[hoffo]

"It seems that Pentax will be announcing a new Q2 mirrorless camera at Photokina - the first images already leaked on the Japanese digicame-info website. The name of the new model could also be Q-S1 (or Q2) and it will be available in black, gold, white and gunmetal colors. Detailed specifications are not yet available."

Pictures of upcoming Pentax Q2 mirrorless camera leak online | Photo Rumors

[barondla]

Great news! Can't wait to see what the features are.
thanks for sharing
barondla

[Guakala]

Pentax Gods, grace us with an articulating/detachable EVF! Or at the very least an articulating screen a la MX-1.

[GibbyTheMole]

Pentax Gods, grace us with an articulating/detachable EVF! Or at the very least an articulating screen a la MX-1.

Yep... I'm down with that idea.

[CWRailman]

I called it in this thread
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/269143-no-more-individual-colors-q.html

But what is that knob on the right side grip where I keep my finger when shooting. That HAS to go.

Denny

[filoxophy]

Yeah, what is that? Almost looks like a second control dial, but the placement (regardless of function) is head-scratching at this point...

[Sandy Hancock]

But what is that knob on the right side grip where I keep my finger when shooting. That HAS to go.

Maybe it's simply all that's left of the lovely Q7/Q10 grip now that the design is dedicated to appeasing hipster Leica-philes.
But I doubt it....

[oscaletrains]

Maybe it's simply all that's left of the lovely Q7/Q10 grip now that the design is dedicated to appeasing hipster Leica-philes.
But I doubt it....

Lovely...not. My Q and Q10 will have to suffice. MAYBE a Q7 body if the right color comes along, but I would NEVER purchase anything that looks like that "rumor" photo.

[mike_perth]

You and I have the same luck my Q7 arrived about 10 days ago!! Could have waited for the run out sales!

I called it in this thread
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/269143-no-more-individual-colors-q.html

But what is that knob on the right side grip where I keep my finger when shooting. That HAS to go.

Denny

[Neopifex]

I'm soooo glad I held off on buying a Q7 this summer! The temptation was immense, especially since the black & yellow model would match my car.

I'm a tiny bit disappointed that there won't be custom colors available, but whatever. I can live with black.

The only thing I'd really like to see in this new model is slightly higher resolution. 16Mp would be awesome, especially since that's what I'm used to with my K-5. An EVF accessory would be nice, but I've got a feeling it would end up being prohibitively expensive.

As an avid Auto 110 user back in the day, I still wish they'd make an official lens adapter with a built-in iris, but that dream will likely never be a reality.

[CWRailman]

The only thing I'd really like to see in this new model is slightly higher resolution. 16Mp would be awesome, especially since that's what I'm used to with my K-5. An EVF accessory would be nice, but I've got a feeling it would end up being prohibitively expensive.

There are a lot of fallacies about more MP being better. 16MP in a small size sensor will not give you the same quality as 16mp in a larger sensor such as in your K-5 series camera. On page 23 in his Complete Digital Photography (Third Edition) book Ben Long explains this. Calling a pixel a photosite.

“By packing more and more photosites onto an image sensor, chipmakers can increase the sensors resolution. However there is a price to pay for this. To pack more photosites onto the surface of the chip, the individual sites have to be made smaller. As each site gets smaller, it’s ability to collect light is compromised because it simply doesn’t have as much physical space to catch passing protons. This limitation results in a chip with a poor signal to noise ratio; that is the amount of good data the chip is collecting-the signal-is muddied by the amount of noise-noise from the camera electronics, noise from other nearby electrical sources, noise from cosmic rays raining down from space-that the chip is collecting.”

He then goes on to discuss ways that chip manufactures attempt to compensate for such deficiencies and improve a chips light collecting ability.

Other WEB sites have commented on similar misconceptions. While this one is comparing cell phones to camera’s the argument is still valid.
Camera megapixels: Why more isn't always better (Smartphones Unlocked) - CNET

IMHO, The size of each pixel is more important than the number of pixels. In testing I have found that my 6.1MP K-100 produces a better image than my Q7. That being said, none of my enlargements are over 8x10 with most being used either on my WEB site or for company brochures. Actually I purchased my K-5 series camera’s not for the MP but for the features. I would have been equally as happy if they had a 12MP sensor which is more than adequate for my photography purposes. Personally I wish they would give up already on the MP race which has gotten ridiculous and start producing some reasonably priced high quality lenses. Reasonably Priced being the functional words here.

Denny

[Sgtsween]

There are a lot of fallacies about more MP being better. 16MP in a small size sensor will not give you the same quality as 16mp in a larger sensor such as in your K-5 series camera. On page 23 in his Complete Digital Photography (Third Edition) book Ben Long explains this. Calling a pixel a photosite.

“By packing more and more photosites onto an image sensor, chipmakers can increase the sensors resolution. However there is a price to pay for this. To pack more photosites onto the surface of the chip, the individual sites have to be made smaller. As each site gets smaller, it’s ability to collect light is compromised because it simply doesn’t have as much physical space to catch passing protons. This limitation results in a chip with a poor signal to noise ratio; that is the amount of good data the chip is collecting-the signal-is muddied by the amount of noise-noise from the camera electronics, noise from other nearby electrical sources, noise from cosmic rays raining down from space-that the chip is collecting.”

He then goes on to discuss ways that chip manufactures attempt to compensate for such deficiencies and improve a chips light collecting ability.

Other WEB sites have commented on similar misconceptions. While this one is comparing cell phones to camera’s the argument is still valid.
Camera megapixels: Why more isn't always better (Smartphones Unlocked) - CNET

IMHO, The size of each pixel is more important than the number of pixels. In testing I have found that my 6.1MP K-100 produces a better image than my Q7. That being said, none of my enlargements are over 8x10 with most being used either on my WEB site or for company brochures. Actually I purchased my K-5 series camera’s not for the MP but for the features. I would have been equally as happy if they had a 12MP sensor which is more than adequate for my photography purposes. Personally I wish they would give up already on the MP race which has gotten ridiculous and start producing some reasonably priced high quality lenses. Reasonably Priced being the functional words here.

Denny

EXACTLY! I've seen a few people state that they hope this is a 16 mp 1 1/7" sensor, which would make things worse for the reasons you stated. I doubt it's possible, but how interesting would it be to see a 12 mp 1" sensor in this? Don't think it would work, though.

[Neopifex]

I'm pretty well aware of this argument against higher resolution, but I'm not that worried about it. For one, they increased the size of the sensor when the Q7 came out, but kept the resolution the same as previous models, so there's a little room to grow there. Also, I don't shoot my small-sensor'd cameras at high ISO, so noise isn't a big deal. Higher resolution is useful to me because I tend to do a lot of cropping of my photos. When I upgraded from the K10D to the K-5, I discovered that 16 MP is a very good resolution for me to be able to crop a ton and still get good results. While I'm sure that the 24 MP of the K-3 would be even better, I'm in no rush to upgrade my SLR any time soon.

The Q system really is more for compactness and fun rather than high-quality work. A few more megapixels would make it a lot more fun for me, I think.

[hnikesch]

Well at least all of our lenses are still usable on the new body based on the lenses mounted to it in the leaked photos. I hope for a better processor to reduce the rolling shutter read / write time of the cmos sensor, or a CCD type global shutter, that would improve the usage of all adapted lenses and non shutter lenses. That's it a 14mp 2/3" CCD sensor that maintains in camera SR with a global shutter that's what we need.

As for a 16mp 1/1.7 sensor I have a camera with that a Canon SD990is. The day light IQ is great but when it gets darker you need some good software like LR 5 it seems to tame the noise form form that 16mp sensor. I am impressed with the images I still get from that camera, here is one processed in LR

[monochrome]

I hope for a better processor to reduce the rolling shutter read / write time of the cmos sensor, or a CCD type global shutter, that would improve the usage of all adapted lenses and non shutter lenses. That's it a 14mp 2/3" CCD sensor that maintains in camera SR with a global shutter that's what we need

Wouldn't it be someting if this were to be the test platform for Ricoh /Pentax VIDEO improvements - you know, the ones that everyone complains aren't on the dslr's - sort of the way the K-01 was the test bed for the new IBIS system and for the PRIME - M image processor.