[ogl]

I'm not sure my K200D could do much better, tbh. Resolution falls away fast with the K200D above 800 ISO.

Just try. And You will see. Use JPEG and in-camera NR.

[Christopher M.W.T]

I must say i'm pretty impressed with the Q's quality. Given all the talk about the tiny sensor and all the doom and gloom I think this camera is pretty impressive.

Reality is the public who will use it don't give a flying frack about pixel peeping and all the geeky stuff, they just want to take decent photos nice and easy.

In the words of William Shater "Get a life!"

[jsherman999]

...

Reality is the public who will use it don't give a flying frack about pixel peeping and all the geeky stuff, they just want to take decent photos nice and easy.

.


Agreed. Problem is they can do so for much less than $800-$1000... or if they want to pay that much, get more for their money elsewhere.


.

[Christopher M.W.T]

.


Agreed. Problem is they can do so for much less than $800-$1000... or if they want to pay that much, get more for their money elsewhere.


.

I think the camera will have a niche....I remember a number of people said a pretty pessimistic viewpoint on the Olympus pens.

[jsherman999]

I think the camera will have a niche....I remember a number of people said a pretty pessimistic viewpoint on the Olympus pens.

.


Really? I recall mostly favorable things being said about Pens, from all quarters.

I do agree that 'Q' will have a niche, always have. I just don't think it's underlying specs will sustain a long-lasting appeal within this niche, much less expand it's appeal beyond this niche. This suggests wasted resources on Pentax's part, wasted time, possibly a reputation hit.

Some combination of a significant price drop of the body, shoehorning another larger BLI sensor in there, and introduction of some really good lenses would improve things, IMO.

.

[Zygonyx]

.

...Some combination of a significant price drop of the body, shoehorning another larger BSI sensor in there, and introduction of some really good lenses would improve things, IMO.

.

Definitely, and my bet is that as the Q is already a relative success, you shouldn't be pessimistic.

[solar1]

Thanks. I did get the gist from the google translation, but you never know for sure.

[Aristophanes]

Really? I recall mostly favorable things being said about Pens, from all quarters.

With all due respect, most critique sites derive revenues from the same manufacturers who advertise. Read between the lines:

Olympus E-P1 Review: 38. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review

Some pretty stinging criticisms, like this one:

Poor focus, slow lens and jerky live view image make shooting in very low light frustrating, to say the least

In retrospect, the glow came off once people started using them. Great ergonomics and form factor (I bought one), but lots of criticisms about IQ. User reviews on Amazon:

Amazon.com: Olympus PEN E-P1 12.3 MP Micro Four Thirds Interchangeable Lens Digital Camera with 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 Zuiko Digital Zoom Lens (Silver Body/Black Lens): Camera & Photo

4 stars is not that good on Amazon. Lots of 3 star ratings. Check out the K-x and see how many lower stars relatively speaking:

Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Pentax K-x Digital SLR with 2.7-inch LCD and 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AL Lens (Black)

(with one review of 1 star from a guy who complains about the K-x not being able to handle non-k-mount lenses)

And from the EP-3 DP Review:

Ageing sensor means resolution and high ISO noise performance can't match the competition


Ouch!

Olympus PEN E-P3 Review: 24. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review

The EP-series has decent daily usage stats o Flickr, but look at the E-Volt stats right below:

Flickr: Camera Finder: Olympus

Now look at Pentax:

Flickr: Camera Finder: Pentax

The PEN series has not exactly stormed the ramparts of DSLR sales and use, likely due to IQ limitations for those spending over $500 on a camera where the quips from reviews I noted above come into play for more sophisticated consumers. The Q has its niche. It will depend on price. At $800 it has no value. At $500, probably quite a bit. IQ looks to be on par for a super-compact. I doubt the ILC component is worth the extra $300, but I do know that to see the market at work I'll look to Flickr in a year.

[zxaar]

.


Really? I recall mostly favorable things being said about Pens, from all quarters.

.

I do not agree. For one I am always been too negative to m43s so I can not say anything positive about them . Never liked middle of road solutions.

[jsherman999]

With all due respect, most critique sites derive revenues from the same manufacturers who advertise. Read between the lines:

...

In retrospect, the glow came off once people started using them. Great ergonomics and form factor (I bought one), but lots of criticisms about IQ. User reviews on Amazon:

...

The PEN series has not exactly stormed the ramparts of DSLR sales and use, likely due to IQ limitations for those spending over $500 on a camera where the quips from reviews I noted above come into play for more sophisticated consumers. The Q has its niche. It will depend on price. At $800 it has no value. At $500, probably quite a bit. IQ looks to be on par for a super-compact. I doubt the ILC component is worth the extra $300, but I do know that to see the market at work I'll look to Flickr in a year.

.

Seems you're right. I'll admit I haven't followed the PEN series that closely, mostly remembering a lot of hulaballoo among users being kicked up when the first couple models came out. That 'Glow Coming Off' is exactly what I fear will happen with the 'Q', for exactly the same reasons.


.

[rawr]

Another Q image from flickr user nkenji. This is using Pentax Q+smc PENTAX FA 645 400mm f5.6. This looks sharper than his other moon photo full size.

That guy has some great gear - a K-5, a 645D, a Q, and some very exotic big glass.

[Art Vandelay II]

And from the EP-3 DP Review:

Ageing sensor means resolution and high ISO noise performance can't match the competition


Ouch!

It's funny how actual photographers are usually quite taken with the PEN's and measurbator sites like DPR always have issues. I borrowed a friends E-P3 and shot with it for a day. It really is an amazing little camera. Fastest AF I've ever used (blows away my old K-7 as well as my even older D200) and perfectly usable ISO1600. 3 years old or not it's certainly a better sensor than the Q has. Keep in mind a person can buy an E-PM1 with that same sensor and AF speed + either their choice of the new Panasonic 14-42mm pancake zoom, Oly 17mm f/2.8, or Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 all for about the same price as the Q with just the 8.5mm prime. I'd obviously love to see Olympus get their hands on the sensor from the G3, but until then the E-P3 is a perfectly capable camera.

The EP-series has decent daily usage stats o Flickr, but look at the E-Volt stats right below.

The PEN series has not exactly stormed the ramparts of DSLR sales and use, likely due to IQ limitations for those spending over $500 on a camera where the quips from reviews I noted above come into play for more sophisticated consumers. The Q has its niche. It will depend on price. At $800 it has no value. At $500, probably quite a bit. IQ looks to be on par for a super-compact. I doubt the ILC component is worth the extra $300, but I do know that to see the market at work I'll look to Flickr in a year.

I wish we had usage stats in the rest of the world like Japan has. Flickr and Amazon sales ranks are about the best we have in North America, but neither are exactly what I would call evidence. As far as mirrorless goes though, even Nikon is starting to feel pressure it seems:

Nikon losing market share in Japan | Nikon Rumors

Canon Clinging to Mirrors Means Opportunity for Sony Cameras - Bloomberg

"With the lack of mirrorless solutions, Canon and Nikon’s combined share in Japan has fallen by 35%, while Sony’s share has doubled."

I just hope Pentax has some other mirrorless solution up their sleeve to compete, because while the Q may be a cute little niche product, does anyone seriously think it can compete with something like a GF-3 or NEX5n? Nikon's 2.7x crop system will be an even bigger threat IMO. It should have better IQ then the Q in an similarly sized package. Aside from people that want to take pics of craters on the moon (which a 2.7x crop can also do quite nicely) why would anyone choose the Q over the Nikon that's coming on the 21st?

[Aristophanes]

That 'Glow Coming Off' is exactly what I fear will happen with the 'Q', for exactly the same reasons.

The bang for a buck on the Q seems to be an issue, I agree. The premium people are willing to pay for small form factors is overrated IMO, at least in North America. Japan and Europe have their own norms.

[Wheatfield]

.


That 'Glow Coming Off' is exactly what I fear will happen with the 'Q', for exactly the same reasons.


.

Considering how it's been dismissed as junk even before people had a chance to touch the thing, I don't see much glow coming off the thing after it hits the market. It really only has one direction to go, since it is starting at the bottom of the respect pile already.

[jsherman999]

Considering how it's been dismissed as junk even before people had a chance to touch the thing, I don't see much glow coming off the thing after it hits the market. It really only has one direction to go, since it is starting at the bottom of the respect pile already.

Wasn't really talking about the collective forum verdict, I was mainly referring to the glow coming off for buyers of the 'Q', once they see the meh images for a while and realize that the use cases where only a 'Q' works, while a small larger-sensored mirrorless or even a K-x sized DSLR would not have, are fewer than they thought.

By the way, has the 'glow' come off dpreview for you? Thought you left these parts a little while back?


.