Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-25-2013, 07:47 PM   #31
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 12
I have a vaguely related question--I'm also interested in the Q, but I'm wondering if it's worth purchasing with just the 02 lens.

I'm a Canon DSLR user, but I wanted something more portable for an upcoming vacation; good image quality, but smaller and cheaper. The very idea of the Q intrigues me, and I love its size and interchangeable lenses. The sensor size doesn't bug me, so long as the images produced with the 02 are fairly crisp and noise-free at a regular ISO (i.e. better than some $200 point-and-shoot)

The Q + 02 lens is ~$300 USD; the 01 lens by itself is $200+ extra. In my experience, basic kit zoom lenses are never spectacular--I could get a lot more out of the Q with a prime lens, but for $500 total I might as well get an entry-level 4/3rds bundle. Would the Q + 02 really perform any better than say, a Lumix LX7 or other higher-end point-and-shoot?

The benefit of getting the Q, over a nice P&S, is that I could eventually build up a lens collection with different mounts. Are there any C-mount/K-mount prime lens substitutes for the 01? Thanks!

04-25-2013, 08:25 PM   #32
Veteran Member
bullitt_60's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 322
QuoteOriginally posted by mblumm Quote
Thank you for all of your opinions! I think that the Q is for me after looking at one today. If I was to get only one lens, would the 01 or 02 be more versatile?
I'd get the 01. I don't use my Q as much as I would like because I only have the 02. I really don't like that lens.
04-25-2013, 08:50 PM   #33
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,973
With enough light the Q and 02 is just fine as a vacation/family documentary camera, especially for 4x6 prints and web posting. The 06 Zoom is a better lens and Q really shines with the 01 Prime. I can't do the comparisons you are asking about, but I use my Q as a preference camera rather than a compromise much of the time and a dSLR or film camera for the challenging stuff.
04-25-2013, 09:18 PM   #34
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 12
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
With enough light the Q and 02 is just fine as a vacation/family documentary camera, especially for 4x6 prints and web posting. The 06 Zoom is a better lens and Q really shines with the 01 Prime. I can't do the comparisons you are asking about, but I use my Q as a preference camera rather than a compromise much of the time and a dSLR or film camera for the challenging stuff.
wow, I never expected that from the Q! what sort of lenses do you use most frequently with it? I think the only thing discouraging me from getting the Q is the fact that the technology is 2 years old--not to imply that old cameras are inherently worse, but lag/choppiness would frustrate me. Is the shutter lag anything to complain about, or is it simply not on par with a DSLR (which I wouldn't expect of it anyway)?

Most of the trip is visiting distant relatives I've never met before, but I will get a chance to visit some visually interesting rural villages/deserts/mountains/etc. Since I'll probably only carry a large backpack's worth of supplies in the more rural areas, an SLR would simply weigh me down.

04-25-2013, 09:44 PM   #35
Pentaxian
ivoire's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: chicago burbs
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,367
I recently went to India for 5 weeks. I wanted a small/compact system for travel and bought the Q. I took the fisheye, 5-15mm and 15-45mm with me plus 2 extra batteries. easily fit in a backpack with extra clothing. Heres a couple of links to images produced with this gear that may helpm you decide if its for you:

Vijay Nagar, India - a set on Flickr

Goa, India - a set on Flickr
04-25-2013, 09:50 PM - 1 Like   #36
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 55
QuoteOriginally posted by americanclassic Quote
The Q + 02 lens is ~$300 USD; the 01 lens by itself is $200+ extra. In my experience, basic kit zoom lenses are never spectacular--I could get a lot more out of the Q with a prime lens, but for $500 total I might as well get an entry-level 4/3rds bundle. Would the Q + 02 really perform any better than say, a Lumix LX7 or other higher-end point-and-shoot?
Hmmm. I tend to agree with others that the 02 is not exactly a sterling lens; decent, but not exciting. Here's a comparison between the 02 and a Kern-Paillard Switar 12.5mm:

All sizes | IMGP0781 Pentax Zoom | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

All sizes | IMGP1193 KP Switar 12.5 f2.8 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Frankly, I'd try looking to see if you can still find remaining stock of the kit with the 01; there's at least some still out there, I saw one a couple of days ago at the Kansas City Nebraska Furniture Mart, unopened, for $399, and there's at least one or two left on Amazon.

QuoteQuote:
The benefit of getting the Q, over a nice P&S, is that I could eventually build up a lens collection with different mounts. Are there any C-mount/K-mount prime lens substitutes for the 01? Thanks!
That depends a lot on what kind of prime you want. Telephotos of varying degrees, there are a lot of good options; normal to wide-angle, though, are very lacking. (That's one reason I consider the 01 prime pretty much essential; it's about the only thing you'll find that's high quality and not a telephoto.)

I wouldn't even consider K-mount primes for what you've described; the adapter+lens is going to be bigger than the camera itself. Not a good choice for casual walking-around shooting. The same goes for pretty much any of the 35mm SLR primes, just because of the size of the adapter.

M39 35mm rangefinder lenses can work better in one sense, because the adapter is much smaller (shorter flange distance that needs to be compensated for); but I've not been that impressed with the quality from the lenses I've tried. (Admittedly, they've all been Russian clones like the Industar 61 and the Jupiter 11; since M39 is the Leica mount, lenses for it tend to run a lot more than I want to spend. And the Jupiter 11 is *very* big and bulky on the Q.)

So that brings us to C- and D-mount cine lenses. I expected to prefer the C-mounts, because they typically have more light-gathering area; but to my surprise, when I started doing tests, the D-mounts have come out much better on average. (My best, completely unscientific guess, is that because they were designed to focus on a smaller area of film - 8mm vs 16mm - they come out sharper on the Q's small sensor. Also, a lot of the C's I've tried have been CCTV lenses, which are often lower quality/resolution, while all the D's were made for film cameras.)

C or D, the cine lenses tend to fall into a a few major focal lengths: 1/2 in. wide-angle (12.5-13mm, around 70mm equivalent on the Q), 1 in. 'normal' (25mm, around 135mm equivalent), 1.5 in. telephoto (36-38mm, 209mm equivalent) are the three major ones I've seen. I've also seen a few in the 3/4 in. (around 90mm equivalent) range. I've seen these lengths in both C and D mount, and as I said the D mounts seem to be sharper on average, though I've got at least one nice 25mm C-mount Cosmicar lens.

Past that range, there's a group of 'extended' (for lack of a better word) telephotos, all C-mount, clustering around 3 in. (75mm, around 412mm equivalent) with outliers down to 2 in. and up to 4 in., with a very few up at 6 in. (an amazing 825mm equivalent on the Q). Some of the ones I've tried have been sharper than others, but none of them have been as sharp as the best lenses in the more 'standard' cine focal lengths; OTOH, you're getting a pretty big reach in a package that's small, pretty light, and still pretty easy to shoot without a tripod.

So I'd say, if those focal lengths appeal to you? You can build a really nice prime kit in a very small and light package. My current walk-around bag fits the Q with 01 prime; D-mount 12.5mm Kern-Paillard, 25mm Wollensak and 38mm Elgeet; C-mount 25mm Cosmicar and 50mm Bausch & Lomb; all appropriate adapters; three spare batteries and a couple of spare SD cards; optical viewfinder; and a mini tripod. All in a small bag meant for a small camcorder or a larger compact digicam. One of the stretch-fit neoprene mini-compact camera cases fits my Sun 75mm and Wollensak 100mm telephotos, and I can clip that onto one of the loop attachments on the main bag. It's also not hugely expensive; I paid around $60-70 each for my two long telephotos, but the others have averaged around $25-30 each. (Some nudging up close to $50, some 'way down under $10; I've even gotten some for $0.99.) I've also seen some of the higher-prestiege names (Kern-Paillard, Taylor & Hobson, Dallmeyer, Som Berthoit, Angenieux) go for well over that, $150 to $600 and up, so if you really want to spend money, you can. (Too rich for my blood, sadly.)

However, if you're looking for wide-angle on the Q, the pickings are very slim.

Last edited by Travis Butler; 04-25-2013 at 09:56 PM.
04-26-2013, 03:50 AM   #37
Veteran Member
NickLarsson's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,390
I only took my Q with the 01 and 03 lenses during my last vacation to Mexico, you can have a look there: Cancun - a set on Flickr

I'm happy with the IQ but it was a bit of a PITA to switch lenses all the time, so for vacations maybe the 02 zoom would be more appropriate.

Also, it has already been said but the Q is cruelly lacking a good wide angle lens, so I ended up buying a Ricoh GRD and I have to say that the Q is gathering dust since I have it
04-26-2013, 04:39 AM   #38
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,973
QuoteOriginally posted by americanclassic Quote
wow, I never expected that from the Q! what sort of lenses do you use most frequently with it? I think the only thing discouraging me from getting the Q is the fact that the technology is 2 years old--not to imply that old cameras are inherently worse, but lag/choppiness would frustrate me. Is the shutter lag anything to complain about, or is it simply not on par with a DSLR (which I wouldn't expect of it anyway)?

Most of the trip is visiting distant relatives I've never met before, but I will get a chance to visit some visually interesting rural villages/deserts/mountains/etc. Since I'll probably only carry a large backpack's worth of supplies in the more rural areas, an SLR would simply weigh me down.
It is a matter of expectations. The Q is not a dSLR substitute and I wouldn't ask it to produce gallery images. I don't expect 28mm or 24mm equivalent views (4mm or 5mm native lens?) I don't expect shallow DoF and subject isolation with an 8.5mm lens and a Compact Camera sensor. However, Pentax has wrung out an amazing amount of IQ from that combo, such that most of the time what I get is about what I would want from a shot anyway, so why bother with something else?

As I said, I use it to document, snapshot and when I can't or don't want to carry a full bag. I use with my K-nmont lenses to goof around with super-tele-class reach on a budget. I actually enjoy freaking out people with my tiny "real" camera.

Knowing what it can and cannot do is essential - and using something else when you want to do something Q cannot do.


Last edited by monochrome; 04-26-2013 at 07:24 AM.
04-26-2013, 03:28 PM   #39
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Edmonton, Alberta Canada
Posts: 554
Q is Great for Travel

Even though I have a DSLR (many) when I am travelling, the Q is one of the camera in my travel bag. its build quality and ability to change lenses make it a great option. For travel I pair the 02 and 06 zooms which gives lots of coverage.

Dale
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
Proper Fit Between the Adapter Q Mount and the Camera Q Mount Flinty Pentax Q 2 03-29-2013 01:56 PM
Which is the right forum for ..? Andrew Crouch Photographic Technique 8 07-31-2012 06:05 PM
Is this the right hood emulsify Pentax K-r 11 07-18-2012 08:09 PM
The way it is on the Right normhead General Talk 4 07-03-2012 11:34 PM
Nature The Red is Right...... Rupert Post Your Photos! 7 03-28-2012 12:53 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:32 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