[luftfluss]

Pentax Q-S1 Review

Whilst the Pentax Q-S1 may not have as large a sensor as other mirrorless cameras, the compact size of the camera and lenses may make this a stylish compact camera you'd want to take with you when you didn't want to cart a Digital SLR around with you. There are currently 8 lenses available with more lenses planned, although a number of the lenses currently available are "toy" lenses, and other compact system cameras often have a wider range of lenses available (with the exception being the Samsung NX-Mini). The Pentax Q-S1 delivers bright punchy, highly saturated images on default settings. Thankfully, if this is not your preferred look, then the colour settings can be customised or you can shoot raw and alter the images as much as you want. The camera can also shoot at 5fps, although for only a short number of shots. With manual controls, raw shooting, and dual axis electronic level, this camera will most likely suit the beginner as well as the more advanced photographer, however, the inclusion of Wi-Fi would certainly be welcome, particularly as this is available on the majority of the competition.

[Docrwm]

Thanks. Not bad, I agree about the WiFi.

[6BQ5]

It's good to see the Q system get some positive reviews. I thought it was interesting that every test shot I saw in the review was done with the 01 prime. The 02 zoom may not match the 01 prime but it isn't bad at all and it deserves a fair shake.

I agree that the Q could use a panoramic function. It would really complement the limited lens line up. I wonder what combination of panoramic scanning and manual zooming would look like?! Seriously though, a panoramic function with auto exposure adjustment during the pan? Wow!

[DSims]

It's good to see the Q system get some positive reviews. I thought it was interesting that every test shot I saw in the review was done with the 01 prime. The 02 zoom may not match the 01 prime but it isn't bad at all and it deserves a fair shake.

Honestly, I would do the same thing. I've never been attracted to the images I've seen from the 02 lens. OTOH, the 01 and 08 are very good, and the 06 appears to be too. So those three more-or-less give you a complete set anyway.

[Docrwm]

Honestly, I would do the same thing. I've never been attracted to the images I've seen from the 02 lens. OTOH, the 01 and 08 are very good, and the 06 appears to be too. So those three more-or-less give you a complete set anyway.

The 03 is pretty good as fisheyes go too.

[DSims]

The 03 is pretty good as fisheyes go too.

And the 04 is interesting too.

[monochrome]

The 06 is sharp, bright and contrasty for such a tiny zoom lens. Given the quality of all the others I can't understand why the 02 is a (comarative) slouch.

[goubejp]

The 01 is fast, that partially compensate the small size of sensor : you don't have to push iso when you use a f1.9 prime. The most interested lens IMHO. The next one will be the 08 zoom

[Docrwm]

The 06 is sharp, bright and contrasty for such a tiny zoom lens. Given the quality of all the others I can't understand why the 02 is a (comarative) slouch.

Remember that it was the first zoom for the Q and I believe suffers in comparison because the other zooms had more development time and experience behind them in comparison.

[mepaca]

The 06 lens is incredible for what it is. To have a 207 mm equivalent f2.8 lens that size and weight is crazy.

[Nicolas06]

The 06 lens is incredible for what it is. To have a 207 mm equivalent f2.8 lens that size and weight is crazy.

QS1 has crop factor of 4.6 it is equivalent to 207mm f/12.9 on FF or 147mm f/9.2 on APSC in term of deph of field.

[mepaca]

QS1 has crop factor of 4.6 it is equivalent to 207mm f/12.9 on FF or 147mm f/9.2 on APSC in term of deph of field.

I wasn't talking depth of field. I was talking aperture which is f2.8. It obviously doesn't have the depth of a larger sensor.
I still contend that it is incredible........... for what it is. I personally don't need all that much depth of field when hiking through
the woods and coming across a family of deer crossing a river.

[Nicolas06]

I wasn't talking depth of field. I was talking aperture which is f2.8. It obviously doesn't have the depth of a larger sensor.
I still contend that it is incredible........... for what it is. I personally don't need all that much depth of field when hiking through
the woods and coming across a family of deer crossing a river.

But then, how it is especially incredible? f/2.8 just mean that the 45mm focal length has an apperture of 16mm diameter... There nothing magical in this f/2.8 number... On the 207mm equivalent, this would have to be 74mm. That why such lense is big... Even through the light density doesn't change, the total light that goes on the sensor change... And with it noise levels.

[Dangermouse]

I am wondering whether Pentax should drop the "Toy Lens" tag on the 03/04/05, it seems to give reviewers the wrong idea.

I now have the 03 and 05, the 04 is on the way. They're definitely a cut above what the name would suggest, and nothing like the "Lomography" image it implies.

[Docrwm]

I am wondering whether Pentax should drop the "Toy Lens" tag on the 03/04/05, it seems to give reviewers the wrong idea.

I now have the 03 and 05, the 04 is on the way. They're definitely a cut above what the name would suggest, and nothing like the "Lomography" image it implies.

Do they use "Toy" as a label for the 03 Fisheye? It's the only one of the 3 I own and its a great little lens. Quirky but it's a fisheye. I've had great fun with it over the years and some of its images are among the best from my Q.