[rwingsfan]

I have been struggling with this for some time now. I know there are some similar threads all of which I have read. I normally research a purchase pretty extensively before pulling the trigger. For the life of me I am having a great deal of difficulty deciding between these platforms. All offer a compelling attribute, but none seem to have it all. With the Q and Q7 I most like the ability for macro and long reach, however I have some worry about IQ. The NEX seems most suited as it can be adapted to K mount lens and seems to have great IQ. The K-01 for sure has great IQ and complete compatibility. My needs are somewhat conflicting I guess. I love the small footprint of the Q series and the initial investment is decent. I like the thought of great reach with this setup and have seen the incredible macro shots that come from the camera. My issue with the Q is that a number of "normal" shots I have seen are just "meh". I see conflicting issues with the K adapters for the Q also, and no way am I paying 200-300 for a Pentax unit. The NEX is quite intriguing as its footprint is relatively small, has great IQ, decent compatibility to K lens, and can be had on the second hand market at a decent price. However why are there sooooo many models of the NEX? Jeeez seems to be a lot of overlap there. Finally the K-01 was my original choice. Smaller than my K5II w/grip but not exactly demure. It has comparable IQ with my K5II and unfettered compatibility with my K lens lineup. I have had some trouble finding one of these at a price point I am good with, but have missed a few to indecision also. Again my usage will be a backup to my K5II, a little smaller footprint to through into the saddlebags of our bike, and a smaller vacation kit. I wished they made a unit with the footprint and long reach of the Q, the IQ of the NEX, and the complete compatibility of the K-01. Pipe dreams I know. Anyway done rambling. If you have one or more of these kits and can comment on the real world pros and cons, I could sure use the help in deciding which way to go. BTW I am going to keep my budget around $400 or under for body and adapter, native lens are not as important to me, but would like to get at least one. Thoughts?

Guess I should have posted in the general mirror less section, oh well

[causey]

Take a look at Sony a3000 --- a dslr-like mirrorless in E mount. $290 at amazon, has a great 20mp sensor and an EVF, weighs 400 grams.

[Biro]

Take a look at Sony a3000 --- a dslr-like mirrorless in E mount. $290 at amazon, has a great 20mp sensor and an EVF, weighs 400 grams.

Yeah, I would have to second this interesting suggestion. The A3000 might not be the first, or even second, camera that comes to mind in this kind of situation. But, think about it: $290? With kit 18-55mm E-mount lens, an APS-C sensor and built-in EVF? C'mon. The EVF is small and low-resolution but is perfectly serviceable. You can always use the rear LCD, as you would with the NEX-3 and NEX-5, if you need it for manual focusing with Pentax lenses. And you could always add the inexpensive Sigma 19mm and 30mm f/2.8 primes and have a second mini-system. If you ever decide you don't like or want the A3000 any longer, the lenses will work on any other NEX body, including the NEX-6 and NEX-7. But the A3000 is a cheap, low-risk way to try out NEX.

[rwingsfan]

Took a look at the a3000, while it is quite interesting I am not sure I want another almost full size dslr. It does seem to be quite a good value.

[causey]

Took a look at the a3000, while it is quite interesting I am not sure I want another almost full size dslr. It does seem to be quite a good value.

It's 200 grams lighter than the K-01.

[rwingsfan]

It's 200 grams lighter than the K-01.

I am not sure weight is a big factor for me, but rather footprint. It looks as big as a K30 but maybe its deceiving.

[DaveInPA]

I have been struggling with this for some time now. I know there are some similar threads all of which I have read. I normally research a purchase pretty extensively before pulling the trigger. For the life of me I am having a great deal of difficulty deciding between these platforms. All offer a compelling attribute, but none seem to have it all. With the Q and Q7 I most like the ability for macro and long reach, however I have some worry about IQ. The NEX seems most suited as it can be adapted to K mount lens and seems to have great IQ. The K-01 for sure has great IQ and complete compatibility. My needs are somewhat conflicting I guess. I love the small footprint of the Q series and the initial investment is decent. I like the thought of great reach with this setup and have seen the incredible macro shots that come from the camera. My issue with the Q is that a number of "normal" shots I have seen are just "meh". I see conflicting issues with the K adapters for the Q also, and no way am I paying 200-300 for a Pentax unit. The NEX is quite intriguing as its footprint is relatively small, has great IQ, decent compatibility to K lens, and can be had on the second hand market at a decent price. However why are there sooooo many models of the NEX? Jeeez seems to be a lot of overlap there. Finally the K-01 was my original choice. Smaller than my K5II w/grip but not exactly demure. It has comparable IQ with my K5II and unfettered compatibility with my K lens lineup. I have had some trouble finding one of these at a price point I am good with, but have missed a few to indecision also. Again my usage will be a backup to my K5II, a little smaller footprint to through into the saddlebags of our bike, and a smaller vacation kit. I wished they made a unit with the footprint and long reach of the Q, the IQ of the NEX, and the complete compatibility of the K-01. Pipe dreams I know. Anyway done rambling. If you have one or more of these kits and can comment on the real world pros and cons, I could sure use the help in deciding which way to go. BTW I am going to keep my budget around $400 or under for body and adapter, native lens are not as important to me, but would like to get at least one. Thoughts?

Guess I should have posted in the general mirror less section, oh well

Here are some of my thoughts on how I approached a similar dilemma. I have the Pentax Q7, the Olympus OMD E-M5, and the Canon EOS-M. I like them all for different reasons.

The OMD E-M5 is now my main kit and the one in which I've invested most heavily in lenses. I used to have a Pentax K5...which I loved...but I got tired of lugging something around that was so big.

But I did want an even smaller option, so I bought a Pentax Q back when they were on sale (for $199) and the EOS-M during its fire sale ($299). My plan was to pick one to keep and sell the other. But it looks like I'll end up keeping both.

I like the EOS-M because it has an APS-C sensor and with its 22mm pancake lens is pocketable (meaning jacket pocket or cargo short pocket...not jeans). I bring this along with me when i don't want a camera bag but I really want good low light performance. I eventually picked up a used Sunpak flash online for $40 and the 18-55mm kit lens for $90 but I don't plan on investing any further due to Canon's lack of commitment.

I eventually upgraded my Q to the Q7 and I typically bring that when I want to avoid a camera bag and still want the option of multiple lenses. I actually bring my Q7 into football games with the 01 prime on it and then also bring the 06 long zoom and the 03 fisheye. All of these fit into my cargo shorts or into the large pocket of my pull over hoodie. Being able to switch lenses is a good option and I still get images that look great when viewed online or played on our digital photo frame. If you pixel peep you'll see the Q7 doesn't match the m4/3 or the APS-C...but that should be expected. The key thing is the images still look great when viewing the image normally.

Which one you choose depends alot on how you want to use it. And what lenses you want.

Another option to check out is the panasonic lumix dmc-gm1 which might be a nice compromise...it has a micro 4/3 sensor and a body that is actually smaller than the Q7 (but the lenses will be larger):

Compare camera dimensions side by side

Attached Images

 

[rwingsfan]

Here are some of my thoughts on how I approached a similar dilemma. I have the Pentax Q7, the Olympus OMD E-M5, and the Canon EOS-M. I like them all for different reasons.

The OMD E-M5 is now my main kit and the one in which I've invested most heavily in lenses. I used to have a Pentax K5...which I loved...but I got tired of lugging something around that was so big.

But I did want an even smaller option, so I bought a Pentax Q back when they were on sale (for $199) and the EOS-M during its fire sale ($299). My plan was to pick one to keep and sell the other. But it looks like I'll end up keeping both.

I like the EOS-M because it has an APS-C sensor and with its 22mm pancake lens is pocketable (meaning jacket pocket or cargo short pocket...not jeans). I bring this along with me when i don't want a camera bag but I really want good low light performance. I eventually picked up a used Sunpak flash online for $40 and the 18-55mm kit lens for $90 but I don't plan on investing any further due to Canon's lack of commitment.

I eventually upgraded my Q to the Q7 and I typically bring that when I want to avoid a camera bag and still want the option of multiple lenses. I actually bring my Q7 into football games with the 01 prime on it and then also bring the 06 long zoom and the 03 fisheye. All of these fit into my cargo shorts or into the large pocket of my pull over hoodie. Being able to switch lenses is a good option and I still get images that look great when viewed online or played on our digital photo frame. If you pixel peep you'll see the Q7 doesn't match the m4/3 or the APS-C...but that should be expected. The key thing is the images still look great when viewing the image normally.

Which one you choose depends alot on how you want to use it. And what lenses you want.

Another option to check out is the panasonic lumix dmc-gm1 which might be a nice compromise...it has a micro 4/3 sensor and a body that is actually smaller than the Q7 (but the lenses will be larger):

Compare camera dimensions side by side

Very nice link and just what I needed to compare sizes. As I suspected the A3000 is much too large as I would rather just get a k30 if going that route. The search is on.

[DaveInPA]

Very nice link and just what I needed to compare sizes. As I suspected the A3000 is much too large as I would rather just get a k30 if going that route. The search is on.

Yes...that website is great. You can also "add" lenses to bodies to compare the sizes of different combinations of bodies & lenses.

Here's a nice comparison of the Lumix GM-1 (with 2 lens options), the Pentax Q7 and the Canon EOS-M...

[philbaum]

My similar dilemma was to find a camera for carrying on hikes and casual street carrying.

I ended up buying the Nex 5n and later the Nex 6. I was unwilling to give any IQ from the Sony aps sensor so ended up getting these Nexes.

The good:
Reportedly the focus peaking and magnified focusing in Nex is the best in the business, whether it is or not is irrelevant, its very good for manual lenses, and AF lenses when conditions won't permit AF

Tilting LCD is very useful, why Pentax steers away from it in its dslrs is beyond me. Also its built extremely well, don't expect any fails from it

I didn't enjoy using macro lenses till i bought these nexes, they make macros a ton of fun. you can use the tilting lcd to shoot macros from a variety of viewpoints using the lcd and focus peaking.

All of my Pentax lenses work on the Nex, just not in AF mode. I ended up buying 2 fotodiox adapters pk to nex. Had absolutely no problems using them. One has a built-in tripod mount which is nice. I've even used my DA-300 with the Nex.

Cons of Nex
Not water-resistant like Pentax :-)

Doesn't have the choice of lenses that Pentax has. This used to be worse but with the arrival of 2 new zooms in 2013, they are now out there, but a bit spendy.

I now carry a Sigma 19, 30 and plan on getting the 60. In addition to Sigma AF lenses, i carry the DA35 macro, and a Penta M 100F4 macro, both of which work well with the Nex.

The Nex bodies lack some of the functionality one gets used to with Pentax K5 bodies - such as no AF button like the K5's and K3, but has some features that Pentax doesn't

Nex 6 and 5n bodies provide 12 bit files, not the 14 bit files of the K5s. Makes a difference in how one can process some files.


When i'm shooting rehearsal plays or need the best files, i always choose my K5. Casual walkarounds, i carry the Nexs. There are no perfect cameras - they all have some level of compromise.

[rwingsfan]

seems there is a plethora of MFT cameras to consider also.....jeesh

[wolfiegirl]

I was in a similar boat to yours but ended up getting a q mainly due to price point. the footprint makes me happy but iq in low light cannot compare to my k-01 and k100d.

The nex adapters are cheaper than the q ones. I like that the q gives me new telephoto options but the learning curve is pretty high with the non Pentax adapter.

I enjoy the k-01 a lot and is a big staple in my kit but its footprint is fairly big.

[6BQ5]

I am continuously intrigued by the A3000. It packs a lot of concepts into a rather small package. My concern is not the low resolution screens. I thought it only had one wheel and I don't think I would have the energy to sustain another lens system. Yes, the body is smaller than my K-30 but the difference felt less dramatic than I had hoped for. Maybe by the numbers it looks significant. I would still like to know if it can do focus peaking in the EVF. If it can do that then I can see myself using something like that. The display model at Walmart never works! Then again, a K-01 with a LCD loupe sounds even better!