Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-08-2013, 06:10 PM   #1
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Far North Qld
Posts: 3,294
Gobsmacked by the Q

I've not had the Q (with 01 lens) long and only taken a couple dozen or so JPG shots to get familiar with it. I always use Manual mode.
I am satisfied with the IQ from this tiny camera with the small sensor, but there is some detail smearing which didn't surprise me.
(I also tried the $45 adapter with some of my K mounts which was a miserable failure for me.. but that's another story)

BUT...

Today I shot in RAW and used Lightroom3 to convert to JPG with only default 'As shot' settings..
They were just pictures taken out side the house, nothing special in that regard - but the results.....!

I AM BLOWN AWAY!!! ASTOUNDED!! GOBSMACKED!!!

It's like a different camera! Amazing detail, no smearing, low low noise!
I'm even going to say it's better than my K-7 (is that possible!?)

What a gem! And the 01 lens, terrific - zero PF/CA

Thanks P/R - I have Q-fever but I'm a happy camper


PS: The only issue that bothers me is the 8Gb EyeFi card I have which works perfectly in all other cameras often gives a MEMORY CARD ERROR in the Q.

02-08-2013, 06:15 PM   #2
Senior Member
MarinatedHerring's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 118
could you post one or two of the results? I have never seen a reason to shoot in Raw but mostly because I'm inexperienced with digital photography in general. I have also never used Lightroom 3.

I'd really appreciate seeing a sample, thank you
02-08-2013, 06:27 PM   #3
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,550
I know how well a raw-enabled 1/2" sensor can do, so I'm looking forward to the package that's trucking my way as we speak...

MH - not a Q sample but this blog post shows a Fuji F550 jpeg and processed raw. Amazing difference after a bit of PS Elements - in this case the Fuji EXR sensor may have added some value though. The jpeg is on the left...
02-08-2013, 06:50 PM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Far North Qld
Posts: 3,294
Original Poster
Images are 6Mb and 8Mb (4000x3000 pixels), so here's the link to both.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/bb67c6fewd1pe4v/fQdCkymFXf

As mentioned, they aren't the best subjects, I just shot them off to see the results..

Image1 was a general scene shot with a contrasty sky and dark details but more the detail of the trees on the distant hills. Impressive I thought.
Image2 (the Hibsicus) was shot into the sun (behind grey cloud) deliberately to check for CA in high contrast areas and how much of the foreground was lost in the shadows.

They were imported in LR3, everything left at defaults then exported to JPG.
With a few tweaks in Lightroom, the clarity and detail can really be brought out and still no NR needed.

The same shots as in-camera JPG will muddy the detail somewhat, especially the finer leaves, blades of grass and trees in the distance.

Shooting RAW is more work for sure, but definitely worth it for special shots.
Of course, happy snapping of pets or children playing, or even random shots taken for fun I wouldn't bother, JPG is good enough. But it's good to know that when I need it, RAW will give me the scope I might be wanting.

02-08-2013, 06:56 PM   #5
Veteran Member
bullitt_60's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 322
I took my first sample images today and thought I was shooting in RAW... I wasn't. Not only that, I was shooting 4:3. Total fail. It will take some getting used to as I overexposed every image taken outside. Try again tomorrow.
02-08-2013, 06:59 PM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,430
sledger, the member I bought my 2nd Q from had it on Raw+ and I didn't know it at first. I just went back and converted a couple Raw files in PSE9 - I KNEW there was something about this camera!! Even more fun than the K-01!! I am now totally and completely lost.

To be honest, I was pretty impressed by the 01 just in jpeg - but this is really something. I turned off the RAW+ - but I'm turning it back on. Why on earth were so many people negative about the Q? (For that matter, why didn't more people like the K-01?)
02-08-2013, 07:10 PM   #7
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Far North Qld
Posts: 3,294
Original Poster
The K-01 is beckoning..
I just need to fund it by selling some other gear first.
02-08-2013, 09:18 PM   #8
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,430
QuoteOriginally posted by sledger Quote
The K-01 is beckoning..
I just need to fund it by selling some other gear first.
Under certain circumstances, with certain lenses, it will astonish you. The rest of the time it is only damned good.

02-08-2013, 09:46 PM   #9
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Far North Qld
Posts: 3,294
Original Poster
I have a SIGMA 30mm F1.4 EX prime which I think would find a nice home on a K-01

Meanwhile... I'm enjoying the Q and it's RAW'ness.
I also love the build 'Q'uality
02-08-2013, 10:23 PM   #10
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,430
QuoteOriginally posted by sledger Quote
I have a SIGMA 30mm F1.4 EX prime which I think would find a nice home on a K-01

Meanwhile... I'm enjoying the Q and it's RAW'ness.
I also love the build 'Q'uality
Oh my! The lens release button doesn't operate when the FA35/2 is mounted to my K-01. Kinda pedestrian compared to yours, but the color rendition is astonishing. Botanical Garden outing planned for that set up.
02-09-2013, 04:28 AM   #11
Veteran Member
tclausen's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
To be honest, I was pretty impressed by the 01 just in jpeg - but this is really something. I turned off the RAW+ - but I'm turning it back on. Why on earth were so many people negative about the Q? (For that matter, why didn't more people like the K-01?)
I haven't got the foggiest idea....perhaps some misconstrued conservatism of what a "real camera" should be like.

The Q and the K01 have their quirks, and I'd love for a sit-down with a pentax body engineer one of these days (working on it, too), but...they're fun to use and with really great IQ.

I only shoot in RAW, and even with a simple automated workflow, the results are just great.

Then again, when shooting in raw, the cameras are hardly more than light-sealed boxes for holding a sensor and for attaching a camera lens to, now are they?
02-09-2013, 06:16 AM   #12
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,430
QuoteOriginally posted by tclausen Quote
when shooting in raw, the cameras are hardly more than light-sealed boxes for holding a sensor and for attaching a camera lens to, now are they?
I can just hear a High School photography instructor .....
02-09-2013, 08:51 AM   #13
Veteran Member
tclausen's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
I can just hear a High School photography instructor .....
Well, didn't claim originality now, did I?
02-09-2013, 11:23 PM   #14
Veteran Member
bullitt_60's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 322
One cropped image was taken with a K-5 and DA 35mm and the other with the Q and 02. Which one is which?

1.


2.


Obviously this isn't scientific or even fair (or difficult ), this is just for a laugh. I think the Q holds up pretty well.
02-09-2013, 11:28 PM   #15
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
I say #2 is Q. Very close though, looks good.
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, card, detail, jpg, lens, mirrorless, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q10, q7, shot
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SMC-M 75-150/4, anyone else gobsmacked by this sleeper? 123K10D Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 10-18-2013 01:29 AM
Pentax K-01 drops by $200, K-30 by $50, Q by $150 Adam Pentax News and Rumors 48 12-05-2012 09:39 AM
Disappointed by the Q zoom? Kirill_est Pentax Q 4 07-27-2012 08:50 AM
Q for the Q & DSLR users jezza323 Pentax Q 6 02-05-2012 09:13 AM
Sample Photos taken by the Q bobell69 Pentax News and Rumors 23 08-06-2011 05:17 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:50 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