Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-19-2014, 11:57 AM   #1
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,880
ePhotozine reviews the Q-S1

Pentax Q-S1 Review

QuoteQuote:
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.


12-19-2014, 12:31 PM   #2
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
Thanks. Not bad, I agree about the WiFi.
12-19-2014, 12:56 PM   #3
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,108
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!
12-19-2014, 01:15 PM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
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.

12-19-2014, 01:23 PM   #5
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
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.
12-19-2014, 02:07 PM   #6
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
The 03 is pretty good as fisheyes go too.
And the 04 is interesting too.
12-19-2014, 02:21 PM   #7
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,423
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.
12-19-2014, 02:55 PM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 804
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

12-19-2014, 04:15 PM   #9
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
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.
12-24-2014, 08:20 PM - 6 Likes   #10
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 48
The 06 lens is incredible for what it is. To have a 207 mm equivalent f2.8 lens that size and weight is crazy.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q7  Photo 
12-26-2014, 05:55 AM   #11
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,703
QuoteOriginally posted by mepaca Quote
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.
12-26-2014, 06:50 AM   #12
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 48
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
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.
12-26-2014, 12:25 PM   #13
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,703
QuoteOriginally posted by mepaca Quote
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.
12-26-2014, 12:41 PM   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 283
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.
12-26-2014, 01:22 PM   #15
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by Dangermouse Quote
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.
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, ephotozine reviews, images, lee, lens, lenses, mirrorless, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q-s1, q10, q7, settings
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A brief, unscientific comparison : Original Q vs Q-S1 6BQ5 Pentax Q 29 11-30-2014 07:21 AM
It's here, the Pentax Q-S1 knightzerox Pentax Q 52 09-27-2014 07:26 AM
Q-S1 and K-S1 New Naming? LaurenOE General Photography 8 08-21-2014 09:36 PM
The Verge, Ephotozine, Techradar K30 reviews schufosi777 Pentax K-30 & K-50 6 07-31-2012 01:37 PM
ephotozine reviews DA55-300mm jamesm007 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 05-25-2011 05:31 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:12 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