Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-30-2014, 11:50 AM   #1
Senior Member
iamwhoiam's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: So. California
Posts: 153
Should I go Q

I never thought of buying a Q but with the great prices on the Q-7 I am considering it. This tiny camera might be fun to try. Which is the best way to go: Q with 02 for $199 or Q with 02 & 06 for $399? Would I be able to use my 55-300 with the Q or would smaller lenses such as my 35/2.4 and 43/1.9 be best? If I decide to do this which K to Q adapter would be the best one to get? How is the Fotodiox? Do I purchase w/ or w/o aperture dial or best to get both?

11-30-2014, 12:02 PM - 1 Like   #2
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
Aperture control is a real plus. I bought without it and then had to go back and buy a 2nd adapter because its really a plus.

Longer is great with the Q. Of course it takes time and a great tripod when you are looking at 1200mm+ in functional length. The 06 is a very nice telephoto lens and the constant 2.8 is great. I use it for sports outing and such when I don't want the bulk of the adapter plus K mount lens. I think the Q7 + 02 is a killer deal at $199 and the 02+06 at $399 a bit less of a great deal. If you can find a 01 prime jump on it - great little lens IMHO.
11-30-2014, 12:03 PM   #3
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
CWRailman's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Photos: Albums
Posts: 504
The minimum investment will allow you to experiment and if you see you will not enjoy the camera, you can always recoup a good portion of your investment by reselling it on Ebay. ( That is if you are talking about buying a Q-7. The original Q's are selling for much less) However, you had better decide quickly as that $199 price will not last long.

Last edited by CWRailman; 11-30-2014 at 02:09 PM.
11-30-2014, 01:05 PM   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
vagrant10's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: portland
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,364
The thing I like about the Q is that it's truly a go anywhere cam. If you shoot in raw+ and you use the effects (bold monochrome is awesome) you'll get both a standard raw and a jpg w/ your effect saved. It is a small sensor but that can have positives and negatives. If you like shooting wide, the 08 is great and makes a completed system IMO.

11-30-2014, 01:57 PM   #5
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 85
The Q is nice and durable - metal not plastic and I have used mine while snowing hard, the Q7 has slightly better image quality, I like my 06 a lot and focuses quickly - you can usually pick it up a little less than 200 on Ebay most the time, using your 55-300 with any adapter will take a tripod and more effort in focusing, the fotodix adapter works fine but not as good as the expensive Pentax adapter. It is a lot easier using the 06 which will give a little longer reach on the Q than the Q7.
11-30-2014, 03:17 PM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Mikesul's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,687
QuoteOriginally posted by pickone Quote
The Q is nice and durable - metal not plastic and I have used mine while snowing hard, the Q7 has slightly better image quality, I like my 06 a lot and focuses quickly - you can usually pick it up a little less than 200 on Ebay most the time, using your 55-300 with any adapter will take a tripod and more effort in focusing, the fotodix adapter works fine but not as good as the expensive Pentax adapter. It is a lot easier using the 06 which will give a little longer reach on the Q than the Q7.
The original Q is a charmer but its IQ is noticeably weaker than the Q7. Although you are correct that you get more reach from the wonderful 06 on the Q than on the Q7 there have been several tests showing that the image quality is clearly better on the Q7 with Q. The result is that you can crop better. You will be delighted with either camera so long as you understand it is not just a little K3 or K5. The Q has its own very worthwile qualities. I do not hesitate to take it when I want a light kit.
11-30-2014, 03:54 PM   #7
Senior Member
iamwhoiam's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: So. California
Posts: 153
Original Poster
I think it's that yellow color that's calling to me. I should have bought the "bumblebee" K-01 when they were having the fire sales instead of my black Darth Vaderish one. If I buy the Q-7 I'd have to buy the adapter and that's additional $$ and I could use that money towards the K-3 or the other camera I am considering. BUT the Q7 is so tiny and pocketable...good for street photography. No viewfinder, though, so how does it do in the bright sun? With the K-01 I can barely see anything in the LCD when it's bright outside.
Which adapter is really the best? The Fotodiox is so much cheaper compared to the Pentax but from what I've read the Pentax adapter is much better.
11-30-2014, 04:09 PM   #8
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by iamwhoiam Quote
I think it's that yellow color that's calling to me. I should have bought the "bumblebee" K-01 when they were having the fire sales instead of my black Darth Vaderish one. If I buy the Q-7 I'd have to buy the adapter and that's additional $$ and I could use that money towards the K-3 or the other camera I am considering. BUT the Q7 is so tiny and pocketable...good for street photography. No viewfinder, though, so how does it do in the bright sun? With the K-01 I can barely see anything in the LCD when it's bright outside.
Which adapter is really the best? The Fotodiox is so much cheaper compared to the Pentax but from what I've read the Pentax adapter is much better.
I use an old Rangefinder sight on my Q - works a treat.

Save power too when I turn off the LCD screen.

11-30-2014, 04:16 PM   #9
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
pacerr's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Henry, TN
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,910
QuoteOriginally posted by Mikesul Quote
. . . so long as you understand it is not just a little K3 or K5.
Here's my key to understanding the Q's (and P&S's in general): With a Q I can TAKE pictures, with a DSLR I can MAKE pictures.



I can't 'see' enough looking at the LCD screen to make controlled changes to the image whereas through the VF I can make judgements and change the settings accordingly - I have control over the outcome. I enjoy convenience but ultimately I want control.



Two different tools: one to construct a nice pre-cut, glue-it-together project, the other to build something from scratch.
11-30-2014, 06:34 PM   #10
Senior Member
iamwhoiam's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: So. California
Posts: 153
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
I use an old Rangefinder sight on my Q - works a treat.

Save power too when I turn off the LCD screen.
Thanks. Will check this out. Where would I find one...ebay, KEH, ??

---------- Post added 11-30-14 at 05:40 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by pacerr Quote
Here's my key to understanding the Q's (and P&S's in general): With a Q I can TAKE pictures, with a DSLR I can MAKE pictures.



I can't 'see' enough looking at the LCD screen to make controlled changes to the image whereas through the VF I can make judgements and change the settings accordingly - I have control over the outcome. I enjoy convenience but ultimately I want control.



Two different tools: one to construct a nice pre-cut, glue-it-together project, the other to build something from scratch.
Although it's not a DSLR I would think the Q7 goes beyond a pre-cut template type of camera with it's q lenses, adapter available so one can use other lenses and the photo options. In fact, many point and shoots (ones described as bridge cameras) allow a wide range of options for the photographer to choose from so that they can be creative and artistic.


One last question re: the Q7.....how does it function in low light? I would think because of its size it wouldn't be as scary for some of my birds when I try to take their photos but many times I need to do this in low, natural light and can not use a flash. If I buy this I'll probably still wind up getting a K-3 or a GX7 at some point but the Q7 just looks like it would be fun and interesting, something a bit different.

Last edited by iamwhoiam; 11-30-2014 at 06:42 PM.
11-30-2014, 06:55 PM   #11
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,013
QuoteOriginally posted by pacerr Quote
Here's my key to understanding the Q's (and P&S's in general): With a Q I can TAKE pictures, with a DSLR I can MAKE pictures.
That is precisely why I believe the lack of an EVF is a weakness of the Q. At another site devoted to photography, members are incredibly enthusiastic about their Canon SX-50 and SX-60 "bridge" cameras, and the wildlife pictures they are able to MAKE because of the zoom available to them. The Q/Q10 have the same size sensor as the SX-50/SX-60, and the Q7/Q-S1 have sensors that are somewhat larger, of course. There is no reason why someone with a Q, using an adapted K-mount lens, couldn't do at least as well as someone does with an SX-50 to MAKE real, serious pictures, except for the composition and focus parts of the process (the SX cameras do have an EVF).
11-30-2014, 07:35 PM   #12
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Mikesul's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,687
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
That is precisely why I believe the lack of an EVF is a weakness of the Q. At another site devoted to photography, members are incredibly enthusiastic about their Canon SX-50 and SX-60 "bridge" cameras, and the wildlife pictures they are able to MAKE because of the zoom available to them. The Q/Q10 have the same size sensor as the SX-50/SX-60, and the Q7/Q-S1 have sensors that are somewhat larger, of course. There is no reason why someone with a Q, using an adapted K-mount lens, couldn't do at least as well as someone does with an SX-50 to MAKE real, serious pictures, except for the composition and focus parts of the process (the SX cameras do have an EVF).
If you look through the photos posted here and especially in the 01 and 08 Lens clubs you will see that many people are indeed making not just taking excellent pictures with the Q and Q7. Lack of an EVF may make it more challenging but the results are particularly impressive. The Q7 differs from most P&S cameras just in this area of control over the picture made. Please look at the 01 Lens Club section in particular.
11-30-2014, 07:40 PM   #13
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,013
QuoteOriginally posted by Mikesul Quote
If you look through the photos posted here and especially in the 01 and 08 Lens clubs you will see that many people are indeed making not just taking excellent pictures with the Q and Q7. Lack of an EVF may make it more challenging but the results are particularly impressive. The Q7 differs from most P&S cameras just in this area of control over the picture made. Please look at the 01 Lens Club section in particular.
You are 100% correct. I have said several times that "the Q is a niche player looking for a niche". My only point is that selling the Q would be much easier if using it were less of a challenge, if its place were more obvious. I will probably buy one at some point, but I have not yet convinced myself that I'm up to the challenge.
11-30-2014, 07:44 PM   #14
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Mikesul's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,687
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
You are 100% correct. I have said several times that "the Q is a niche player looking for a niche". My only point is that selling the Q would be much easier if using it were less of a challenge, if its place were more obvious. I will probably buy one at some point, but I have not yet convinced myself that I'm up to the challenge.
Well, I agree an EVF would be nice but not at the cost of size and that is the problem. Who know what they may come up with in a year or so.
11-30-2014, 08:17 PM   #15
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,124
The Q series of cameras are strange beasts. On the one hand they have very advanced controls and functions like HDR stacking, Av and M shooting modes, built in ND filter, leaf shutters, and RAW output. However, they lack what some would expected from such an advanced camera. There is no EVF, built in WiFi, tilting screen, etc. The sensor is small and there are only eight native lenses. I think it's a potent mix of pros and cons that drives the photographer toward a new path of creativity - one that they would not have taken with a DSLR or an advanced u4/3 system. The photographer is forced to work around the technical shortcoming and while some shots may be missed there will other shots taken which would never have come otherwise. When technology does all the work for someone they don't strive as hard as a whole. I don't mean to say that the Q is hard to use but the missing features are those that many snap shooters take for granted nowadays.

I would not say that the Q is for everyone, especially for those who don't own one and criticize it. No, not you ... but threads on other forums abound where posters bash the little Q like a fuzzed out tennis ball. If you're the creative type who likes to play and do things you're not suppose to then the Q is for you.

If you do get a Q then play around with it as-is. Don't go crazy buying extra lenses or adapters. The 02 lens is surprisingly good. Just be sure to shoot at its sharpest, which is wide open. Shoot RAW. Nudge the sharpness, contrast, vibrancy, and saturation sliders together just a bit. The image will bloom before your eyes. You can probably set all of this in the camera and get a nice 8-bit per color channel JPG. I prefer saving all the data, 12-bits per color channel. Decimate it later.
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, color, dslr, kit, lcd, lens, lenses, light, mirrorless, money, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q-s1, q10, q7, screen, viewfinder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
upgrading from k-x should i go mirrorless? rabblefrabble Pentax DSLR Discussion 20 11-29-2014 03:53 PM
Should I stay? Or, should I go? mdshooting Pentax Full Frame 176 10-18-2014 03:08 AM
What lens/focal length should I go for next. chaza01 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 09-01-2014 08:33 AM
Which Q should I go for? Soul_Est Pentax Q 15 06-08-2013 06:59 AM
Paid trip to anywhere in the US- where should I go for photography? OneEyedDoe General Talk 30 02-12-2013 07:33 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:50 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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