Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-27-2012, 09:09 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 165
Q10 availablity?

Does anyone know if the Black body version of the Q10 will be available in North America?

09-27-2012, 09:37 AM   #2
Senior Member
bluefoam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 107
Is the Q10 available yet or is it only on pre order? I've seen it on a couple of sites, but surprised I haven't seen any hands on reviews.
09-27-2012, 10:07 AM   #3
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 43,143
It's available only for pre-order right now, and should start shipping in October.

Handling-wise, it's basically the same camera. The AF is in fact a bit better, not that it sucked on the original Q or anything. While I do like the new looks (and especially the red version of the camera), I'd say that overall, the Q10 feels a bit more plasticky. However, given that it's supposed to have better IQ, and considering that it's only about $100 more than its predecessor, I think it's a good addition to the Q lineup, assuming that anyone in the US actually cares.

Have you seen this?
Pentax Q10 Photokina Report - What's New - Pentax Camera News & Rumors - PentaxForums.com

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

09-27-2012, 03:32 PM   #4
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 165
Original Poster
Q10 is the same camera

Adam: I did read your short review from Photokina.

My issue is that the Q10 is so much like the original. I get that it is supposed to be lower cost with the polycarbonate frame instead of Magnesium, but the ergonomic issues remain...

the custom dial does not have enough flexibility for me to select the items I want there...

the vibration reduction system is disabled with adapted lenses... the new K adapter will probably allow shake reduction, but what about other adapters....

there is no socket to allow attachment of an EVF.

Preorders in the USA is for silver and red Q10 cameras... what about black?

09-27-2012, 08:28 PM   #5
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,327
GXRUser, you have valid points. All cameras can be improved, including the Q. The Q did limit the quick dial to selecting certain groups of effects. Not sure if the Q10 does this or not. Haven't seen a proper full review yet. Many thought the Q10 lacked focus peaking. Now we find out that the camera at Photokina had it. I tend to enter the creative filters thru the menu instead of using the dial. That way I can dial in how much of the effect is needed.

The SR will be a help. Hopefully it will not require the adapter to funtion and can be added to the original Q with firmware update. We should know in a few weeks.

So far it appears we get red or black & silver. Black may show up later. I already have an original Q in black and can live with silver and black if need be. If you need black it can probably be ordered from another country. The world has become smaller.

The Q10 is the last under Hoya. Hoya has never been big in flip lcds or evf. Think this will change with Ricoh and the next Q. Ricoh already has an evf for your GXR.

Even with these quirks the Q is a very fun and easy camera to use. Remember it isn't even a year old system yet. There is room for improvement & growth.

thanks
barondla
09-28-2012, 11:16 AM   #6
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 165
Original Poster
I believe in the Q...

QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
barondla
Thank you for the kind tone in your comments.

I bought a used Q last year for about the price of the Q. When I used it indoors, I loved it. I thought the iq was wonderful. I did not need anything else. I then used it outdoors and could not operate the camera due to glare and inadequate brightness of the screen.

I bought a Voigtlander 50mm viewfinder so I could frame a picture outdoors. This was better.

I bought an OM to Q, 110 to Q, and Leica M to Q adapter. I was hoping to use the crop factor to have a very "long" high speed lens.

With my 40mm lens, I found that I could not focus the Q on the screen, indoors, even with screen enlargement (zoom/focus assist?). With longer lenses it was even worse. My 50mm macro was not hand holdable (not unexpected). My 90mm had too much shake.

This is when I discovered that Shake Reduction was inactive except with Pentax Q lenses.

I then found the GXR. EVF solved my issues with focus outdoors. Focus Peaking with the center screen magnification with manual lenses. The dedicated M mount module was perfect for my needs. I had predicted that I would want the S10 module for a travel lens. The GXR was used and came with the P10. The iq was good. The 28-300 equivalent lens was superb for travel. It was small and rugged. I bought it and after a month, sold the Q because I was not using it.

I had concluded that the Q was wonderful indoors with it's dedicated lenses. Until an EVF and shake reduction with adapted lenses was available, I could not be comfortable with the Q.

I want to adopt the Q because the iq is that good. As a hobbyist, I do not need a full frame dSLR or Leica M. I want a small, compact, affordable, flexible camera, that I can operate in my back yard, while traveling, and indoors. As I have developed presbyopia, I need a camera I can hand hold and see the screen for focus and framing. I really enjoy autofocus. The Q and Q10 come close, but I need a an EVF.

When a Q varient is introduced with EVF, ("Q2" or "Q module for GXR") I will be there with an order.

I have recently examined the Sony RX100. Wonderful. It's screen is close to usable outdoors in bright sunlight. No EVF. ( I am uncomfortable with camera operation at arms length)

The Panasonic LX7 is good. It supports an EVF.

I have a Q 01 lens waiting for a Q body that supports an EVF.

The best picture I have taken this year was with a Q. I am a believer.
Attached Images
   
09-28-2012, 07:34 PM   #7
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,327
Wonderful images of a handsome pet. Nailed this. You should be proud.

Understand your points. I have one Q friend that can't see the lcd in any light. A magnifying hood on the lcd solved his eye sight problems. It is still a pretty small combo. It basically turns the 3" lcd into a viewfinder. You might consider it

Since Ricoh already makes an efv and people want one for the Q, can't imagine the next Q not having one. I might use one if it is implemented well. My 1st mirrorless was an Olympus EP-L1. It was a joy to use ( though larger than I really wanted). Thought I needed the efv for bright light. It is clunky on the Olympus. Constantly switching back and forth between it

evf and lcd. The joy went out of using it, and I use it less. It doesn't have to be that way!

Wonder if Ricoh will broaden the Q mount by making a module for your camera? I have looked at the GXR before since I have Leica M lenses. How big is it vs a Q? Have never seen a Ricoh in real life.

Hope you find a Q to mount your lens on.

thanks
barondla

Last edited by barondla; 09-28-2012 at 09:03 PM.
09-28-2012, 08:43 PM   #8
Loyal Site Supporter
Pioneer's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Elko, Nevada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,231
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Since Ricoh already makes an efv and people want one for the Q, can't imagine the next Q not having one. I might use one if it is implemented well.
I have used Electronic Viewfinders and I will stay with the Q optical viewfinder even if Pentax comes out with an electronic one at some time in the future. I use the optical viewfinder and find it to be exactly like using the hot shoe mount viewfinders that have been provided with Leica rangefinders for more years than I have been alive. It is sparkling clear and gives me an awesome view of the image I am framing. Since the Q has great autofocus I don't have to worry about focusing so if I can't see the display screen because of the sun (which actually doesn't happen all that often anyway) it really doesn't matter to me. If I do feel the need to chimp to check the histogram I can turn away from the sun and do that.

09-29-2012, 04:47 AM   #9
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 133
Pioneer,

Which optical viewfinder do you use? I would think one of them with zone focusing (or hyperfocal) could work well on the Q with the 01 prime.

As far as an EVF I would personally love to see a Q with an EVF and no LCD. It would give more room for physical controls on the rear. That is likely was to esoteric to be built though.

Shawn
09-29-2012, 08:53 AM   #10
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 165
Original Poster
Viewfinder

I have a Voigtlander 50mm viewfinder. It is nearly perfect.

When I used the Q, I wrote a suggestion that I would also prefer a built in EVF and I was willing to not have a view screen on the back of the camera. Why not use a low power LCD to just display the menus and technical information (think of the dslrs before live view...) It would use less power and allow a more ergonomic and useful camera for taking pictures.

I have found live view displays, especially articulated ones, to be most useful on a tripod, in a studio, when doing macro work. I will grant that if I was paparazzi, I might have a different opinion.

I think the mirrorless camera needs an eye level viewfinder like the traditional Leica M, Pentax Spotmatic, Olympus OM1. It creates a more personal experience. Holding a camera at arm's length creates problems.

It is why the K-01 is a failure in my opinion.

The Q would be a grand slam with an EVF. With the live view screen, it is acceptable because of all of the other positive values of the compact camera.

It is my hope that the Q2 would continue the magnesium construction, and either have a built in EVF (configured in a similar layout as the Sony Nex 6/7 or Nikon V1) or a connector for a shoe mounted EVF (and the EVF should be compatible with the Ricoh GXR). If a shoe mount design is used, a K-02 should use the same connector and EVF as well.
09-29-2012, 09:06 AM   #11
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 165
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Wonderful images of a handsome pet. Nailed this. You should be proud.

Understand your points. I have one Q friend that can't see the lcd in any light. A magnifying hood on the lcd solved his eye sight problems. It is still a pretty small combo. It basically turns the 3" lcd into a viewfinder. You might consider it ...
barondla
Thanks. One thing that I find these two images have is the very good depth of field. In the last several years I have been drawn to greater depth of field in my images. One advantage of small sensors in digital cameras is the inherent greater depth of field. With a sharp lens, this becomes a pleasure. For the camera designer, it allows for incredible margin of error with auto focus systems.

When I have thought about this I have concluded that the greater depth of focus allows the image to appear more like the world does to my vision. With the natural onset of presbiopia, the loss of close vision and accommodation yields a world with less depth of field.

Limited depth of field an artifact we use to enhance sitting portraits. This is the area of excellence for large format sensors and very wide aperture lenses. I see the cameras that excel at this (FF Nikon, Canon, Sony/Minolta) and I note the size of these cameras are like a classic Pentax 6x7.

I think I use a camera more like photojournalist or documentarian. I want small, fast, lightweight where the images capture a moment. Small sensors are ideal since I can shoot with available light and still have depth of field. The Q, Nikon V1, and APS cameras like the Sony Nex and Ricoh GXR with M Mount are ideal for this.

Different cameras for different uses.

Which hood did your friend use? I tried a simple folding hood and it did not really solve my glare or visibility issues. The added bulk totally defeated the value of the Q's size.
09-29-2012, 12:53 PM   #12
Loyal Site Supporter
Pioneer's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Elko, Nevada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,231
QuoteOriginally posted by Shawn67 Quote
Pioneer,

Which optical viewfinder do you use? I would think one of them with zone focusing (or hyperfocal) could work well on the Q with the 01 prime.

As far as an EVF I would personally love to see a Q with an EVF and no LCD. It would give more room for physical controls on the rear. That is likely was to esoteric to be built though.

Shawn
I use the Pentax viewfinder that matches up with the 01 prime. It is just a simple optical viewfinder with brightlines that frame the image area. It has no parallax correction or any other electronic input from the camera. I do admit, when it first arrived, I was a little surprised at the simplicity of the Pentax viewfinder for the Q, but has time has gone on I find that I like it more and more. It hardly ever leaves the hot shoe on the Q now, and when it does it is usually on my person somewhere.

I was thrilled to death to see Pentax supporting the Q the way they did with their announcements at the recent Photokina. My one concern right now is that Pentax does not seem to have considered introducing additional viewfinders. I think that one that had three selectable framelines would be just about perfect for the 02 zoom and if I could get one Christmas wish from Pentax that would be my request. They are very simple devices but very useful for those of us that are used to working with viewfinders.

As for hyperfocal or zone focusing, I actually find that it is reasonably easy to do with this camera, but the autofocus is so good I really don't worry about it.

While not an expert on the topic by any means, I find that the EVFs I have used in the past were marginally usable at best, and distracting as h--l at worst. I am sure that new technology has improved them but in my opinion there is still no substitute for a simple, optical viewfinder. But, that being said, lots of people like them and having the option would be a good thing in my mind whether I chose to use one or not.
09-29-2012, 02:18 PM   #13
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 133
" I find that the EVFs I have used in the past were marginally usable at best, and distracting as h--l at worst. I am sure that new technology has improved them but in my opinion there is still no substitute for a simple, optical viewfinder."

EVFs have gotten a lot better. The EVF in the OMD is very good for example. The combination of the EVF and IBIS with magnification is extremely handy with MF lenses on the camera both for longer distance as well as macro photography. The highlight/shadow display can also be useful in tough light. I *far* prefer to use the EVF vs. the LCD on the OMD.

I think for shooting with a prime using zone/hyperfocal focusing an optical viewfinder would be a very nice quick way to shoot. Having the LCD off should help battery life as well. I have a Voightlander Kontur finder on the way.

Shawn
10-11-2012, 07:32 PM   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 165
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
GXRUser, you have valid points. All cameras can be improved, including the Q. The Q did limit the quick dial to selecting certain groups of effects. Not sure if the Q10 does this or not. Haven't seen a proper full review yet. Many thought the Q10 lacked focus peaking. ...

thanks
barondla
Where did you see reported that the Q10 had focus peaking?

I have not seen this.

(I did see that Sony SLT bodies now have focus peaking...)
10-11-2012, 08:36 PM   #15
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,327
GXRUser, there have been a few mentions of focus peaking on the Q10.
1. A post by ishpuini ( Q owner), on this forum, reported the Q10 he tried at Photokina had focus peaking.
2. A post on this forum links to a youtube video demonstrating focus peaking in action.
3. Another review ( sorry don't remember where) listed focus peaking in the specs.

Hope this helps. Can't imagine being without a Q!
thanks
barondla
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
Am I mental? Q or Q10 bluefoam Pentax Q 43 11-19-2012 10:41 PM
The new Q10 sensor. barondla Pentax Q 25 09-26-2012 01:11 AM
q10 questions jrforman Pentax Q 5 09-24-2012 01:54 PM
Pentax q10 Jaymie0613 Pentax News and Rumors 12 09-10-2012 01:37 PM
Pentax Q10 yygomez Pentax News and Rumors 5 09-07-2012 06:58 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:30 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