/PENTAX Q | PENTAX
01 STANDARD PRIME Bundled (Body + 01 Lens = ￥69,800) (US$872.5)
02 STANDARD ZOOM￥24,800 (US$310)
03 FISH EYE￥9,800 (US$122.5)
04 TOY LENS WIDE￥5,980 (US$74.75)
05 TOY LENS TELE PHOTO￥5,980 (US$74.75)
Body + 01 Lens +02 Lens ￥89,800 (US$1115)

optical viewfinder accessory O-VF1 is asked for ￥19,800 (US$247.5)

The body + all lenses + VF = ~ US$1640.

---

Last edited by ogl; 06-24-2011 at 12:22 AM.

[the swede]

Why compare the price of Q products with others? Im sorry, but i dont understand the logic in that.

The Q system seems to be very special. Im convinced this will sell, alot!
Some DSLR user will buy it, many will not.
Then we have the true enthousiasts that will buy anything Pentax put out.
Then we have a mass market that will buy it, just because they can, and maybe because its a very good product. And its small, fun, qute and all that.

I can imagine this going well with the women born somewhere around 85', with good jobs and a steady income,
living in the big cities and such, with a moderate interest in photography.

And yes, i believe that Q is a very good product!

I will not buy it though

[detritus]

And yes, i believe that Q is a very good product!

I will not buy it though

agree... i may / may not buy it depending on the price eventually, but i can imagine a lot of pple buying it and enjoying it a lot.

[SteveM]

And yes, i believe that Q is a very good product!

Me too....

We should believe in God, not in product.

huh...???? I don't see how Q is going to save god. Anyways, can we get back on topic?

[ShowMeTheMoney]

For me personally, pricing is a bit of an issue for the Q - especially when compared to the GRDIII, the LX5 and the X-Z1. But that simply means it isn't for me. I'm one of those waiting for a serious mirrorless or a Pentax FF.

But I quite honestly don't get all the hate for the Q. Personally, I know more people who'd rather drop the $1640 for the Q than pay cheaper for a Kr + 18-135. For those people, toting around a DSLR to a club or to a party just doesn't make sense. The Q makes a hell of a lot more sense to them.

Though IMO, Pentax dropped the ball on the launch by not including samples from the two toy lenses and the fish-eye. IMO, those three lenses are the biggest selling point of this system.

$800+ $80x2 for the prime kit plus the two toy lenses might sound a bit too much - but considering that most people who use Holga's (at least here in the Philippines) are the people who willingly drop $300-400 on a Lomo LCA or 4 different Lomo cameras - instead of the spending the same amount on an LX5/G12 etc.. not to mention at least $100-200 per month buying and developing 120 film - which means for them, dropping $1000 for a digital Lomo 2 lens kit + fast normal prime, is probably a pretty good deal.

I do get what Pentax was trying to do here. Pricing is my only beef with it, but I think street price will probably be closer to advanced compacts. I have no issues with the sensor size at all. Personally, I think Pentax would make more money from the Q vs a DA 500mm f/4, or a DA 300mm f/2.8, but that's just me.

But with that said, if Pentax wants to be different, I'd rather they come out with something like a digital TLR, or a no-frills Full Frame - no movie mode, just 3fps, just 3 AF points - a Full Frame Nikon D40 if you will - except sized like the boxy film FFs of old and priced below USD $1500. If you're going to be quirky, I'd rather they do it in style. Personally, I'd rather drop the cash on those than a D700 or a 5d clone or even a D3x clone.

If I wanted a sports-shooting or wedding shooting Full Frame, NiKanon already have those. If Pentax came out with a D800 clone at the same time that the real D800 came out - how many people do you think would buy it? Only people with the FA Limiteds. For most people, they'd rather buy the Nikon or the Canon.

[adr1an]

We should believe in God, not in product.

What the ?? You are aware what the meaning of 'believe' is?? Otherwise... If you only 'believe' in God... then it explains a lot I guess... and may go some ways of explaining why concepts of technical Evolution are seemingly not to your personal tastes...

I'm now entirely convinced that your dislike for this system is based *purely* on Ideology and not based on substantive or personal experience or exposure...

Here's a refresher on what "believe" means....

be·lieve/biˈlēv/Verb

1. Accept (something) as true; feel sure of the truth of: "the superintendent believed Lancaster's story".

Either that - or your moving on to your next Straw Man.... on an ethereal level...

[juu]

God is only ONE - Holy Trinity. The rest are pagan's idols.

I liked this thread better when we discussed the Pentax Q rather than religious beliefs.

[adr1an]

I liked this thread better when we discussed the Pentax Q rather than religious beliefs.

Its almost as if they are one in the same for some it would seem abundantly clear

Will be good tomorrow - some of the Sydney folk will get their hands on one at PMA...

I look forward to hearing from people who have had actual personal experience and exposure to the Q contributing...

[RonHendriks1966]

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.

I took pictures with 645D, had a handfull of small cards with me to test several camera's.

[RonHendriks1966]

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").

Well you are looking for 250-600mm and the combo of this lens on Q gives you 3300mm in 35-mm filmsize and gives you the oppertunity to make descent shots of the moon!

Wouldn't that be cool?

[RonHendriks1966]

I do get what Pentax was trying to do here. Pricing is my only beef with it, but I think street price will probably be closer to advanced compacts. I have no issues with the sensor size at all. Personally, I think Pentax would make more money from the Q vs a DA 500mm f/4, or a DA 300mm f/2.8, but that's just me.

But with that said, if Pentax wants to be different, I'd rather they come out with something like a digital TLR, or a no-frills Full Frame - no movie mode, just 3fps, just 3 AF points - a Full Frame Nikon D40 if you will - except sized like the boxy film FFs of old and priced below USD $1500. If you're going to be quirky, I'd rather they do it in style. Personally, I'd rather drop the cash on those than a D700 or a 5d clone or even a D3x clone.

If I wanted a sports-shooting or wedding shooting Full Frame, NiKanon already have those. If Pentax came out with a D800 clone at the same time that the real D800 came out - how many people do you think would buy it? Only people with the FA Limiteds. For most people, they'd rather buy the Nikon or the Canon.

bouncing back from small sensor back to FF

Your points do make sence. I only think that Pentax is moving away from being a cheap brand, since there is no money to earn, unless your selling the items as cupcakes.

[gazonk]

Let me put this another way:

If the sensor was 20-25% bigger and the kit package came in at MSRP US$649, and all the other lenses and Pentax brand accessories came in combined with the camera kit at US$1,000, Pentax would have a runaway hit (so long as the IQ and low-light capacity was equal to or better than the S95, LX-5, etc. competition).

But what if the sensor is just as good as those other (also quite small!) sensors? The samples so far look promising.

[gazonk]

Your points do make sence. I only think that Pentax is moving away from being a cheap brand, since there is no money to earn, unless your selling the items as cupcakes.

Regardless of how much they sell of this, I think it may help them in their apparent (and very wise!) decision to move away from a cheap brand image. And they also have the 645D to prove that they're a "no compromises brand".

[oliver]

seems to me that most people's concerns about the Q are

(I) the price (which will come down after launch)

(II) the small size of the sensor and the potential negative impact that will have on image quality, particularly noise, DR and control of dof.

Perhaps we should all have a more open mind and just wait and see how this back illuminated sensor performs in reality - I suspect that it could be much better than many fear. The fact that they offer iso 6400 surely tells that they have confidence in its low light abilities.
The bokeh control option may also work well and solve concerns about dof.

Let's not kill this thing before its even hit the streets. It may actually be far more fun and perform better than many expect.

Oliver

[gazonk]

The fact that they offer iso 6400 surely tells that they have confidence in its low light abilities.

Well, they offer 6400 on their noisy compacts, so that's not so sure.
But while they were still up, the sized-down 6400 samples on imaging-resource looked much better than I had feared.