Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-25-2011, 10:54 AM   #46
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by robbie_d Quote
As we stand today you can get the GF3 with the 14mm pancake for 419. Please tell me where I can get the Q plus prime for 469.
Well i ain't looking at pounds here.
The GF3 + 14mm is here €549,- Panasonic DMC-GF3 Zwart + 14mm Pancake - Digitale Camera's bij CameraNU.nl
The Q + lens 1 is here €599 https://www.digimaxx.nl/pagina/home.html they don't have them on the web but it's the local store where i live and they have called to there supplier and calculated a price for me.

So for me at least the price difference is €50.

About the canon G12 and the rest of your comment.
All what i'm trying to say is that you must compare like to like, the Q is a CSC so it isn't fair to compare it to a compact camera or to a DSLR because they are different.
You for example don't compare a Ducati, Audi and Landrover either, while they are all transportation to bring you from point A to B.


Last edited by Anvh; 09-25-2011 at 11:03 AM.
09-25-2011, 10:57 AM   #47
New Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Shropshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 15
QuoteOriginally posted by howieb101 Quote
To those who keep bagging the IQ. Please have a look at some of the comparison charts at:
Hands on: Pentax Q review | News | TechRadar UK.

Second to Sony C3 for dynamic range in Raw. Well above Canon G12 and Panasonic GF3.
Second = for dynamic range in jpeg.
Second until iso 1600 for signal to noise ratio in raw.
First until iso 1000 for signal to noise ratio in jpeg.

Okay, these are charts only. But it certainly doesn't indicate the poor IQ that some people seem to think it has.

I'm hoping they bring out a wide angle zoom or prime, the price drops a bit and then I might consider it.

HowieB
The charts do indeed look good.

However, after a day's shooting I don't go home and look at charts, I look at photos. And the photos I've seen so far haven't delivered what the charts have promised.

Perhaps the conclusion we draw is that there is more to image quality than signal to noise ratio and dynamic range.
09-25-2011, 10:59 AM   #48
New Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Shropshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 15
QuoteOriginally posted by howieb101 Quote
To those who keep bagging the IQ. Please have a look at some of the comparison charts at:
Hands on: Pentax Q review | News | TechRadar UK.

Second to Sony C3 for dynamic range in Raw. Well above Canon G12 and Panasonic GF3.
Second = for dynamic range in jpeg.
Second until iso 1600 for signal to noise ratio in raw.
First until iso 1000 for signal to noise ratio in jpeg.

Okay, these are charts only. But it certainly doesn't indicate the poor IQ that some people seem to think it has.

I'm hoping they bring out a wide angle zoom or prime, the price drops a bit and then I might consider it.

HowieB
I also don't personally feel it's a case of poor IQ, more 'not worth the money' IQ.
09-25-2011, 11:01 AM   #49
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by robbie_d Quote
I also don't personally feel it's a case of poor IQ, more 'not worth the money' IQ.
Only the Q or do you have the same problem for example with the GF3 + 14mm?

09-25-2011, 01:28 PM   #50
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
QuoteOriginally posted by robbie_d Quote
I also don't personally feel it's a case of poor IQ, more 'not worth the money' IQ.
Exactly what I was just going to say. As I said in the nazi Forum repeatedly I think the IQ of the Exmor R is pretty damn good for a sensor of that size in optimal conditions. But 'pretty damn good' is being judged against previous sensors for P&S cameras. I actually bought my latest P&S because it had the Exmor R sensor and was a good improvement on me last P&S.

I wouldn't buy a 600 camera with a tiny Exmor R sensor though
09-25-2011, 01:31 PM   #51
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Yes well for some reason, you have decided to be my internet troll, so anything you say is suspect, based on this decision.

How so? A Rolex is just a fancy watch, it doesn't tell time any better than a 50 dollar Timex. A Rolls is just a car, it won't get you where you are going any better than a Subaru.
In both instances, it is fit and finish and choice of materials that the customer will see and feel that places the product a cut above the norm.
In fact, the Subaru is probably worlds ahead in terms of reliability.
But people still pitch out money for the stuff that feels nice in the hands.
It's something that you seem unable to understand, so we should probably leave it at that until you have a few more things figured out.
One of the things I did notice about the Q was that it had a very quality "feel".
If people put that ahead of some undefined IQ, then that's what they will do.
And people will do that very thing. If one is human, then one will understand this concept.
If one is not, then they will not.
It's not a hard concept. You either get it or you don't, you are either human, or you are something else.
I can see why you are one of the most unpopular members on here. Several people warned me, but the rest of the forum is great.
09-25-2011, 02:01 PM   #52
New Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 16
How about the Q's shutter lag? If it lacks, I see a very nice option for quick street photography. Because with some compacts it's a pain...
09-25-2011, 04:28 PM   #53
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,043
QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
I can see why you are one of the most unpopular members on here. Several people warned me, but the rest of the forum is great.

OOOOOOOO WOOOOOOO an ad hominem attack.
I love having my own personal troll.

09-25-2011, 04:39 PM   #54
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
Exactly what I was just going to say. As I said in the nazi Forum repeatedly I think the IQ of the Exmor R is pretty damn good for a sensor of that size in optimal conditions. But 'pretty damn good' is being judged against previous sensors for P&S cameras. I actually bought my latest P&S because it had the Exmor R sensor and was a good improvement on me last P&S.

I wouldn't buy a 600 camera with a tiny Exmor R sensor though
Do you keep saying it just to remind yourself not to buy a Q
09-25-2011, 05:02 PM   #55
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Do you keep saying it just to remind yourself not to buy a Q
Absolutely!!

Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!!!

"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"
"I must not buy a Q!"

Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!!!

09-25-2011, 05:07 PM   #56
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
OOOOOOOO WOOOOOOO an ad hominem attack.
I love having my own personal troll.
Irony
09-25-2011, 06:38 PM   #57
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,043
QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
Wow, I had no idea that you were that sensitive.
I wasn't mocking you with a gif, I was just pointing out that I thought your response was worthy of a five year old.
In the same spirit of mutual respect for my reasoning that your little gif had.
Sometimes even trolls get weepy.
09-25-2011, 08:21 PM   #58
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote

How so? A Rolex is just a fancy watch, it doesn't tell time any better than a 50 dollar Timex. A Rolls is just a car, it won't get you where you are going any better than a Subaru.
In both instances, it is fit and finish and choice of materials that the customer will see and feel that places the product a cut above the norm.

Not really, though. Rolex & Rolls sell because their buyers want to establish status. Good fit & finish go into those products, sure, but that only serves to offer a camouflage and a convenient excuse for the real reason they're purchased: status.

Lowering the price of those goods would actually be counter-productive, because their buyers want them to be expensive. See this concept.

The equivalent for this in the photography world is Leica. Pentax is not Leica, 'Q' is not a Leica product, not a Veblan good, so, largely, maybe, fail.

QuoteQuote:
It's not a hard concept. You either get it or you don't..

Correct.


.

Last edited by jsherman999; 09-25-2011 at 08:27 PM.
09-25-2011, 08:35 PM   #59
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Wow, I had no idea that you were that sensitive.
I wasn't mocking you with a gif, I was just pointing out that I thought your response was worthy of a five year old.
In the same spirit of mutual respect for my reasoning that your little gif had.
Sometimes even trolls get weepy.
More irony. Judging by your responses I must be getting under your skin. Not intentional of course and if forum life is that uncomfortable I would advise taking deep breaths and counting from 1 to 10. Usually works. If not getting out there and taking photographs is a good therapy too. Let us know when you've got a set together. xxx

Last edited by Smeggypants; 09-25-2011 at 08:38 PM. Reason: Not enough ISO
09-25-2011, 08:41 PM   #60
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Not really, though. Rolex & Rolls sell because their buyers want to establish status. Good fit & finish go into those products, sure, but that only serves to offer a camouflage and a convenient excuse for the real reason they're purchased: status.

Lowering the price of those goods would actually be counter-productive, because their buyers want them to be expensive. See this concept.

The equivalent for this in the photography world is Leica. Pentax is not Leica, 'Q' is not a Leica product, not a Veblan good, so, largely, maybe, fail.




Correct.


.

Well Said!!


Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, kit, lens, mirrorless, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, price, q10, q7, viewfinder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax SMC 200mm A* f2.8 Pricing advice LennyBloke Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 09-08-2011 06:56 AM
Pentax K7 Pricing A.M.92 Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 01-22-2011 10:19 AM
USA Pricing vs Canada Pricing Babbs Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 11-18-2010 05:27 PM
no pricing of pentax lens in B&H catalog cyy47 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 11-05-2009 09:19 PM
Help pricing a Pentax H2 Stephanie Pentax Film SLR Discussion 14 11-05-2009 11:46 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:34 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top