Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-03-2012, 01:41 PM   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
Has the Q taken the digital photography world by storm? No -- but Pentax, IMO, hasn't marketed it even close to effectively. Effective marketing emphasizes the strengths of the product, and the introduction (in system lenses and promotion) centered around small and build quality. Though those are the most obvious features, they are not really that relevant as a strong points when judging the camera's utility as a photographic tool. An outside-of-the-box concept needs an appropriately outside-of-the-box marketing campaign to explain the merits to those mired in "conventional wisdom". It seems like it will be up to Q users to illustrate the camera's real strengths. . .and that will come in time, IMO.

Ultimate success or failure is totally relative though. IIRC, Pentax projected 24,000 units per month as a production estimate for the Q. That's only 288K units for the first year -- not that high a bar to get over when you consider 110 million digital camera sold in 2010. . . If Pentax sells anywhere near the production numbers, then it'll be a success for Pentax, regardless of forum or photosharing site representation or perception.

IMO, the Q will show some serious chops as a specialty camera for super tele and macro shooting. It will also come into it's own as a street shooter, candid shooter, and for photojournalism. Doubt all of this if you will, but I think that the once people start really using it, the camera will prove itself.

I for one, am fairly inactive with photography during the winter since I mainly shoot birds and small critters. I've only had a few real opportunities to use the Q in the field, so have relatively little to post -- this will change in a few months.

The real impact of the Q would be more fairly assessed when its anniversary date rolls around this fall.

Scott

02-03-2012, 01:57 PM   #17
Forum Member
Paolo.Bosetti's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Stanford, CA, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 60
QuoteOriginally posted by Clicker Quote
You know i use Flickr as an unscientific gauge for model popularity...i don't see any Pentax Q postings...none...nada that said i'm really too lazy to change my avatar so at some point i'm either going to show some love and get it or change my avatar
Really? the sole Pentax Q group passed 3000 pictures. But what it really matters is that many of them are really nice pictures, IMHO. I have the Q, it's always with me, and I'm enjoying taking every pictures with it, so much that I don't use my Leica X1 anymore (considering selling it) and I'm rarely using my k-5 (although I'm still enjoying it for the amazing IQ and for the great lenses I can use).

About the K-01, I'm also considering to buy it as a second body beside the k-5. I like it. Will it cannibalize the Q? dunno, but what about the huge lineup of entry level cams from Canikon?
02-03-2012, 02:08 PM   #18
Veteran Member
ihasa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: West Midlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,054
I don't think the K-01 has any real bearing on the Q. The Q is a fun little toy and takes nice pictures, and I hope they sell loads of them... but no K-mount = irrelevant (to me!)
02-03-2012, 02:21 PM   #19
Pentaxian
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,235
Like many others here, I had written off the Q as a camera for those who like small, pricey, fashionable things, regardless of functionality or even of what others may think of them. An upmarket collector's item, perhaps.

Yesterday, while I was buying a lens case at one of the better local stores (they sell a lot of Canon, Nikon and Leica cameras, as well as selling and servicing professional optical gear like surveying instruments etc) I spotted the Q on the shelves. Again, like many others, I was struck by just how small it is in comparison even to P&S cameras, and how well-built it is.

What really fascinated me, though, was the salesperson's comment about it: he told me that people with high-end Nikons and Canons were his biggest market for the Q, because they weren't concerned about things like high-ISO performance. What they wanted was a well-made, pocketable camera with good IQ for times when they're not using their large professional gear. Clearly, that's not a huge market, but it is a discerning niche market, and one that is not so concerned about price. It's also one that isn't just influenced by fashion or even a collector's urges.

Now, he could have just been spinning a line, but I don't think so. The firm is far and away the longest-established optical firm around here, and isn't into pressure sales. It's run by a chap I taught engineering to, many years ago, and who's the latest in a long family line of technical people managing the business. They know cameras and optics - the salesperson knew about the F*300 I brought in with me. The business is, in short, old-school, but successful, because they know their markets, and they know about their line of business.

I'm relating all this, because the experience made me look at the Q with different eyes. I'm not sure I'd be in the market for one, but I'm neither quite so ready to dismiss it, anymore. If they brought out a variant with a larger sensor, I would probably give it serious consideration, but even as it is, a secondhand one might make a good buy in a year or so.

02-03-2012, 02:42 PM   #20
Pentaxian
Clicker's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,241
QuoteOriginally posted by Paolo.Bosetti Quote
Really? the sole Pentax Q group passed 3000 pictures. But what it really matters is that many of them are really nice pictures, IMHO. I have the Q, it's always with me, and I'm enjoying taking every pictures with it, so much that I don't use my Leica X1 anymore (considering selling it) and I'm rarely using my k-5 (although I'm still enjoying it for the amazing IQ and for the great lenses I can use).

About the K-01, I'm also considering to buy it as a second body beside the k-5. I like it. Will it cannibalize the Q? dunno, but what about the huge lineup of entry level cams from Canikon?

maybe i didn't look hard enough but i used the camera finder and nothing turned up
02-03-2012, 03:39 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 361
I have completely changed my mind about the Q, now that the K-01 has been announced.

It seems Pentax have now got two solutions for the Mirrorless craze. While initially the Q seemed like too small a sensor, for which their was no market it has without doubt held up well with images, everyone who comments on the image quality is pleasantly surprised, and all the reviews are quite favourable. And it's most important aspect is it's ridiculously small size for an EVIL. The price was initially too high, but has come down a bit now.

So Pentax achieved a new lens mount, small size and decent image quality with the Q. The new K-01 now gives a APS-C, in about as small a size as possible while retaining K mount compatibility and will of course also achieve decent image quality. So I think Pentax have done both what was needed, small size and new mount mirrorless Q, and K-01 with K-Mount.

I'm not particularly interested in buying either of them, but if they want to do a mirrorless fullframe (with OVF) or perhaps a new K-3, well that was what I'm after anyway, but meantime Pentax now have two solutions to many of the criticisms I see in the mirrorless world. Which is size, and also lens compatibility.
02-03-2012, 03:50 PM   #22
Pentaxian
Clicker's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,241
My philosophy is to keep an "open mind" and when i apply it to technology i dive in when i think i know what it's all about.
02-04-2012, 06:47 PM   #23
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta Canada
Posts: 550
I am not sure that either the Q or the K01 will be successful in the market. I have the Q and it is a fun little camera but was priced too high. The K01 seems to be specd too low (no EVF and articulated screen). Adding a good EVF and articulated screen for higher price could have enhanced the overally market appeal without limiting the appeal to their target markets.

Dale

02-04-2012, 07:00 PM   #24
Pentaxian
Clicker's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,241
We just need to start putting out some good images/work with the Q and show what it can do. Let the work/images decide if it is what it is.

There's already some good stuff being made, it just needs to be seen by the skeptics.
02-04-2012, 08:24 PM   #25
Senior Member
drugal's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Detroit suburbs
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 257
My impression of the Q was that it was geared towards people who want an upgrade from a point and shoot and seasoned photographers that want a fun holga like experience to reinvigorate their love of photography.

I don't fit into either of these groups. I think it could be a fun little camera for the right kind of person, however.

I might have thought about getting a Q if the blur control feature had been rated better in the PF review because I really like the look of it!
02-04-2012, 09:29 PM   #26
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
A parallel: The Olympus Pen-F system failed. The OM system failed. At least, Olympus figured they could make more money selling XA successors, and they dropped the SLR lines and sold zillions of P&S cams for decades. (Forget their book-cooking.)

Another parallel: The Canon FD system failed. At least, Canon figured they needed AF so they developed EOS... which is now failing, as Canon market share is dropping and they canned their CEO. And where's their mirrorless? Will Canon survive?

How can we tell when a system fails? When it's canceled. Is there any sign that Q will be canceled? If it keeps making money, it's a success, whether the gearheads here like it or not. I personally don't care, but watching the dust-up is fun fun fun.
02-04-2012, 10:07 PM   #27
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,236
I wouldn't call it a failure. I think it was specifically designed for their home market of Japan. Although, it hasn't been a success story either considering a global market.

I do see potential with even the current model. It's starting to get cheaper and is the smallest ILC around. The toy lenses are reasonably priced, which makes it easier to buy all of them for the fun of it.

I'd like to see a Q with a square sensor to take up the maximum amount coverable by the Q system. They could have quite a little camera with a slightly larger sensor, EVF and WR, but of course that means it would be a bit bigger too. They could call it the DQ ("drag queen") because it has the rough features with the Q mount.

For example:

pentaxdq | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

02-04-2012, 11:35 PM   #28
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,085
I'm Q curious. But I'll probably wait until the next version - if there is one - to decide.
02-04-2012, 11:39 PM   #29
Veteran Member
Verglace's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 468
A larger sensor would definitely fix the Q's problems. I'm not interested in buying the k-01 because it is too similar to the k-5 (but I do think it has potential), im not interested in the Q because it's sensor is ridiculously small. So yeah I hope they designed it so they can place a larger sensor on it later. Then it would be awesome
02-04-2012, 11:52 PM   #30
Loyal Site Supporter
SteveM's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,295
I just checked the price and it's $497 shipped with the 8.5mm lens. I thought I read somewhere it was over $800? I would think they will sell a number of them at that price.
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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is k-5 a failure? yusuf Pentax K-5 272 03-30-2011 10:20 AM
Is this Pentax way of admitting SDM was a failure? mfdesalas Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 49 12-28-2010 11:34 PM
After 4 Pentax DSLR, a first failure: Kx Died! BBear Pentax DSLR Discussion 13 10-16-2010 11:30 AM
Pentax K100D Flash Failure Frosty Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 07-24-2010 05:15 AM
Hoya founder's grandson calls Pentax acquisition a failure MrPetkus Pentax News and Rumors 50 06-10-2010 07:46 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:00 PM. | 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