Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-30-2014, 10:26 AM   #16
Site Supporter
CWRailman's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Photos: Albums
Posts: 495
QuoteOriginally posted by transam879 Quote
Just curious about the staff reviews relative to the Pentax Q line primarily pertaining to the image quality. Not sure if anyone knows, but are the ratings for the camera (image quality my main concern) relative to other mirrorless cameras, DSLR, or point and shoot cameras. Image quality is rated the same as the WG-3/4, a point and shoot camera, but I would think that have a higher quality lens (compared to what is fixed on a P&S) as those offered in the Q lineup in addition to a larger sensor on the Q7, image quality would be significantly better than those P&S cameras. As far as Pentax goes, the only other mirrorless camera is the K-01, but that's not fair because it's basically a compact DSLR, so are the ratings in comparison to that (even though no longer available new). Or in relation to cameras as a whole, to include DSLRs, which a 5 & 6 rating (for image quality) would make more sense (and by decent considering the sensor size). Or is the image quality just not that good (which I hope isn't the case because I love Pentax, just trying to remain objective here?)

So, my final question would be: Do I get a P&S camera I can use anywhere (WG-4 or WG-3) and strictly use a Q7 adapted to my K mount tele lenses, or can I use the Q7 as a very high quality P&S camera and OK "DSLR" substitution where compactness is extremely important.

I appreciate any input and thank everyone in advance.
For answers to such questions you might consider this site. One of the pages allows you to compare the Q7 with other camera's and you can draw you own conclusions. They never reviewed the original Q nor the Q10. Pentax Q7 Review: Digital Photography Review

For an enthusiastic review of the original Q check out Blunty's review in which he talks about the pocket ability of the original Q. Also note that he stresses that the Q is NOT FOR EVERYONE. He also did one on the Q7 in which he talks about the improvement in IQ over the original Q.


10-30-2014, 10:53 AM   #17
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Grapevine TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 61
As usual, much depends on exactly what you want. I have occasion to wear a tux two or three times a year. Over the years I've stuck a really tiny Pentax P&S in a pocket, which was fine but limited; a Panasonic Lumix TZ3 super zoom, which...was a stretch on the pocket, but versatile. Went to a wedding last week; took my Q7 with the 02. The 06 and 08 fit neatly into the tux pocket. Biggest problem was finding it; I have the yellow Q7/02 combo, and some member of the fam was always using it. The nice thing is when I wanted it I could swap on the 06 or 08, and shoot raw without having to drag around something like my K20d. Recommended; YMMV, natch.
10-30-2014, 10:04 PM   #18
Site Supporter
vagrant10's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: portland
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,327
QuoteOriginally posted by officiousbystander Quote
Great images Vagrant10. They're a real eye opener for sensor size elitists (including me). Is the neon walkway O'Hare?
Thanks! And that is O'Hare - good catch considering that pic looks like a hallucination

Yeah, I've been a bit surprised at how much I'm willing to use the Q considering it's sensor size - but now, I've come to trust it because it delivers. It's great knowing I've got something more capable than my cell phone all the time if I need it. Not saying cell phone pics are bad - they can often be very good - but the flexibility, responsiveness and ergonomics of the Q are just superior.
10-30-2014, 10:34 PM   #19
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,247
Some shots from last Saturday. I reckon the Q7 goes OK for IQ.

The Rolling Stones

11-01-2014, 07:05 AM   #20
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,246
You raise a good point, For me the 1/1.7 sensor is the minimum size I use to achieve the IQ that I want. I have a Canon P&S with a 1/1.7 sensor and my Q7, IQ is almost identical and on trips I use both. The Q7 (with 06 lens attached and a 03 in my pocket) on a over the shoulder sling strap and the P&S (24 to 120mm) in a belt case.

Last edited by hnikesch; 11-07-2014 at 04:54 PM.
11-05-2014, 09:19 PM   #21
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
Some shots from last Saturday. I reckon the Q7 goes OK for IQ.

The Rolling Stones
Those are awesome Sandy! Great work with the Q7 and 06.
11-05-2014, 09:38 PM   #22
Loyal Site Supporter
paulh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: DFW Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,458
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
Those are awesome Sandy! Great work with the Q7 and 06.
wow - agree, super set of shots!
12-01-2014, 05:32 PM   #23
Site Supporter
Blacknight659's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 664
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
Those are awesome Sandy! Great work with the Q7 and 06.
Wow, the power of the Pentax System! I bet if you lugged in a K-5ii or K-3 with a 50-135 f2.8 or 70-200 Tamron f2.8 you would have been kicked out!

The Q was probably so small they wouldn't have suspected such awesome images to come out of it. I think this set of photos proves why the Q system has value in todays camera line up. It is sooooooo small and yet packs an awesome punch especially considering all that is against it technology wise (small snesor, small glass). You really captured some amazing shots here... had you not said it was from the Q, I probably wouldn't have been able to tell. Bravo!

12-02-2014, 10:05 PM   #24
Loyal Site Supporter
Pioneer's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Elko, Nevada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,167
I shoot quite a bit of film, and once in a great while I pull out my K-01. But my two workhorse cameras are my Q and Q7. It is rare that I do not have one of them with me. Over the last couple of years I have learned that these two miniature cameras punch far above their weight class if I do my part.
12-03-2014, 08:27 PM   #25
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,615
QuoteOriginally posted by Pioneer Quote
Over the last couple of years I have learned that these two miniature cameras punch far above their weight class if I do my part.
Technologically, you've got a BSI sensor, RAW file capability, and fine optics all working for you.
12-04-2014, 05:03 AM   #26
Site Supporter
Blacknight659's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 664
I would look at it like this...

The Q system is powerful in the right hands. It may be limited by the smaller sensor in some applications, however the large amount of lenses at your disposal and its small size speaks to many people. I understand the Q has its limits, and as long as you don't push too hard, you can capture some wonderful shots. For some, this is THE camera for travel and allows for all the creativity you would get from a full on DSLR.

That being said, you can capture a wonderful image with ANY camera as long as you know its limits and work within them.

For you, it comes down to what you need out of a camera. The WG-3 Is awesome, however you lack RAW and complete manual control. The Life Proof mentality is very freeing, and you litterally feel like you can capture anything. However, sometimes your creativity will be limited.

I think others have said it best in previous posts. There are many other options for you out there if the Q or the WG-3 don't fit what you need. Consider how you plan to use your camera, and then try to find one that fits. I hope its a Pentax... But I wouldn't be upset with you for picking another camera as long as it fits your needs.

Good luck and happy camera hunting! As always, be sure to tell us what you bought and show us some photos!
12-04-2014, 09:28 AM   #27
Loyal Site Supporter
pacerr's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Henry, TN
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,850
An image in the camera's worth two in the bushes -- sorry 'bout that, I couldn't resist.

While ... ah, traveling? ... in the mid-'60's I adopted a 1/2-frame 35mm Oly Pen-F system in place of a H1a which produced slides which wouldn't have been possible otherwise. The 1/2-frame slides weren't up to full frame standards, especially when scanning slides 40+ years later, but the pay-off is having images I wouldn't have any other way today.

The Q7-system offers me the same opportunity to "carry concealed" when and where a DSLR kit isn't practicable. I can carry a digital system with 17-200mm equivalent + macro and the potential for extreme tele FL's in the kit space/weight of a DSLR with one zoom lens. It's a fine complementary tool.
12-04-2014, 10:29 AM   #28
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,730
QuoteOriginally posted by pacerr Quote
An image in the camera's worth two in the bushes -- sorry 'bout that, I couldn't resist.

While ... ah, traveling? ... in the mid-'60's I adopted a 1/2-frame 35mm Oly Pen-F system in place of a H1a which produced slides which wouldn't have been possible otherwise. The 1/2-frame slides weren't up to full frame standards, especially when scanning slides 40+ years later, but the pay-off is having images I wouldn't have any other way today.

The Q7-system offers me the same opportunity to "carry concealed" when and where a DSLR kit isn't practicable. I can carry a digital system with 17-200mm equivalent + macro and the potential for extreme tele FL's in the kit space/weight of a DSLR with one zoom lens. It's a fine complementary tool.
I currently carry a Canon Elph for that reason.


Once I get a Q7, then I anticipate looking for an 01 lens to fill that niche on my roster.
12-04-2014, 10:32 AM   #29
Loyal Site Supporter
Pioneer's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Elko, Nevada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,167
There is no doubt that the 645D or 645Z can produce beautiful images. But a well composed, well exposed and well focused photograph that reaches out and grabs your attention will grab it whether it came from a Q or a 645Z. The primary difference will be in the size of print you can produce.

I think there is a bit of a size bias involved with the Q. People are used to seeing huge, black cameras emblazoned with Canon or Nikon logos, equipped with monstrous white lenses, when the pro steps on the field. Most will not take you seriously if you step out with a Q. Heck, sometimes it is even hard for you to take yourself seriously. It almost feels as if you are bringing a pocket knife tied to a stick to a medieval jousting contest.

But do a little test for yourself. Take similar pictures, one with the Q, one with your pro gear (or semi-pro gear.) Then using your normal workflow, treat each photograph exactly the same in your editing software. Then doing the best you can, print each one at 8x11/A4. Or if you really want to test your skills, print each photograph in 11x14/A3 size. Now, mount, frame and hang them ensuring they are each well lit to bring out the best of each one. Then leave them there for awhile. Ask your friends and visitors which they like. What you learn may surprise you and may even change your mind about the capability of these small cameras.
12-04-2014, 10:37 AM   #30
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,730
QuoteOriginally posted by Pioneer Quote
I think there is a bit of a size bias involved with the Q. People are used to seeing huge, black cameras emblazoned with Canon or Nikon logos, equipped with monstrous white lenses, when the pro steps on the field. Most will not take you seriously if you step out with a Q. Heck, sometimes it is even hard for you to take yourself seriously.
My Canon Elph is metallic blue in color. The last thing I want when I pull out my little camera is for people to take me too seriously. I want them to ignore the guy behind the camera. In fact, of the readily-available current Q7 colors, I rank black as least desirable and yellow/black as most desirable.
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, dslr, image quality, mirrorless, pentax, pentax dslr, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q-s1, q10, q7, quality
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to you use your Pentax Q? Is the 02 lens comparable to a mid-range P&S? americanclassic Pentax Q 23 04-27-2013 08:51 AM
Hilarious Mirrorless stop motion - Pentax K01 & Q show up at the end LFLee Photographic Industry and Professionals 3 11-26-2012 08:28 PM
Whitby, Ontario -- Jumping from P&S to DSLR cosmic Welcomes and Introductions 6 11-16-2010 06:35 PM
For Sale - Sold: FS: Pentax Optio S 3.2MP P&S camera s!lver Sold Items 4 10-29-2007 11:24 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:02 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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