Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: What is your position on Q now?
I have Q already. 1715.74%
I have another camera of similar size/performance. 76.48%
I want no mirrorless camera at all. 1211.11%
I'd buy Q for lower price. 3229.63%
I'd buy Q sucessor with better performance. 87.41%
I miss macro lens for Q system.   00%
I miss better telephoto lens for Q system.   00%
I miss better wide angle lens with Q system. 21.85%
I want a superzoom lens with Q. 10.93%
Another reason. 2926.85%
Voters: 108. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-10-2012, 12:40 PM   #31
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
QuoteOriginally posted by wlachan Quote
Japan is a gadget country and people buy anything the latest. However, the success of any products do not depend on initial burst but long term worldwide sales too. The Q? Not cute financially.
If I am not mistaken the Q was designed for the Asian market soooo it would seem to be a success to me. Like I said not the camera for me (the new Fuji is much closer but will cost far more as well)

For what it is the Q is a good camera and certainly fits with the be different label

and yep japan is a Gadget mad country, over the years i was in CE there were many items marketed there that would never have sold here. many were better than the stuff sold here for that matter.

01-10-2012, 12:52 PM   #32
Veteran Member
wlachan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,626
Designed for Asian markets? How come they are being marketed outside Asia then? The Q is overpriced for its image quality. They overbuilt the body but underbuilt the lenses. If the Q lived in its own realm, it may mean something. Unfortunately, it has to compete and very few consumers really care or even aware of its existence. Sorry but it simply fails from both technical and financial POV. If it came 5 years earlier, it might have a chance with its tiny sensor. Today? It makes no sense.
01-10-2012, 12:57 PM   #33
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
once again just because you aren't the target customer doesn't mean it's not a valid product. no-one is saying you have to buy one. I've seen a lot of different camera designs come and go over the years (and sold a good number of them) one thing sales taught me is not to project what i want onto the customer. BTW it has started to come down in price now that some of the initial cost recovery has happened

By the overpriced standard then leica should be scrapped
01-11-2012, 11:55 AM   #34
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Prague
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,198
Original Poster
Today I found out that one of my friends bought the Q, but told no one. As if he was ashamed for having this little camera. It sort of makes sense, Big caneras are for showing, small ones for hiding.
I'm looking forward for trying it out...

01-11-2012, 02:21 PM   #35
Pentaxian
mattb123's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Colorado High Country
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 7,614
QuoteOriginally posted by elho_cid Quote
Today I found out that one of my friends bought the Q, but told no one. As if he was ashamed for having this little camera. It sort of makes sense, Big caneras are for showing, small ones for hiding.
I'm looking forward for trying it out...
Seems like there's a "Friends don't let friends.." joke in there somewhere.
01-11-2012, 03:04 PM   #36
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,157
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
once again just because you aren't the target customer doesn't mean it's not a valid product. no-one is saying you have to buy one. I've seen a lot of different camera designs come and go over the years (and sold a good number of them) one thing sales taught me is not to project what i want onto the customer. BTW it has started to come down in price now that some of the initial cost recovery has happened

By the overpriced standard then leica should be scrapped
The only real objection that anyone can come up with regarding the Q is the price. The IQ is fine, nothing to complain about, and the lens selection, while not especially there yet, should be fleshed out, although I'm not so sure how much fleshing out the line needs, even now.
The price is a function of the build quality, which is on par with the best cameras out there (if they could only have done the same good build with the K5).
Now, it is debatable that it is somewhat silly to put that much quality into what is, for many people, a disposable product, but the quality is still there, and it does cost.
And lets face it, there is a certain amount of avarice on the part of Hoya wanting to make their investment back on what they had to know was going to be a fairly low volume seller.
01-11-2012, 08:05 PM   #37
JHD
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,407
I looked at the Q, along with the Fuji X-10 and a number of other m4/3 cameras. But for me the camera that stood out among them all was the Nikon 1 V1. The thing that appealed to me was the very fast and responsive 10 FPS AFC with its huge buffer and fast data transfer rates.
01-11-2012, 11:12 PM   #38
Veteran Member
Anton Magus's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Durban, South Africa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 355
People buy a camera for a particular purpose. If you want photographs with great IQ then you buy a DSLR. If you want something convenient to carry to take the odd snap-shot you buy a small P&S. If you want something more general purpose there are a whole range of super-zooms to choose from. With the Q you get the IQ of a P&S with the price tag of a DSLR. Its a little camera with no real market niche besides novelty value and an absurd build quality. If you look just at IQ and physical size, then the Q is competing against a whole range of far less expensive cameras. If you look just at price, then there is a wide range of cameras giving better IQ and overall versatility for similar or less money.

01-12-2012, 01:35 AM   #39
Loyal Site Supporter
i_trax's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Perth Western Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,119
I do now!

QuoteOriginally posted by elho_cid Quote
I haven't bought the Q yet, despite I really think it is a good idea and concept. I have my reasons. What are yours, if you haven't bought Q yet?
Hi, I just menaged to get one ( with 01+02) for AU$445.01
how can I move my vote from:
I'd buy Q for lower price
into:
I have Q already.

well, it's on it's way
kind regards
jack
01-12-2012, 06:34 AM   #40
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,157
QuoteOriginally posted by Anton Magus Quote
Its a little camera with no real market niche
It does seem to be selling, albeit not in large numbers, so it's found a niche somewhere. Perhaps there are more people out there who like well made cameras more than plastic feeling junk than you believe.
Sometimes a manufacturer has to try to make a niche in the market. The other option is to put out me too products that get lost in the sea of other me too products.
01-12-2012, 06:55 AM   #41
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
It does seem to be selling, albeit not in large numbers, so it's found a niche somewhere. Perhaps there are more people out there who like well made cameras more than plastic feeling junk than you believe.
Sometimes a manufacturer has to try to make a niche in the market. The other option is to put out me too products that get lost in the sea of other me too products.
Exactly. Every time there is a release of something more unique there are a slew of people who project their needs onto it and determine that since they can't see using it it must be a complete failure and it was dumb to release it. If it is selling though apparently there are others who have different priorities

I completely understand the niche of the Q . It's not for me for the most part but My wife has expressed interest

I do think original pricing was a little high, but that will change as well
01-12-2012, 09:30 AM   #42
Pentaxian
ivoire's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: chicago burbs
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,368
I saw someones signature here once with something like "buy, do, get what makes you happy.... anything less will make you unhappy". If the Q does it for you, get one. It is convenient and flexible and produces nice images
01-12-2012, 10:09 AM   #43
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,868
I have an Espio W 90, water proof, shock-proof etc. as a mirror-less camera, and I have my k20d. The Q lacks the rugged take anywhere qualities of my Espio, and it lacks the IQ of my K20D, so where exactly does it fit in? I mean really, my Espio goes in the pocket of my cargo pants when I'm hiking, canoeing, when boating I leave it out in the boat ready to grab. There's a float on it in case I dump. I could duct tape it to my White Water helmet if I wanted to and make "on the go videos". The incredible versatility of this camera means, it goes everywhere. At 12.1 Mp it images are easily printable up to 23x33.

So someone like me just won't be able to find a place for a third camera body in between the two.

So I'd sugest, the Q is a great camera for someone who doesn't own an APS-c of FF DSLR.. who isn't very active in terms of needing a shockproof or waterproof camera... but as most of this forum is DSLR users, I don't really see the attraction for people here. To me, there are two classes of pictures... good enough quality, for a spectacular or hard to photograph scene where the pure dynamic of the picture will make up for the lack of IQ, and beauty that can be captured but needs to be rendered perfectly for full effect. The Q doesn't fit precisely into either category for me. If you gave me one, I'm not sure if I'd even use it. (If someone wants to give me one, I'll report back here with the results.)
01-12-2012, 02:02 PM   #44
Pentaxian
Clicker's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,241
Well i'm going to get one shortly because i don't want to change my avatar and before Feb 14 2012...i think that's a good reason...eh?!?
01-12-2012, 02:05 PM   #45
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,157
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I have an Espio W 90, water proof, shock-proof etc. as a mirror-less camera, and I have my k20d. The Q lacks the rugged take anywhere qualities of my Espio, and it lacks the IQ of my K20D, so where exactly does it fit in? I mean really, my Espio goes in the pocket of my cargo pants when I'm hiking, canoeing, when boating I leave it out in the boat ready to grab. There's a float on it in case I dump. I could duct tape it to my White Water helmet if I wanted to and make "on the go videos". The incredible versatility of this camera means, it goes everywhere. At 12.1 Mp it images are easily printable up to 23x33.

So someone like me just won't be able to find a place for a third camera body in between the two.

So I'd sugest, the Q is a great camera for someone who doesn't own an APS-c of FF DSLR.. who isn't very active in terms of needing a shockproof or waterproof camera... but as most of this forum is DSLR users, I don't really see the attraction for people here. To me, there are two classes of pictures... good enough quality, for a spectacular or hard to photograph scene where the pure dynamic of the picture will make up for the lack of IQ, and beauty that can be captured but needs to be rendered perfectly for full effect. The Q doesn't fit precisely into either category for me. If you gave me one, I'm not sure if I'd even use it. (If someone wants to give me one, I'll report back here with the results.)
People get too hung up on technical.
What lack of IQ, for example? If all a person does is blow their images up to pixel level and look for flaws, there isn't a camera/lens combination made that will keep them happy.
OTOH, if they want to make nice pictures, the IQ of any camera made in the last 5 years (including the Q) is up to the task.
Not seeing the attraction in a camera can be said about any camera, it doesn't matter which one it is. People don't like the K5 because it is too small, they don't like the pro line Canons or Nikos because they are too big. The cheap Canons are plasticy, the Nikons are noisy.
No one is going to be 100% happy.
I've got a DSLR, it's a nice camera. In fact it's a really nice camera. I've got dozens of lenses for it. Nice lenses, some really nice lenses.
But I don't take it with me everywhere I go.
The Q lives in my jacket pocket with the standard lens.
I could probably live comfortably with any little camera, but the interchangeable lens option of the Q is very appealing to me. Right now, the Q has something in common with both the APS-C line and the 645 line: The lens selection hasn't been fleshed out yet. When (if) Ricoh expands the lens line, the Q is going to be a very appealing system camera.
The interchangeable lens option gives the Q tremendous potential, much more than any fixed lens P&S, providing Ricoh gets behind the thing.
The IQ is just fine, BTW. Pretty much on par with the K20, and has more or less the same high ISO limitation as the K20 (don't shoot above 1600 unless you can live with a little noise).
People who say the IQ of the Q isn't up to the K20 haven't made a direct comparison, they are just repeating the mantra that because the sensor is small, the IQ can't possibly be any good that people were saying before the Q had been released.
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, mirrorless, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q10, q7
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:15 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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