What lenses do you want on the Q?

emergo · 10-24-2014, 07:50 AM

Originally posted by goodnight

If the lenses in those two new patents come into being, then there's a 8.17mm f/1.4 and a 35mm f/1.4 on the way, designed with a 2/3" sensor in mind: ~32mm and ~138mm equivs. Maybe this new 8.17mm f/1.4 is why the 01 has practically vanished as a bundled lens? I imagine a faster lens designed for a slightly bigger sensor would be a little larger, though.

my guess is that these two patents are for new Ricoh C Mount lenses for their scientific and security series, and not for the Q. http://www.ricoh.com/fa_security/lens/vga/

goodnight · 10-24-2014, 08:53 AM

Originally posted by emergo

my guess is that these two patents are for new Ricoh C Mount lenses for their scientific and security series, and not for the Q. VGA Lens (Manual Iris Lens) / FA?Security | Ricoh Global

The dream is dead

PentHassyKon · 10-24-2014, 09:24 AM

Originally posted by sapporodan

....

The Q's greatest strength is the tiny lenses, just a shame we don't have that many of them.

And it's reach as evidenced by one of the early threads

Antonio Marques · 11-12-2014, 01:59 AM

So let me add to the group who'd like to see more wide to portrait primes, and smallish.
The choice on that end is significantly worse than on the longer end. I imagine one might want AF on something longer than 45mm, but that's niche compared to the normal range, and could hardly ever be small.
I'd love t see a true pancake.
As it is now, the 01 is pretty hard to find, which makes the Q not quite so much an interchangeable system!

sapporodan · 11-12-2014, 02:12 AM

Originally posted by Antonio Marques

So let me add to the group who'd like to see more wide to portrait primes, and smallish.
The choice on that end is significantly worse than on the longer end. I imagine one might want AF on something longer than 45mm, but that's niche compared to the normal range, and could hardly ever be small.
I'd love t see a true pancake.
As it is now, the 01 is pretty hard to find, which makes the Q not quite so much an interchangeable system!

It is really strange about the lack of Primes. Pentax is really famous for it's compact limited lenses, plus small primes right now are very fashionable, so why does Pentax produces a camera system with only one proper prime (I am not counting the toy ones)?
Even the Samsung NX Mini has two!!!

Mr Bassie · 11-12-2014, 02:41 AM

Definitely more primes are needed. A non-toy wide angle and a telephoto would be a great start.

Antonio Marques · 11-12-2014, 05:09 PM

I have a depressing thought about this: the Q is meant only for beginners who would like to try out the concepts of real photography. As such, its lens lineup has a little bit of everything, but not in a way that non-beginners would like it. And before someone says something, consider that the 01 isn't sold in Europe, period.
Now, it may be the case that that's changing, as the development of the Q-S1 makes no sense otherwise. I mean, what gap does the Q-S1 fill? My only guess is as a part of a step up of the Q family, which will have to involve more lenses. If not that, then I have no idea.

6BQ5 · 11-12-2014, 05:17 PM

Ricoh has stated that the Pentax Q line is the company's answer to the mirrorless ILC question.

DaveInPA · 11-12-2014, 06:55 PM

I want a 10-300mm equivalent f1.4 pancake lens.

CWRailman · 11-13-2014, 07:59 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by DaveInPA

I want a 10-300mm equivalent f1.4 pancake lens.

And it should not cost more than $50 right?

reh321 · 11-13-2014, 08:09 AM

Originally posted by DaveInPA

I want a 10-300mm equivalent f1.4 pancake lens.

I would be thrilled with a pancake lens of normal range, kind of a thin 01, and have a package that included it (similar to packages offered by Sony and others);
that would enable the Q to compete in the new pocket camera market more easily.

DaveInPA · 11-14-2014, 04:37 AM

Originally posted by reh321

I would be thrilled with a pancake lens of normal range, kind of a thin 01, and have a package that included it (similar to packages offered by Sony and others);
that would enable the Q to compete in the new pocket camera market more easily.

That would be awesome. Unfortunately, with the Q-mount, the non-toy lenses have the shutter built into the lens. I think this makes it difficult to make a true pancake lens for the Q.

But it would be nice!

reh321 · 11-14-2014, 09:05 AM

Originally posted by DaveInPA

That would be awesome. Unfortunately, with the Q-mount, the non-toy lenses have the shutter built into the lens. I think this makes it difficult to make a true pancake lens for the Q.

But it would be nice!

I still don't really understand how the Q works with adapted lenses that, by definition, don't have a shutter built in.
What are the implications of using an "electronic shutter" only??

Presumably a pancake lens could be built using this "electronic shutter".
What would be the downside of that?

sapporodan · 11-14-2014, 09:18 AM

Originally posted by reh321

I still don't really understand how the Q works with adapted lenses that, by definition, don't have a shutter built in.
What are the implications of using an "electronic shutter" only??

Presumably a pancake lens could be built using this "electronic shutter".
What would be the downside of that?

I think (and I may be wrong) the main problem with electronic shutters is they work a bit like a photocopier and scan the image as a line. That causes an issue when there is any fast movement as it causes the image to look distorted.
Also I think it restricts what shutter speed you can use.

reh321 · 11-14-2014, 09:43 AM

Originally posted by DaveInPA

That would be awesome. Unfortunately, with the Q-mount, the non-toy lenses have the shutter built into the lens. I think this makes it difficult to make a true pancake lens for the Q.
But it would be nice!

Currently I have a Canon Elph that goes everywhere with me.
In order to justify a Q, it would need to be able to replace the Elph, and I'm thinking that a pancake lens would be needed for it to fill that role.
So I'd be using an electronic shutter to replace an electronic shutter - not a problem.
I'm guessing that there are others just like me.

10-24-2014, 08:53 AM	#47
goodnight Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 128	Originally posted by emergo my guess is that these two patents are for new Ricoh C Mount lenses for their scientific and security series, and not for the Q. VGA Lens (Manual Iris Lens) / FA?Security \| Ricoh Global The dream is dead Last edited by goodnight; 10-24-2014 at 10:56 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pets Well, what is it? What do you want from me? I am just a mere kat.	rrstuff	Post Your Photos!	6	02-17-2014 08:37 PM
Do M39 adapted lenses focus to infinity on the Q?	GibbyTheMole	Pentax Q	14	10-16-2013 07:49 AM
Pets You want me to do what????????????	eaglem	Post Your Photos!	9	02-19-2013 03:25 PM
People What do you want?	vikingo	Photo Critique	3	02-03-2013 05:05 AM
What do you want Pentax will come up with the Kx successor?	rustynail925	Pentax News and Rumors	31	07-29-2010 05:53 PM

10-24-2014, 07:50 AM	#46
emergo Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Coloroado Photos: Gallery Posts: 271	Originally posted by goodnight If the lenses in those two new patents come into being, then there's a 8.17mm f/1.4 and a 35mm f/1.4 on the way, designed with a 2/3" sensor in mind: ~32mm and ~138mm equivs. Maybe this new 8.17mm f/1.4 is why the 01 has practically vanished as a bundled lens? I imagine a faster lens designed for a slightly bigger sensor would be a little larger, though. my guess is that these two patents are for new Ricoh C Mount lenses for their scientific and security series, and not for the Q. http://www.ricoh.com/fa_security/lens/vga/

10-24-2014, 09:24 AM	#48
PentHassyKon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: SoCal Posts: 415	Originally posted by sapporodan .... The Q's greatest strength is the tiny lenses, just a shame we don't have that many of them. And it's reach as evidenced by one of the early threads

11-12-2014, 01:59 AM	#49
Antonio Marques Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 69	So let me add to the group who'd like to see more wide to portrait primes, and smallish. The choice on that end is significantly worse than on the longer end. I imagine one might want AF on something longer than 45mm, but that's niche compared to the normal range, and could hardly ever be small. I'd love t see a true pancake. As it is now, the 01 is pretty hard to find, which makes the Q not quite so much an interchangeable system!

11-12-2014, 02:12 AM	#50
sapporodan Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 123 Original Poster	Originally posted by Antonio Marques So let me add to the group who'd like to see more wide to portrait primes, and smallish. The choice on that end is significantly worse than on the longer end. I imagine one might want AF on something longer than 45mm, but that's niche compared to the normal range, and could hardly ever be small. I'd love t see a true pancake. As it is now, the 01 is pretty hard to find, which makes the Q not quite so much an interchangeable system! It is really strange about the lack of Primes. Pentax is really famous for it's compact limited lenses, plus small primes right now are very fashionable, so why does Pentax produces a camera system with only one proper prime (I am not counting the toy ones)? Even the Samsung NX Mini has two!!!

11-12-2014, 02:41 AM	#51
Mr Bassie Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,258	Definitely more primes are needed. A non-toy wide angle and a telephoto would be a great start.

11-12-2014, 05:09 PM	#52
Antonio Marques Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 69	I have a depressing thought about this: the Q is meant only for beginners who would like to try out the concepts of real photography. As such, its lens lineup has a little bit of everything, but not in a way that non-beginners would like it. And before someone says something, consider that the 01 isn't sold in Europe, period. Now, it may be the case that that's changing, as the development of the Q-S1 makes no sense otherwise. I mean, what gap does the Q-S1 fill? My only guess is as a part of a step up of the Q family, which will have to involve more lenses. If not that, then I have no idea.

11-12-2014, 05:17 PM	#53
6BQ5 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Nevada, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,348	Ricoh has stated that the Pentax Q line is the company's answer to the mirrorless ILC question.

11-12-2014, 06:55 PM	#54
DaveInPA Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Bucks County, PA Photos: Albums Posts: 499	I want a 10-300mm equivalent f1.4 pancake lens.

11-13-2014, 07:59 AM - 1 Like	#55
CWRailman Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Scottsdale, Arizona Photos: Albums Posts: 510	Originally posted by DaveInPA I want a 10-300mm equivalent f1.4 pancake lens. And it should not cost more than $50 right?

11-13-2014, 08:09 AM	#56
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,185	Originally posted by DaveInPA I want a 10-300mm equivalent f1.4 pancake lens. I would be thrilled with a pancake lens of normal range, kind of a thin 01, and have a package that included it (similar to packages offered by Sony and others); that would enable the Q to compete in the new pocket camera market more easily.

11-14-2014, 04:37 AM	#57
DaveInPA Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Bucks County, PA Photos: Albums Posts: 499	Originally posted by reh321 I would be thrilled with a pancake lens of normal range, kind of a thin 01, and have a package that included it (similar to packages offered by Sony and others); that would enable the Q to compete in the new pocket camera market more easily. That would be awesome. Unfortunately, with the Q-mount, the non-toy lenses have the shutter built into the lens. I think this makes it difficult to make a true pancake lens for the Q. But it would be nice!

11-14-2014, 09:05 AM	#58
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,185	Originally posted by DaveInPA That would be awesome. Unfortunately, with the Q-mount, the non-toy lenses have the shutter built into the lens. I think this makes it difficult to make a true pancake lens for the Q. But it would be nice! I still don't really understand how the Q works with adapted lenses that, by definition, don't have a shutter built in. What are the implications of using an "electronic shutter" only?? Presumably a pancake lens could be built using this "electronic shutter". What would be the downside of that?

11-14-2014, 09:18 AM	#59
sapporodan Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 123 Original Poster	Originally posted by reh321 I still don't really understand how the Q works with adapted lenses that, by definition, don't have a shutter built in. What are the implications of using an "electronic shutter" only?? Presumably a pancake lens could be built using this "electronic shutter". What would be the downside of that? I think (and I may be wrong) the main problem with electronic shutters is they work a bit like a photocopier and scan the image as a line. That causes an issue when there is any fast movement as it causes the image to look distorted. Also I think it restricts what shutter speed you can use.

11-14-2014, 09:43 AM	#60
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,185	Originally posted by DaveInPA That would be awesome. Unfortunately, with the Q-mount, the non-toy lenses have the shutter built into the lens. I think this makes it difficult to make a true pancake lens for the Q. But it would be nice! Currently I have a Canon Elph that goes everywhere with me. In order to justify a Q, it would need to be able to replace the Elph, and I'm thinking that a pancake lens would be needed for it to fill that role. So I'd be using an electronic shutter to replace an electronic shutter - not a problem. I'm guessing that there are others just like me.