[Brazeal]

I currently have a K-5, and I'm intrigued by some of the photos that I've seen with the Q and adapted K lenses. I've read many of the Q reviews and forum posts, so I understand its limitations, but the long reach with adapted K lenses has me thinking this is the best bang for your buck for extended reach shooting, with some limitations of course.
I've had some LBA building up for the DA*300 for awhile, but I'm having a hard time justifying that $1,300-$1,400 price tag. I currently have a sharp Sigma 70mm EX that would give me the reach on the Q of a little more than the reach of that DA*300 on the K-5, with some impact on IQ of course. I have a Tamron 70-300 as well, but I think it would be too soft to use with the Q, but it would be worth testing.

My options are to buy the Q now and buy the DA*300 later or just go ahead and buy the DA*300 now and forget the Q. I found a brand new Q with the 2 lens kit for $280 from an individual, so I could buy that and the Pentax K/Q adapter (when released) for less than half of a new DA*300.
I'd sure appreciate some input, especially from K-5/Q users. Thanks!

Mike

[ElJamoquio]

You don't need to wait for the Pentax adapter of course, as you know.

I have both the K-5 and the Q. I like the Q. The K-5/300 has much better IQ than the Q/70 will.

That said the $280 price is quite good.

[NickLarsson]

I found a brand new Q with the 2 lens kit for $280 from an individual

For this price it's a no-brainer IMO, and you can always sell it back at the same price if you're not happy with it (which I doubt ).

[snostorm]

Hi Brazeal,

I don't know if the Q is a viable substitute for a truly great telephoto lens for your DSLR. First of all, consider that the DA*300 + your K-5 would give you very sophisticated AF, class leading IQ, real-time OVF, and a 450mm FOV in 35mm terms. The Q + adapted 70 would give you focus peaking mf, difficulties associated with LCD VFs (including difficult viewing in sunlight and EVF lag time), and only a 392mm FOV 35mm EQ -- you have to consider crop factor for both when considering equivalents. I find it useful to use 3.6x when comparing FL EQs to what I'd be using with my K-5.

That being said, despite the comparative difficulties of using the Q with adapted lenses compared to my DSLR with AF K mount lenses, I really like having the alternative of sticking the Q with the 01, 02, and 03 FE + K2Q adapter and D FA 100 f2.8 Macro in my jacket pockets instead of carrying the K-5 with the FA 50 f1.4, Tamron 28-70 f2.8, DA 10-14 FE, and FA* 300 f4.5 in a fairly large and heavy bag. I usually take the Q unless I'm specifically going out to shoot birds, and even then, the Q + at least the 01 and K2Q adapter is in a pocket for perspective shots, candids of people, and possible use as a 3.6x TC if needed.

IMO, despite the cost and weight of the DA*300, the ease of use and experience of owning and using a world-class ultra tele with a very advanced DSLR like the K-5 would be enough to recommend it. If after that, you want more reach and/or more macro magnification than the DSLR can give you, with the advantage of longer FL EQ with faster max apertures than are possible (or practically affordable) with any format DSLR , then the Q + adapter becomes a viable addition. The Q will give both of these, plus the bonus of best in class (ultra compact) body build, shooting features and ergonomics, and system size with Q system lenses. I'd say that it's probably better to build a DSLR system first, and if you decide to augment this with a compact, then consider the Q since it will expand you photographic capabilities with adapted lenses in addition to giving you a compact with the control you're already used to, a world class body build, and ultra small system size with Q system lenses.

Scott

[imtheguy]

You dont provide your shooting requirements but speaking just for the gear, a Q is not replacement for a da*300. I use both and with a very cheap ebay adapter stick up to 700mm of glass on the Q but its for specific kinds of shots. That said, the price you mention is a helluva bargain if it includes lenses you can use. The Q/Q10 will only get cheaper but not likely the da*300 right now. Of course, a gently used da*300 leaves some budget for a Q, if not today then in a couple months maybe? Recommend you get the da*300 then add the Q when you can. I have keepers on the wall from the Q+(big lens) but many more from the K-5 + da*300. Good luck, keep shopping!

[Zaphodmonster]

The pocketability was one of my main reasons for getting the q as I wanted to get a camera that I could have with me at all times. I want to buy a q/k adapter cause it looks like a lot of fun and I am only an amatuer so that should be enough for me for now.

But if you are concerned with top image quality or need more professional gear then maybe the DA* 300 would be a good way to go!

This is just my opinion and as I mostly do street(love the Q for street!) and portrait photography I rarely am in a situation where I could really use a telephoto lens.

[crewl1]

The Q deal you ran into is a bargain, so I would jump on it, and sell it if you don't like it as you can surely make your money back and possibly a little profit.

The Tamron 70-300 on the Q leaves a little to be desired, mainly because the purple fringe that lens produces gets amplified, and also because the best results with that lens are stopped down to Q diffraction territory.

Good fast primes work best adapted on the Q, but as others have noted the usability is not for handheld sports action telephotos, more like tripod/static wildlife shooting .

Like I said, at the price you found you won't lose anything if you decide it is not for you. Be warned though, it is an addictive little camera

[Brazeal]

Thanks very much for all of the great input! Although I would love to have the IQ of the 300 now, I know that I would not have much opportunity to use it for awhile. Buying the Q kit now would be the better choice for me because I left my Nikon S9100 in San Juan in the rental car in Sept., so this would give me a nice little compact to take with me almost everywhere.

Larry, good point with the PF on the Tamron. I have a couple of primes and may buy another later. I understand that the Q would need to be used with a tripod for mostly static shots, and wildlife shooting is exactly what I had in mind. Maybe I can come across a good deal on a 300 later.

Thanks again to everyone for the great input. I plan on taking a look at the Q kit tomorrow. Sadly, I have Halloween obligations tonight... Lol.

[qblade]

The Q is a little jewel of a camera. I've only had mine for a few days, but I'm really impressed with it, and having a lot of fun. I bought it for a number of reasons (pocketability, reduced price compared to when the camera was released, good reviews) and am very happy with it. I can't imagine that you will be sorry if you buy that Q kit.

[barondla]

Welcome to Q ownership and the forum. The Q is a fun little camera that can really perform. With a little work you can accomplish so much. Please post some pics when you get a chance.
thanks
barondla

[hongzhibin1987]

Hi brazel,
Actually I own both.
I got my Q when I realized the size and weight of K-5. Yes K5 might be the smallest DSLR on the market so far, however I still don't like its size thought. Hanging it on my neck for a day can kill my love to photography.
So I got Q. And I have to say, I take it everyday.
I think the pros and the cons of Q are both obvious. Pros: size, interchangeable lenses, rich filters, and weight. Cons: probably poor IQ compare with DSLR. but please remember: Q is not a DSLR. It is a digitized successor of the Auto 110.
I'm extremely pleasant with the fun of photography brought by Q.

[interested_observer]

I too am on the fence here. It is good to read everyone's view here. I have had several opportunities and passed on each one of them. I will say that for $280 I would just buy it just because - especially with the two lens kit. I just found another opportunity for a new Q - dual lens package, and again have been thinking about it. I'll probably go look at some additional posted images and try to make up my mind this evening.

[twilhelm]

The more images I see from the Q the more I want to add one to my "pocket". Actually it would be great for afternoon trips on the motorcycle. And did I mention the images look much better than I thought they would?

[felixkh]

The Q is a great little camera

[barondla]

Man you guys are a tough sell. There are so many things the Q can do for you. It is the perfect second camera system. It can be the "have it with you any time" camera. The ultimate street shooter. Incredible macro microscope. Super telephoto monster. Once the 06 2.8 telezoom arrives everyone will be wanting a Q. This combo will make all the other ILC look dated and wrong.

Look at all the K-5 owners with a Q. They are happy and having FUN. Hobbies are supposed to be fun. The Q is liberating. You don't always have to carry 30 lbs of equipment to take photographs. If you still must carry the big bag, the Q system can ride along taking up less room than a DSLR body and weighing less. Take a backup system! Put down the test charts, follow your heart.
thanks
barondla