Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-12-2013, 03:44 PM   #1
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
Q lens equivalents for Q/Q10 vs Q7

Here they are in rough form (rounded for ease of use) based on the 5.64 & 4.55 crop factors posted by Adam for the cameras in the announcement.


I find the numbers for the Q7 crop factor interesting. We essentially have a 28, 40, 50, 85, 70-200, 15, 24-70 - which are all classic numbers and ranges in the Pentax lens lineup over the years. The correspondence is not exact, please don't quibble, but it is close. The 06 is now a 68-205 (70-200) f2.8 which is a killer range and lens IMHO. Very interesting arrangement.


These lenses make extensive use of high-performance optics for superior imaging power that minimizes aberrations.
  • Standard fixed-focal-length lens
    01 STANDARD PRIME


  • Standard zoom lens
    02 STANDARD ZOOM


  • Telephoto zoom lens
    06 TELEPHOTO ZOOM



Unique-Lens Series

Create distinctive images with these compact, lightweight and reasonably priced lenses.
• Unique Len Series lenses are manual focus and fixed aperture with no built-in lens shutter.
  • Fish-eye lens
    03 FISH-EYE


    TYPO ALERT the Q-Q10 Angle should read "160" not 100 degrees
  • Wide-angle lens
    04 TOY LENS WIDE


  • Telephoto lens
    05 TOY LENS TELEPHOTO


  • Mount shield lens
    07 MOUNT SHIELD LENS




Offical Pentax Specs for all lenses on the Q7 can be found here:
http://www.pentax.jp/english/products/q7/lenses/index.html



Last edited by Docrwm; 06-14-2013 at 04:30 AM.
06-12-2013, 03:54 PM   #2
Pentaxian
panoguy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington, D.C.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,290
You don't think that this was planned, do you?
06-12-2013, 04:03 PM   #3
Veteran Member
EarlVonTapia's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Vancouver
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,155
QuoteOriginally posted by panoguy Quote
You don't think that this was planned, do you?
I thought Pentax set their company strategy using dice rolls (D20's) and dart boards.
06-12-2013, 04:27 PM   #4
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
We essentially have a 28, 40, 50, 85, 70-200, 15, 24-70
I noticed the same and I think it was planned. Because otherwise, the image circles wouldn't match now which is a 2nd indication.

However, some new 645D lenses are said to cover the full image circle (with good enough resolution) only if sold in Japan (because of poor yield). Therefore, I think Pentax should assure customers that existing Q lenses are a good match for the Q7.

Another observation I make:

The image circle for the Q mount is NOT carved in stone AND the mount diameter seems to support much larger image circles than even the Q7 uses (my guess is the mount supports the 1" format).

So, there may be a Q5 or Q3 in the makes with an even larger sensor. But it may need new lenses, at least new wide angle ones. Note that this is my personal speculation. Based on user reaction that the 1/1.7" format is outdated for an ILC, given there is Nikon 1 and Sony RX100. It could be interesting to evaluate the image circles of existing Q lenses.

(As a note I have to make of course, the equivalent 70-200 is to be labelled 70-200/12. F2.8 applies to 15-45 only. Not need to discuss though.)


Last edited by falconeye; 06-12-2013 at 04:37 PM.
06-12-2013, 04:32 PM   #5
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
I noticed the same and I think it was planned. Because otherwise, the image circles wouldn't match now which is a 2nd indication.

However, some new 645D lenses are said to cover the full image circle (with good enough resolution) only if sold in Japan (because of poor yield). Therefore, I think Pentax should assure customers that existing Q lenses are a good match for the Q7.

Another observation I make:

The image circle for the Q mount is NOT carved in stone AND the mount diameter seems to support much larger image circles than even the Q7 uses (my guess is the mount supports the 1" format).

So, there may be a Q5 or Q3 in the makes with an even larger sensor. But it may need new lenses, at least new wide angle ones. Note that this is my personal speculation. Based on user reaction that the 1/1.7" format is outdated for an ILC, given there is Nikon 1 and Sony RX100. It could be interesting to evaluate the image circles of existing Q lenses.
Yes, I think it makes sense that this was a contingency plan and that the numbers were planned. It's just too classic a lineup of focal length equivalents.

The image circle may support up to 1" (and I agree with you that it looks likely) but I do not believe the case will support a 1" sensor with SR and all the framing that requires to operate effectively.

They have the old image circle/crop factor information still listed for the 02 on the Q7. Here is what the official description of the 02 with the new Q7 says at B&H:

"The Pentax 02 Standard 5-15mm Zoom lens provides the 35mm focal length equivalent of a 27.5-83mm lens, incorporating wide angle to short telephoto lengths. It is ideal as an everyday lens not simply due to its versatility but because it offers a compact and lightweight form factor. Its f/2.8 maximum aperture at the wide-angle end is effective in low light situations and is able to produce a shallow depth of field. Four extra-low dispersion aspherical lens elements keep chromatic aberrations to a minimum throughout its zoom range and Pentax's exclusive lens coating technology reduces flare and helps to produce sharp, high contrast images. An integrated neutral density filter provides 2-stops of light reduction for enhanced exposure control when using wide apertures in bright light."
06-12-2013, 05:05 PM - 1 Like   #6
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
I'm not surprised.

Pentax has always liked their lenses to follow the classic 35mm FL EQs to a great extent, and this only makes sense. What this illustrates is that the Q system was probably designed with a 1/1.7" sensor in mind, but the sensor mfgs weren't cooperating at the time when Hoya decided to actually release the system since the best sensor available in this format at that time was the 10MP CCD that we saw in the Canon, Nikon, and Samsung "enthusiast" class compacts (Panasonic was also using a CCD in their LX5, but it was a 1/1.63" format). Pentax stated that the Q was a camera waiting for a sensor, Hoya wanted to announce the Q system before they sold the Pentax Camera division, and this CCD sensor wouldn't cut it because it wasn't capable of shooting HD video. The 12MP BSI CMOS had very similar IQ and had been available for some time, so they went with it to meet the timetable set for the sale of the division. The lenses purposefully omitted any reference to 35mm FL EQ because that would be confusing if they later decided to go with the larger format (I personally like this decision, and wish they never started this FL EQ stuff).

Other things to note: The much (and justifiably so) maligned 1/13 sec sync limit for the CMOS electronic shutter would not have existed if they had gone with the CCD since those sensors can globally refresh and give flash sync up to max electronic shutter speed. It's only with CMOS sensors that the electronic shutter is so limited to sequential scan speed until they develop new technology (probably in the on-chip processor cicuitry) that could allow significantly faster sync speeds, so a late-in-the-game decision to go with the 1/2.3" CMOS instead of a 1/1.7" CCD probably threw a wrench in the designers' plans. Also, this might have delayed the announcement of the Pentax K2Q adapter because a CMOS sensor introduced more likely scenarios where jello would effect IQ, since just about all adapted K mounts would be turned into relatively long tele FLs. Also, this made the Q with adapted lenses almost useless for macro, which is another potential strength of the system's specs, so they might have had to scramble to add a leaf shutter to the adapter (which they'd have to do anyway because CMOS is likely the only type of sensors, regardless of format, we'll see in the foreseeable future).

We'll have to see how this turns out. If the Q7 sells well, then it's good for us because it will help to ensure the survival of the system and more Q system lenses for the future. I won't be preordering a Q7, but will be willing to give it a look if my local dealer gets one in stock. They could have made me a believer if they had included a higher res LCD and/or made provisions for an accessory EVF, even with the larger format. I still might bite if they've made some significant changes to the external flash protocols. We'll have to see. . .

Scott
06-12-2013, 05:42 PM   #7
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
The lens contacts would probably prohibit a 1" sensor, especially with SR.
06-12-2013, 05:55 PM   #8
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,877
But now for the big question, will the IQ be significantly better? A Q7 with a k-adapter turns my A-400 into an 1800 mm equivalent for birding , but can I live with the IQ? The Q10 wasn't good enough IMHO. Will there be enough improvement? Tune in next week.

06-12-2013, 05:59 PM   #9
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
But now for the big question, will the IQ be significantly better? A Q7 with a k-adapter turns my A-400 into an 1800 mm equivalent for birding , but can I live with the IQ? The Q10 wasn't good enough IMHO. Will there be enough improvement? Tune in next week.
Well, some guys takes amazing bird shots with their K-lenses on the Q. Sadly you lose some pixel pitch density with the Q7 but the lenses will be thankful for the lower needed resolution.
06-12-2013, 06:01 PM   #10
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,455
I imagine this is what Jim Malcolm was signaling in the Q Users conference call when he said Q is the really exciting mount, with potential for real growth. As I recall, when I posted the transcript, some here scoffed and others were curious. I wouldn't be surprised to discover in a few yeas there are many more unanticipated steps in the Q System evolution.
06-12-2013, 06:10 PM   #11
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
I imagine this is what Jim Malcolm was signaling in the Q Users conference call when he said Q is the really exciting mount, with potential for real growth. As I recall, when I posted the transcript, some here scoffed and others were curious. I wouldn't be surprised to discover in a few yeas there are many more unanticipated steps in the Q System evolution.
It's like they planned to get a bit laughed and scuffed at by people, only to hope that people would finally realize the potential when enough bought the 1/2.3" ones. Then when the hype on forums etc hit a high level due to people actually sharing how much they like the camera release a model that brings the rest of the markets attention. Oh boy, they played us on the forum to become a big army of great marketing capability!
06-12-2013, 06:22 PM   #12
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by VisualDarkness Quote
It's like they planned to get a bit laughed and scuffed at by people, only to hope that people would finally realize the potential when enough bought the 1/2.3" ones. Then when the hype on forums etc hit a high level due to people actually sharing how much they like the camera release a model that brings the rest of the markets attention. Oh boy, they played us on the forum to become a big army of great marketing capability!
Excellent. Finally some thought about marketing!
06-12-2013, 06:39 PM   #13
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,455
QuoteOriginally posted by VisualDarkness Quote
It's like they planned to get a bit laughed and scuffed at by people, only to hope that people would finally realize the potential when enough bought the 1/2.3" ones. Then when the hype on forums etc hit a high level due to people actually sharing how much they like the camera release a model that brings the rest of the markets attention. Oh boy, they played us on the forum to become a big army of great marketing capability!
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
Excellent. Finally some thought about marketing!
Well viral marketing or not, they really played me, then.
06-12-2013, 06:50 PM   #14
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Well viral marketing or not, they really played me, then.
I'm just glad that they appear to be putting some thought into this whole thing, for a change.

Q7 -> K500 -> K-50 -> K5I/IIs makes for a nice lineup IMHO. My only suggestion is that they bring back the 18-55 + 55-300 kit combination, which was the best deal they have put together as a kit and beats the other intro kits hands down.
06-12-2013, 06:57 PM   #15
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
I'm just glad that they appear to be putting some thought into this whole thing, for a change.

Q7 -> K500 -> K-50 -> K5I/IIs makes for a nice lineup IMHO. My only suggestion is that they bring back the 18-55 + 55-300 kit combination, which was the best deal they have put together as a kit and beats the other intro kits hands down.
They just need to make the 55-300 WR first to offer full WR kits like that.
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, crop, lens, lenses, mirrorless, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q10, q7, series, shield, telephoto
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Q vs Q10 Lowell Goudge Pentax Q 10 03-31-2013 02:25 PM
Q10 vs Q mdodrill Pentax Q 8 02-26-2013 01:16 PM
DxOMark: Q vs. Q10 froeschle Pentax Q 7 02-13-2013 01:46 PM
Q vs Q10? Sagitta Pentax Q 10 01-30-2013 05:52 PM
Q10 arrives. Q10 vs Q comparison images. barondla Pentax Q 6 10-29-2012 09:58 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:56 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