Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-23-2012, 03:04 AM   #91
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Veluwe
Posts: 339
QuoteOriginally posted by Clicker Quote
Which animals did you shoot, the ones inside or outside?
Shot both and all survived!

Attached Images
 
02-23-2012, 08:08 PM   #92
Pentaxian
Clicker's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,241
@PentaxMomFeula, there's someone in japan drooling at that photo right now
02-29-2012, 08:48 AM   #93
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
Yes, the Q must be a failure, because I haven't yet seen any in the wild. Of course, I hardly ever see Pentax or Sony in the wild, so those brands must have failed too. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places. Maybe I need to sail to Singapore. On a tramp freighter.
03-09-2012, 05:31 PM   #94
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vienna, Austria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 112
Hey, I'm on a K7 plus a Q!

QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
+1, amen! I have over 15 digital cameras ( 10 with interchangeable lenses ). If I could only have two it would be the Q and the K-7. The Q is that useful and fun. Take anywhere portable camera and digital super teleconverter, long lens monster that even does great video. I am also considering adding the K-01 to my collection.
thanks
barondla
Thats also my set as of today (the Q came today...): the hardly pocketable K7 for hi quality photography and the tiny Q for good (air-)travel photos. My Ricoh GX200 is up for sale now (although its an excellent camera at base ISO). The Q is a wonderful camera with many pro features (it has IR sensors at the back and front side, the K01 has only one at the front). I got my double lens set for EUR 480 which I find quite reasonable (waited for the price drop which happened to happen in the UK this February - check out the UK dealers like amazon.co. uk or warehousedirect). The Q prime lens set is now even appr. 50,- cheaper than the Fujifilm X10 I was also looking at, but backed away as I found out about the Fuji's obviously unsolvable IQ problem "white orbs", size - too big - and weight - too light for my likings-). Concerning the K01, I don't really know who the target audience is supposed to be. Pentax DSLR users (K5/7) can't be meant because the K01 is a few steps down from the K5/7 being almost the same size and having the same IQ. It might make for a good back-up. The K01 might also appeal to people moving up from a compact being used to framing via the screen and who are afraid of OVFs and complex DSLRs.

03-09-2012, 09:50 PM   #95
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by stern Quote
Concerning the K01, I don't really know who the target audience is supposed to be. Pentax DSLR users (K5/7) can't be meant because the K01 is a few steps down from the K5/7 being almost the same size and having the same IQ. It might make for a good back-up. The K01 might also appeal to people moving up from a compact being used to framing via the screen and who are afraid of OVFs and complex DSLRs.
How many people now use a mobile phone as their primary P&S ? How many of those would be intimidated by, or just outright dislike, using a VF to frame their shots after having grown up with LCDs ? There's your target market ... and it's growing by the million every month !
03-10-2012, 01:43 AM   #96
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vienna, Austria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 112
My say - you are completely right.

QuoteOriginally posted by Frogfish Quote
How many people now use a mobile phone as their primary P&S ? How many of those would be intimidated by, or just outright dislike, using a VF to frame their shots after having grown up with LCDs ? There's your target market ... and it's growing by the million every month !
For me - after thinking about the possible K01 market - the K01 looks like an entry level K-mount for those users you described. For seasoned DSLR-Pentaxians the K01 IMHO has little added value as its more or less the same size, the same IQ, the same weight. Besides, it is much lower speced (just one example: I personally like the two IR sensors on the front- and backside of my K7 and on the Q). Since I own a K7, a K01 would be a more-or-less duplication with some downgrading to my current set-up. The Q OTOH is a perfect companion as an carry-anytime camera when the K7 gets to large, bulky and heavy (in German: a "immer dabei"). I wouldn't call the Q it a failure, I'd call it a surprise or an ugly duckling that has grown into a swan since its launch. What bothers me on this forum is that the forum-owners keep dissing the Q (in the comparison with the decisivly larger, hardly pocketable and seriously flawed Fujifilm X10 - "white orbs"! - they go on calling the Q a "toy", which it is surely not).
03-10-2012, 01:45 AM - 1 Like   #97
Senior Member
Kirill_est's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Tallinn
Posts: 110
QuoteOriginally posted by stern Quote
Concerning the K01, I don't really know who the target audience is supposed to be.
How about those who want zero headaches due to front/back focus issues
03-10-2012, 01:50 AM   #98
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,073
To be a failure, what do you consider ?
- rejection by the users, then ask to see how many have got rid of their Q ...
- product-line profitability, then ask Pentax why they issued a road-map showing at least 3 new future lenses in Q mount ...
- market-share, then consider Pentax is an overall failure as nearly unrepresentative label ...
- "see in the field" inquiry, then ask any blind people what his score is ...

In my opinion, Q is a very coherent concept system, with it's proper limitations reduced to the minimum in the actual body, that could essentially be improved by a new firmware.

03-10-2012, 05:51 AM - 1 Like   #99
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Veluwe
Posts: 339
I love my q.
My husband loves my q (there is a danger there).
My children love my q (it is getting more dangerous every time I show off q to the family).
My daughter in law already asked when she could have it for some time (she did not define how much time) for she loves it too.
I have now stopped showing my q to others. It is safer. Because I need my q.

Meanwhile I am convinced owning a q is a healthy thing.
It makes you alert, you see everything and so no longer miss shooting oportunities, because you cann't have someone sneekingly pinch your q. : trains eyesight.
It is a blessing for the back as it is tiny and light. : q is soothing for your back, shoulders and wrist.
It sets your wardrobe worrying soul free. : q always fits in somewhere and offers you the comforting feel not to need an ugly overly large brown bag.
It lets you relax because indeed q knows how to focus properly by discarding ff and bf troubles.
And if things turn not out as you would have hoped, you can always proclaim that you cann't possibly blame your q too hard, because everyons knows it has not yet a full grown sensor but that doesn't matter because it is your perfect little q.

Q is good for you, it exhilirates your mind and lifts your soul out of the heavy dlsr drag blues to new q hights of spiritual liberation. Q is not only good for your body, but also for you psychological health.

Q is better than asperine. Get one.
03-10-2012, 07:06 AM   #100
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,073
You are perfectly right.
I have always with me my Q and its now 9 lenses :
- Std prime 01
- Std zoom 02
- Fish-eye 03
- Toy lens w 04
- Toy lens tele 05
- Cosmicar 4.2/1.6
- Cosmicar 16/1.6
- Sonnetar 25/1.1
- Navitar 50/0.95

all of these + two spare bateries and polarizing filter take place in about half my small rucksack's volume, together with my wallet, GPS, cell phones, a few other small gadgets and card holders.
Which other system gives you such a compact and thorough photographical potential ?
03-10-2012, 10:17 AM   #101
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Veluwe
Posts: 339
Nine lenses ...
That is an awful lot of lenses to run around with.
Even when tiny.

With q I developed a new method of picture taking which I call registrational snapshotting.
It is purely for my own fun. So often I do NOT take a picture of something I like, because I know it is not interesting for anyone but me. And now I DO. And I think I AM LIBERATED. I take pictures of all and everything, the dustbin, a single discarded paper on the road, the one in front of me, the shadows on the forest ground, the bluriness the wind causes in the trees, hundreds of little things, everything that catches my eyes. Review it fastly, smile and move on. It is not video, BUT IT IS: VIDEO = I see. With q I am the catcher of my eyesight. Don't think - catch. I am the catcher on the run.

No time to change 9 lenses ... one is enough for me
(Of course this is an excuse for not craving nine lenses).
03-10-2012, 11:56 AM   #102
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,073
Yes, evreryone its' practices.
I admit i often carry the Q system + either K or 645 systems as well, so you can see the difference
But when doing so, I always take more pictures with the tiny Q.
04-16-2012, 03:37 PM   #103
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Aylesbury, Bucks
Photos: Albums
Posts: 492
No idea whether it's a commercial success or not.

Like most of us, I dismissed it as an overpriced oddity. Steve Huff's positive review made me re-evaluate it. Despite the magnesium alloy body and superior aesthetics, the 600 price point was over optimistic and clearly more than the market would stand. I've just seen it on Amazon for 300. Now that is a real value proposition and I am definitely tempted.

Pentax could have gone down the m4/3 route (it's a semi-open standard after all). That might have been a surer route to failure. Me too is never a good strategy. There is room in the market for enthusiast products as shown by Fuji. No reason why the Q can't have the same appeal as the X100 - it's a future cult item for sure.

Instead of condemning the Q for what it isn't why not praise it for what it is? No, it doesn't have a big sensor. It seems that the only way to get an APS-C sensor in a compact body is to have a fixed lens (Fuji X100 / Leica X1) or else go with the dubious milk-bottle-on-a-fag-packet aesthetics and ergonomics of the Sony NEX / Samsung NX. Think of it as a top of the range compact with interchangeable lenses and suddenly it doesn't seem so bad. Now that it's the price of a compact it looks pretty damned good.

There's another obvious advantage to consider. It's the size of a freaking smartphone which means that you really can take it anywhere. I've got a K-5 (yay me). Social acceptability issues aside, even paired with a limited, there are lots of places I can't take it (most concert venues, for example) and plenty of others where I don't want to take it (such as dinner with friends and family). The best camera is the one you've got with you, right?

My advice to Pentax: don't give up on it. Ricoh make some nifty compacts so take advantage. 28mm F1.9? Yes please!

Final thought: if it had a red dot on it it'd go for a grand easy and sell like hot cakes. Give it a chance I say.
04-17-2012, 07:36 AM   #104
Senior Member
sapporodan's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 123
Have to admit I had no interest in the Q until I used one and discovered its a great little camera, but I just cant justify the price, it's out of my budget!

If they made a cheaper body I would consider it. I really hope the Q gets a chance.
04-17-2012, 11:30 AM   #105
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 202
I went to Forest Park in St Louis for my annual MUNY start-up work-call. This is a great place to have a camera, but with 2 carry-ons already, bringing the K-5 kit wasn't much of a choice. Anyway, I knew there was a camera shop nearby that I thought sold Pentax. Sure enough they did. K-5s, K-r, some decent lens choices - and then the Q. It is everything I would avoid by instinct in a camera - too small, no EVF, small sensor...'a decent toy' (per the sales guy), etc. etc.

Darn it if it wasn't a pretty cool little system. Using it wasn't nearly as impossible as I thought it would be. I think I could really get used to having - & using - one - especially for such trips where the K-5 stays home. If I stay interested in photography as much as I am, I see a potential purchase!
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 08:52 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