Pentax Q in the Flesh

Christine Tham · 08-15-2011, 12:56 PM

Mock, any ideas when we'll see the toy lenses? I am intrigued by these and hoping to buy a Q with the fish eye and the toy lenses.

I bought a Sony DSC-HX7V to play around with until the Q is released. Judging by the picture quality and the (surprising) usability of the HX7V, the Q should be a very fun camera.

Mock · 08-15-2011, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by Christine Tham

Mock, any ideas when we'll see the toy lenses? I am intrigued by these and hoping to buy a Q with the fish eye and the toy lenses.

I bought a Sony DSC-HX7V to play around with until the Q is released. Judging by the picture quality and the (surprising) usability of the HX7V, the Q should be a very fun camera.

As far as I know, they will be available when the camera launches (mid-late September in NA), I didn't think to ask.
The rep did mention that they are only bundling the camera with the 01 Prime lens in order to get people to buy other lenses - to think more creatively about what they're shooting. If that is actually the goal, then the lenses should be available out of the gate...I just wonder why nobody (AFAIK) has been able to try one yet.

Maybe they're not available, or maybe Pentax doesn't want leaked images taken with toy lenses representing the IQ of their camera before it's out?

PhilippeG · 08-15-2011, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by Mock

There were 100% crops from a centre area, and a corner area with text. The XZ-1 example was garbage (in the corner), the Q was legible. This is how I know the 8.5 is sharp in the corners...

Is the aperture comparable? I remember the XZ-1 is supposed to have a large aperture (for this kind of camera), so perhaps it's much better stopped down to a aperture similar to what the Q can offer?

Mock · 08-15-2011, 03:58 PM

Originally posted by PhilippeG

Is the aperture comparable? I remember the XZ-1 is supposed to have a large aperture (for this kind of camera), so perhaps it's much better stopped down to a aperture similar to what the Q can offer?

I tried it out just now, the maximum aperture on the XZ-1 at approximately 50mm equivalent is F/2. This is close enough to the F/1.9 of the 8.5mm lens for a pretty direct comparison.
I don't know what aperture value was used in the test scene.

ogl · 08-15-2011, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by Mock

They were printed samples, I have no reason to believe they were falsified. The Q wasn't given any obvious upper-hand. There were 100% crops from a centre area, and a corner area with text. The XZ-1 example was garbage (in the corner), the Q was legible. This is how I know the 8.5 is sharp in the corners...

Good marketing work, but this won't help...

Pentax Q is just gimmick. I think it will have not bad sale in Japan. For some time. And it's all. No any chances to compete with high-end compact cameras or with m4/3. It's new niche of P&S camera with interchangeable lenses. Rather odd and rather marginal.
I have no any interest to such products, because of small sensor, IQ and dust problems. It could be not bad product in other aspects, but it's three year late. IMO.

noons · 08-15-2011, 10:17 PM

If you have no interest, then why the CONSTANT spamming in this thread?

ogl · 08-15-2011, 11:02 PM

Originally posted by noons

If you have no interest, then why the CONSTANT spamming in this thread?

It's your opinion. I'm free to pass my opinion. I write very rarely here.

rawr · 08-15-2011, 11:34 PM

V1.0 firmware production Q's are probably already in the hands of dpreview, imaging resource and all the other reviewers around the world. I bet it won't be long now before real Q RAW and JPG's start to trickle out.

I certainly look forward to seeing how the new sensor performs.

johnmflores · 08-16-2011, 12:02 AM

Originally posted by ogl

It's your opinion. I'm free to pass my opinion. I write very rarely here.

76 posts in this thread alone, for a camera that doesn't interest you. I'd hate to see your participation in threads about cameras you like!

ogl · 08-16-2011, 12:24 AM

Originally posted by johnmflores

76 posts in this thread alone, for a camera that doesn't interest you. I'd hate to see your participation in threads about cameras you like!

No any sense to write about what I like. It's silly. I like it and it's all. No need any words.

It's more sense to criticize the product which weak and strange.

And it's rather strange to count my posts. By the way, if it's true - 76 posts is just 7.8% of all answers here.

zxaar · 08-16-2011, 01:49 AM

Originally posted by ogl

Good marketing work, but this won't help...

Pentax Q is just gimmick. I think it will have not bad sale in Japan. For some time. And it's all. No any chances to compete with high-end compact cameras or with m4/3. It's new niche of P&S camera with interchangeable lenses. Rather odd and rather marginal.
I have no any interest to such products, because of small sensor, IQ and dust problems. It could be not bad product in other aspects, but it's three year late. IMO.

Pentax Q is no more gimmick than m43 system or NEX system that promises to be compact are really not compact. With m43 the IQ is similar to Q system and it is not pocket-able (with more than 90% of its lenses).

With Q one has truly compact system with interchangeable lenses. Among all these mirrorless system Q is least gimmicky.

IQ of Q looks to be on par with m43 system's IQ, thanks to BL sensors of Sony.

---------------------------------
Here is something interesting:

gazonk · 08-16-2011, 04:06 AM

Originally posted by zxaar

IQ of Q looks to be on par with m43 system's IQ, thanks to BL sensors of Sony.

I sincerely doubt that it will be even close to m43. But if it's at least as good as e.g. LX5, it may still be a very good camera with some interesting lens options. But for my daughter who seeks a more serious camera than her Optio W80 but thinks DSLRs are too bulky, I'd still recommend m43 over Q. I don't think she will be satisfied with the Q, and so far it's very expensive too.

**Rondec** · 08-16-2011, 04:25 AM

Originally posted by gazonk

I sincerely doubt that it will be even close to m43. But if it's at least as good as e.g. LX5, it may still be a very good camera with some interesting lens options. But for my daughter who seeks a more serious camera than her Optio W80 but thinks DSLRs are too bulky, I'd still recommend m43 over Q. I don't think she will be satisfied with the Q, and so far it's very expensive too.

I am sure the price will drop quickly and also that Pentax will release a cheaper body in the same system within a few months.

falconeye · 08-16-2011, 05:36 AM

Originally posted by gazonk

I sincerely doubt that it will be even close to m43.
...
so far it's very expensive too.

We'll have to wait until the DxO measurements are done. I expect a performance closer to a LX5 too. However, m43 isn't impossible to beat with respect to dynamic range because of the much outdated sensor technology used by that system now. Low light noise will remain better with m43 though.

BTW, DxO indicative price for the Q is interesting: USD 250 !
-> DxOMark - Pentax Q

Addendum:
The Sony DSC-TX9 camera has an 1/2.3 Exmor R 12.3 MP ISO 125 sensor too and so I suspect it to be the same sensor. Using imaging-resource's comparometer ( http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM ) and comparing the TX9 and a PEN-EPL3 (12MP too), then the PEN roughly has a two stop advantage. From the tiny sensor alone, it should be 3 stops (crop 5.5 vs. crop 2). The Q may have 1 stop faster lenses (for a given size and budget) but it seems to remain about 1 stop advantage for the m43 systems.

zxaar · 08-16-2011, 06:00 AM

Originally posted by gazonk

I sincerely doubt that it will be even close to m43. But if it's at least as good as e.g. LX5, it may still be a very good camera with some interesting lens options. But for my daughter who seeks a more serious camera than her Optio W80 but thinks DSLRs are too bulky, I'd still recommend m43 over Q. I don't think she will be satisfied with the Q, and so far it's very expensive too.

I was responding to someone who was making statements without any base.

I also think it might be just short of m43 but m43 is no yard stick, it shall be good enough that its user is happy. Thats all counts in the end.

08-15-2011, 03:42 PM	#962
Mock Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Edmonton Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 314	Originally posted by Christine Tham Mock, any ideas when we'll see the toy lenses? I am intrigued by these and hoping to buy a Q with the fish eye and the toy lenses. I bought a Sony DSC-HX7V to play around with until the Q is released. Judging by the picture quality and the (surprising) usability of the HX7V, the Q should be a very fun camera. As far as I know, they will be available when the camera launches (mid-late September in NA), I didn't think to ask. The rep did mention that they are only bundling the camera with the 01 Prime lens in order to get people to buy other lenses - to think more creatively about what they're shooting. If that is actually the goal, then the lenses should be available out of the gate...I just wonder why nobody (AFAIK) has been able to try one yet. Maybe they're not available, or maybe Pentax doesn't want leaked images taken with toy lenses representing the IQ of their camera before it's out? Last edited by Mock; 08-15-2011 at 03:58 PM.

08-16-2011, 12:24 AM	#970
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by johnmflores 76 posts in this thread alone, for a camera that doesn't interest you. I'd hate to see your participation in threads about cameras you like! No any sense to write about what I like. It's silly. I like it and it's all. No need any words. It's more sense to criticize the product which weak and strange. And it's rather strange to count my posts. By the way, if it's true - 76 posts is just 7.8% of all answers here. Last edited by ogl; 08-16-2011 at 12:34 AM.

08-16-2011, 05:36 AM	#974
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by gazonk I sincerely doubt that it will be even close to m43. ... so far it's very expensive too. We'll have to wait until the DxO measurements are done. I expect a performance closer to a LX5 too. However, m43 isn't impossible to beat with respect to dynamic range because of the much outdated sensor technology used by that system now. Low light noise will remain better with m43 though. BTW, DxO indicative price for the Q is interesting: USD 250 ! -> DxOMark - Pentax Q Addendum: The Sony DSC-TX9 camera has an 1/2.3 Exmor R 12.3 MP ISO 125 sensor too and so I suspect it to be the same sensor. Using imaging-resource's comparometer ( http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM ) and comparing the TX9 and a PEN-EPL3 (12MP too), then the PEN roughly has a two stop advantage. From the tiny sensor alone, it should be 3 stops (crop 5.5 vs. crop 2). The Q may have 1 stop faster lenses (for a given size and budget) but it seems to remain about 1 stop advantage for the m43 systems. Last edited by falconeye; 08-16-2011 at 06:19 AM.

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

08-15-2011, 12:56 PM	#961
Christine Tham Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,269	Mock, any ideas when we'll see the toy lenses? I am intrigued by these and hoping to buy a Q with the fish eye and the toy lenses. I bought a Sony DSC-HX7V to play around with until the Q is released. Judging by the picture quality and the (surprising) usability of the HX7V, the Q should be a very fun camera.

08-15-2011, 03:42 PM	#963
PhilippeG Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Paris, France Photos: Gallery Posts: 345	Originally posted by Mock There were 100% crops from a centre area, and a corner area with text. The XZ-1 example was garbage (in the corner), the Q was legible. This is how I know the 8.5 is sharp in the corners... Is the aperture comparable? I remember the XZ-1 is supposed to have a large aperture (for this kind of camera), so perhaps it's much better stopped down to a aperture similar to what the Q can offer?

08-15-2011, 03:58 PM	#964
Mock Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Edmonton Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 314	Originally posted by PhilippeG Is the aperture comparable? I remember the XZ-1 is supposed to have a large aperture (for this kind of camera), so perhaps it's much better stopped down to a aperture similar to what the Q can offer? I tried it out just now, the maximum aperture on the XZ-1 at approximately 50mm equivalent is F/2. This is close enough to the F/1.9 of the 8.5mm lens for a pretty direct comparison. I don't know what aperture value was used in the test scene.

08-15-2011, 08:14 PM	#965
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Mock They were printed samples, I have no reason to believe they were falsified. The Q wasn't given any obvious upper-hand. There were 100% crops from a centre area, and a corner area with text. The XZ-1 example was garbage (in the corner), the Q was legible. This is how I know the 8.5 is sharp in the corners... Good marketing work, but this won't help... Pentax Q is just gimmick. I think it will have not bad sale in Japan. For some time. And it's all. No any chances to compete with high-end compact cameras or with m4/3. It's new niche of P&S camera with interchangeable lenses. Rather odd and rather marginal. I have no any interest to such products, because of small sensor, IQ and dust problems. It could be not bad product in other aspects, but it's three year late. IMO.

08-15-2011, 10:17 PM	#966
noons Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: WA, Australia Posts: 164	If you have no interest, then why the CONSTANT spamming in this thread?

08-15-2011, 11:02 PM	#967
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by noons If you have no interest, then why the CONSTANT spamming in this thread? It's your opinion. I'm free to pass my opinion. I write very rarely here.

08-15-2011, 11:34 PM	#968
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	V1.0 firmware production Q's are probably already in the hands of dpreview, imaging resource and all the other reviewers around the world. I bet it won't be long now before real Q RAW and JPG's start to trickle out. I certainly look forward to seeing how the new sensor performs.

08-16-2011, 12:02 AM	#969
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by ogl It's your opinion. I'm free to pass my opinion. I write very rarely here. 76 posts in this thread alone, for a camera that doesn't interest you. I'd hate to see your participation in threads about cameras you like!

08-16-2011, 01:49 AM	#971
zxaar Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: kobe/japan Posts: 510	Originally posted by ogl Good marketing work, but this won't help... Pentax Q is just gimmick. I think it will have not bad sale in Japan. For some time. And it's all. No any chances to compete with high-end compact cameras or with m4/3. It's new niche of P&S camera with interchangeable lenses. Rather odd and rather marginal. I have no any interest to such products, because of small sensor, IQ and dust problems. It could be not bad product in other aspects, but it's three year late. IMO. Pentax Q is no more gimmick than m43 system or NEX system that promises to be compact are really not compact. With m43 the IQ is similar to Q system and it is not pocket-able (with more than 90% of its lenses). With Q one has truly compact system with interchangeable lenses. Among all these mirrorless system Q is least gimmicky. IQ of Q looks to be on par with m43 system's IQ, thanks to BL sensors of Sony. --------------------------------- Here is something interesting:

08-16-2011, 04:06 AM	#972
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by zxaar IQ of Q looks to be on par with m43 system's IQ, thanks to BL sensors of Sony. I sincerely doubt that it will be even close to m43. But if it's at least as good as e.g. LX5, it may still be a very good camera with some interesting lens options. But for my daughter who seeks a more serious camera than her Optio W80 but thinks DSLRs are too bulky, I'd still recommend m43 over Q. I don't think she will be satisfied with the Q, and so far it's very expensive too.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-16-2011, 04:25 AM	#973
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,650	Originally posted by gazonk I sincerely doubt that it will be even close to m43. But if it's at least as good as e.g. LX5, it may still be a very good camera with some interesting lens options. But for my daughter who seeks a more serious camera than her Optio W80 but thinks DSLRs are too bulky, I'd still recommend m43 over Q. I don't think she will be satisfied with the Q, and so far it's very expensive too. I am sure the price will drop quickly and also that Pentax will release a cheaper body in the same system within a few months.

08-16-2011, 06:00 AM	#975
zxaar Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: kobe/japan Posts: 510	Originally posted by gazonk I sincerely doubt that it will be even close to m43. But if it's at least as good as e.g. LX5, it may still be a very good camera with some interesting lens options. But for my daughter who seeks a more serious camera than her Optio W80 but thinks DSLRs are too bulky, I'd still recommend m43 over Q. I don't think she will be satisfied with the Q, and so far it's very expensive too. I was responding to someone who was making statements without any base. I also think it might be just short of m43 but m43 is no yard stick, it shall be good enough that its user is happy. Thats all counts in the end.