Pentax Q7 Sample Photos [18]

Adam · 06-19-2013, 04:34 PM

Here are a few sample photos I snapped today with the Q7 and 02 lens. All were shot in raw and converted in photoshop. Enjoy!

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

View Picture EXIF

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

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

Adam · 06-19-2013, 04:35 PM

Some more Q7 pics:

Steve.Ledger · 06-19-2013, 04:55 PM

The WB seems off on the first set.
Also, some look over sharpened?

Thanks for posting, but so far I see no improvement over the results I get from the original Q.
Looking at your high ISO shots in the other thread leaves me with the same feeling, the current Q does not do as bad as some have said, well - at least mine doesn't.

Adam · 06-19-2013, 04:58 PM

The illusion of overshaprening may be due to the fact that I use bilinear resampling by default rather than bicubic. I'm going to redo the jpegs.

As for the image quality, it's noticeably better, but even in web sized images you can see that they came from a point and shoot.

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

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

Phil A · 06-19-2013, 05:05 PM

Maybe the D-Range setting is also switched on or set to auto. Never used it myself, but there's not much contrast in the pics and very little shadow. Some harsh light you're working with there in some of the photos too.
The lens seems to manage OK with the larger sensor, corner to corner.

panoguy · 06-19-2013, 05:25 PM

Originally posted by Phil A

The lens seems to manage OK with the larger sensor, corner to corner.

That's about all we can tell from these snapshots. If the DNGs were posted, we might be able to actually see what the colors and resolution are like beyond the poorly calibrated processing.

**monochrome** · 06-19-2013, 05:29 PM

Originally posted by panoguy

That's about all we can tell from these snapshots. If the DNGs were posted, we might be able to actually see what the colors and resolution are like beyond the poorly calibrated processing.

Don't Harsh the thread, man!

Sandy Hancock · 06-19-2013, 05:39 PM

Very impressed by the edge performance of the 02 on the bigger sensor.
The dynamic range looks pretty good too.

anthony mazzeri · 06-19-2013, 05:57 PM

Is this barrel distortion due to the larger sensor or is it the same with the previous Q/10? This is similar to RX100 raw files at the wide end so I assume there is some similar in-camera correction if you shoot jpg.

Adam · 06-19-2013, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by anthony mazzeri

Is this barrel distortion due to the larger sensor or is it the same with the previous Q/10? This is similar to RX100 raw files at the wide end so I assume there is some similar in-camera correction if you shoot jpg.

Yup. I tried correcting it and the correction amount was pretty big, but I decided to leave it alone as the original looked better.

stormtech · 06-19-2013, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by panoguy

That's about all we can tell from these snapshots. If the DNGs were posted, we might be able to actually see what the colors and resolution are like beyond the poorly calibrated processing.

While I certainly appreciate your showing us some sample images Adam, I kind of agree with Panoguy here. We all have our own recipe and likes for tuning our raw images, and I would really like to try my own processing on some of the raws.

I must admit that my first reaction was "what happened to the great Pentax colors?". I guess it could be the 02 lens since I only have the 01 native lens.

Edit to add - just realized that the 02 lens in the kit probably has no hood - that may make the difference in what I am used to seeing......

ruggiex · 06-19-2013, 06:39 PM

Thanks for the samples. I'm kind of confused. Since it has electronic leveler shouldn't it be able to tell the orientation of the camera and tag it so? I wonder why it's omitted. It's easily corrected in post but I'd prefer to have that done for me...

shooty77 · 06-20-2013, 01:54 AM

Thanks for these first impressions.

When shooting highlights like burning candles or sunsets the Q/Q10 suffered from strong flare (see Pentax-01 Standard Prime 8.5mm f/1.9 (Pentax Q) - Review / Lens Test - Sample Images & Verdict). It was stated by Pentax that this flare is sensor based. Can you say if the Q7 is better in this respect?

NeilGratton · 06-20-2013, 04:13 AM

Originally posted by Sandy Hancock

The dynamic range looks pretty good too.

That was my first thought (It's an area where I do see that my girlfriend's MX-1 beats my Q10).

NeilGratton · 06-20-2013, 04:18 AM

Originally posted by Adam

As for the image quality [-] even in web sized images you can see that they came from a point and shoot.

What makes you say that? I reshot a woodland photo from a 3.2 megapixel 1/2.5" zoom camera (Konica Minolta Z10) on an 8 megapixel APS-C Canon with a 28mm/2.8, and I don't think I could see the quality difference between old and new in web-sized images.

06-19-2013, 06:19 PM	#10
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,594 Original Poster	Originally posted by anthony mazzeri Is this barrel distortion due to the larger sensor or is it the same with the previous Q/10? This is similar to RX100 raw files at the wide end so I assume there is some similar in-camera correction if you shoot jpg. Yup. I tried correcting it and the correction amount was pretty big, but I decided to leave it alone as the original looked better. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: 85mm f2 Pentax-M sharp!! - loads of sample photos	davidxgreen	Sold Items	2	02-08-2013 02:40 AM
Pentax K-5 IIs First Impressions, sample comparative photos	Adam	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	89	10-31-2012 03:45 AM
Pentax k-5 IIs - Are sample gallery photos coming?	Racerdew	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	16	10-02-2012 11:12 AM
Sigma 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 OS HSM Sample Photos	Parallax	Lens Sample Photo Archive	3	06-19-2012 05:59 PM

06-19-2013, 04:55 PM	#3
Steve.Ledger Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Far North Qld Posts: 3,301	The WB seems off on the first set. Also, some look over sharpened? Thanks for posting, but so far I see no improvement over the results I get from the original Q. Looking at your high ISO shots in the other thread leaves me with the same feeling, the current Q does not do as bad as some have said, well - at least mine doesn't.

06-19-2013, 04:58 PM	#4
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,594 Original Poster	The illusion of overshaprening may be due to the fact that I use bilinear resampling by default rather than bicubic. I'm going to redo the jpegs. As for the image quality, it's noticeably better, but even in web sized images you can see that they came from a point and shoot. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

06-19-2013, 05:05 PM	#5
Phil A Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 40	Maybe the D-Range setting is also switched on or set to auto. Never used it myself, but there's not much contrast in the pics and very little shadow. Some harsh light you're working with there in some of the photos too. The lens seems to manage OK with the larger sensor, corner to corner.

06-19-2013, 05:25 PM	#6
panoguy Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,327	Originally posted by Phil A The lens seems to manage OK with the larger sensor, corner to corner. That's about all we can tell from these snapshots. If the DNGs were posted, we might be able to actually see what the colors and resolution are like beyond the poorly calibrated processing.

06-19-2013, 05:29 PM	#7
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by panoguy That's about all we can tell from these snapshots. If the DNGs were posted, we might be able to actually see what the colors and resolution are like beyond the poorly calibrated processing. Don't Harsh the thread, man!

06-19-2013, 05:39 PM	#8
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	Very impressed by the edge performance of the 02 on the bigger sensor. The dynamic range looks pretty good too.

06-19-2013, 05:57 PM	#9
anthony mazzeri Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 312	Is this barrel distortion due to the larger sensor or is it the same with the previous Q/10? This is similar to RX100 raw files at the wide end so I assume there is some similar in-camera correction if you shoot jpg.

06-19-2013, 06:21 PM	#11
stormtech Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: In the boonies (NW Penna) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,744	Originally posted by panoguy That's about all we can tell from these snapshots. If the DNGs were posted, we might be able to actually see what the colors and resolution are like beyond the poorly calibrated processing. While I certainly appreciate your showing us some sample images Adam, I kind of agree with Panoguy here. We all have our own recipe and likes for tuning our raw images, and I would really like to try my own processing on some of the raws. I must admit that my first reaction was "what happened to the great Pentax colors?". I guess it could be the 02 lens since I only have the 01 native lens. Edit to add - just realized that the 02 lens in the kit probably has no hood - that may make the difference in what I am used to seeing......

06-19-2013, 06:39 PM	#12
ruggiex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: East Bay Area Photos: Gallery Posts: 811	Thanks for the samples. I'm kind of confused. Since it has electronic leveler shouldn't it be able to tell the orientation of the camera and tag it so? I wonder why it's omitted. It's easily corrected in post but I'd prefer to have that done for me...

06-20-2013, 01:54 AM	#13
shooty77 New Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 8	Thanks for these first impressions. When shooting highlights like burning candles or sunsets the Q/Q10 suffered from strong flare (see Pentax-01 Standard Prime 8.5mm f/1.9 (Pentax Q) - Review / Lens Test - Sample Images & Verdict). It was stated by Pentax that this flare is sensor based. Can you say if the Q7 is better in this respect?

06-20-2013, 04:13 AM	#14
NeilGratton Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Exeter, Devon Posts: 137	Originally posted by Sandy Hancock The dynamic range looks pretty good too. That was my first thought (It's an area where I do see that my girlfriend's MX-1 beats my Q10).

06-20-2013, 04:18 AM	#15
NeilGratton Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Exeter, Devon Posts: 137	Originally posted by Adam As for the image quality [-] even in web sized images you can see that they came from a point and shoot. What makes you say that? I reshot a woodland photo from a 3.2 megapixel 1/2.5" zoom camera (Konica Minolta Z10) on an 8 megapixel APS-C Canon with a 28mm/2.8, and I don't think I could see the quality difference between old and new in web-sized images.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search