Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-06-2015, 12:27 PM   #31
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,732
QuoteOriginally posted by pacerr Quote
And this is the concern for many who choose the Q for its adaptability for extreme telephoto use at relatively little cost. The limitations of the low pixel count is quite apparent when using a magnifier and also in comparison with a .9M screen.
No doubt Pentax didn't anticipate (or accommodate) the potential market for manual focus use among a relatively small sample of the intended market or a different screen might have been spec'ed.
A quick search for the power spec's for such VF screens hasn't been enlightening but if it's proportional to the difference in larger monitor screens the power hit may not be so significant as to be prohibitive.
The OP queried the "greatest dissatisfaction" and the ability to focus via the existing LCD screen is my only real critique.
Anything else is simply part of the accepted compromise in handling associated with the small size.
I have often described the Q-family as "a niche product looking for a niche". This is the sort of thing I was thinking of.

01-06-2015, 01:05 PM - 1 Like   #32
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Fly-over, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,173
Win-Win

QuoteOriginally posted by kentishrev Quote
... Has anyone gone from a DSLR to the Q7? And what was the biggest disappointment (if any)?

On taking up the Q-system, I never envisioned abandoning the DSLR.

Once I launched, I quickly realized that in order to shoot to the Q's strengths, my post-processing game required greater discipline. Basically, I needed a simpler, more systematic and focused workflow. As I explored different approaches, I found my DSLR AND Q output learning curves share a lot in common and my direction became steadier and more purposeful.

'Either/Or' did not enter my thinking. Instead, I looked for a way to blend the systems and shoot to their unique strengths. In general, I'm pleased with the progress. Others seem to like the direction things are going, too. As such, I've had no disappointments at all.

Cheers... M
01-06-2015, 04:32 PM - 1 Like   #33
Site Supporter
CWRailman's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Photos: Albums
Posts: 495
QuoteOriginally posted by SteveNunez Quote
My biggest gripe is the rather mediocre LCD, which we need to manually focus adapted lenses.....and when used with LCD magnifiers the poor LCD quality becomes apparent making manual ficus difficult......obviously the lack of an eye viewfinder is really tough.

In reading the threads on this board it seems that no matter how the question is asked the conversation always revolves around battery life, the lack of a EVF or people deficiencies in using the LCD screen and focusing issues.

I get the feeling that if someone asked for directions to B&H photo someone would figure out how to include the above mentioned subjects in the answer. Is there any chance that we can agree to a moratorium on these subjects or will posters continue to beat this dead horse? What about focusing on the positives the Q series has to offer?
01-06-2015, 05:15 PM   #34
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Far North Qld
Posts: 3,250
QuoteOriginally posted by CWRailman Quote
What about focusing on the positives the Q series has to offer?
Agree 100%

01-06-2015, 06:06 PM   #35
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Iowa
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,269
QuoteOriginally posted by CWRailman Quote
In reading the threads on this board it seems that no matter how the question is asked the conversation always revolves around battery life, the lack of a EVF or people deficiencies in using the LCD screen and focusing issues.
I think the battery life is fine (I do have 4 batteries, though.) An EVF would make the camera bigger, which kinda defeats the purpose a bit, I get along with the LCD just fine, and I have no problem focusing with it, especially when using the peak focusing aid.

Really, about the only thing I can come up with that's a drawback (and I'm talking about the original Q) is the high ISO performance. But I know you can only expect so much from a small sensor.

Other folks may not care for the Q, and that's ok. I think it's an awesome little camera, though.
01-06-2015, 08:24 PM   #36
Loyal Site Supporter
Pioneer's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Elko, Nevada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,167
Personally I have no problems. The OP asked for any dissatisfactions moving from dSLR to Q, and that opens the door for the normal wishlist to pop up.

My concerns have nothing to do with the camera or its performance. I love it. From the moment it arrived I was intrigued and bought in quite quickly. Even in the original configuration I was happy. Finally, a camera that delivered on the promise that digital brought to the table. The promise of a new type of camera that was small enough to slide into a pocket and take everywhere, yet powerful enough to produce terrific photographs. I could switch lenses depending on what I wanted to accomplish. It is certainly not a dSLR, but the longer I used it and the better I became at getting the best out of it, the less I needed my dSLR. This camera had the potential to become the Leica of our century. A small camera that made use of a new format and small, but high quality lenses, to produce photographs that were "good enough." The longer others use it the more potential is revealed. It is a great documentary camera. It takes stunning, long range, wildlife photographs. I have seen several stunning portraits taken with the Q. The Q has better image quality right now than the Leica had early on.

My concerns have everything to do with the fact that everyone seems to want to turn it into something that it isn't. They have many camera options available, but only one Q. But they want to turn their Q into a small dSLR. In our digital world I have seen this happen to many other really good cameras. Let's just keep adding things and by doing so we enlarge the camera and increase the weight. The feature creep ends up ruining the concept. Sure, we could change the display, we could add an EVF, we could put in a tilt screen, we can add a bigger battery. Suddenly we turn around and we have lost that unique little Q. Now we have a camera just like Nikon or Canon or Sony or Fuji or...

I sincerely hope that does not happen. I am not against improvements. But lets not ruin what we have in a rush to change things. If you really want a camera that is half again as large and twice as heavy, go buy one. Every other manufacturer out there has one of those and would love to sell it to you.

Positives?
- Small
- Great design
- Great Image Quality
- Huge display screen for camera size
- Full control of exposure
- RAW output
- huge selection of jpg output adjustments, scene modes, filters, etc.
- Built in flash
- Very solid build
- Reliable
- Capable of Macro all the way to extreme telephoto
- Quick auto focus
- Manual focus aids
- Growing selection of high quality lens options
- More lenses in the pipeline
- Manufacturer designed adapter for Pentax K lenses including shutter
- Growing selection of accessories

A quick list off the top of my head. I know that more will come to mind and I'll add them as I think of them.
01-06-2015, 08:58 PM   #37
Loyal Site Supporter
pacerr's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Henry, TN
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,852
QuoteOriginally posted by kentishrev:
Has anyone gone from a DSLR to the Q7? And what was the biggest disappointment (if any)?
QuoteOriginally posted by CWRailman Quote
moratorium on these subjects or will posters continue to beat this dead horse?
QuoteOriginally posted by Pioneer Quote
The OP asked for any dissatisfactions moving from dSLR to Q,
Perhaps it would be good policy to allow the OP to 'moderate' his own query?? A simple thanks should suffice to end the beating.
01-06-2015, 09:49 PM   #38
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,732
QuoteOriginally posted by Pioneer Quote
My concerns have nothing to do with the camera or its performance. I love it. From the moment it arrived I was intrigued and bought in quite quickly. Even in the original configuration I was happy. Finally, a camera that delivered on the promise that digital brought to the table. The promise of a new type of camera that was small enough to slide into a pocket and take everywhere, yet powerful enough to produce terrific photographs.
And yet, the very people who complain when faults of the Q are mentioned told me that I shouldn't try to turn a Q7 into a pocket-able camera by asking that it be packaged with a 01 lens as was done in the past. I got a deal on a Q7+02+06 which then left enough money in my informal budget to buy a 01 lens separately, and with that 01 lens it does fit into a pocket of any outfit I wear. By adding a magnifying hood, i can use it for taking pictures of birds. Those items are important to me because I have a list of seven purposes I use a camera for, and my wife and I have an agreement that I will own only two cameras, so the Q7 had to meet several of them if it was to find a place in my closet. I took a gamble that it could meet these needs, and it is living up to my hopes despite all the talk that I shouldn't try to turn it into something that it isn't. If we are allowed to share our dreams here, sometimes it turns out that one person already has an answer to another person's dreams; if we didn't express unmet dreams, that kind of exchange would never happen.

01-07-2015, 07:50 AM   #39
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Fly-over, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,173
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
... I took a gamble that it could meet these needs, and it is living up to my hopes despite all the talk that I shouldn't try to turn it into something that it isn't. If we are allowed to share our dreams here, sometimes it turns out that one person already has an answer to another person's dreams; if we didn't express unmet dreams, that kind of exchange would never happen.

Well said... thank you.


I find it hard to think about things I've never though of before. Sometimes the 'dumb idea' that floats in from Forum member is just enough to bubble-up an idea that helps me advance my game. So... keep the ideas rolling in. They're much appreciated... (by me, at least).


Enjoy the season and Cheers... M
01-07-2015, 08:19 AM   #40
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,615
Rather than going from a DSLR to the Q/Q7,
I've found the Q system to be an excellent complement to a K-mount DSLR.
For me, it covers extreme telephoto
(Pentax K2Q adaptor with compact 90mm and 180mm Apo-Lanthars),
and now extreme wide angle (08 on the Q7).
Not to mention the 03 fisheye,
or getting a good depth of field with K-mount macro lenses on the adaptor.
That's especially useful for moving subjects
where focus stacking won't work..

I've also used the Q cameras on their own for casual walk-around.
As other posters have emphasized,
you'll need good post-processing to get IQ for 11x16 prints.
I don't find that disappointing, just the price to pay for portability.

You can zoom in on the LCD for manual focusing,
and with the added depth of field from the small format,
I've generally found that it works for me,
in combination with the focus peaking.
01-07-2015, 09:40 AM   #41
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,732
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote
Rather than going from a DSLR to the Q/Q7,
I've found the Q system to be an excellent complement to a K-mount DSLR.

I've also used the Q cameras on their own for casual walk-around.
As other posters have emphasized,
you'll need good post-processing to get IQ for 11x16 prints.
I don't find that disappointing, just the price to pay for portability.
For the previous seven years, I carried a Canon Elph in my pocket. Compared to that option, the IQ of the Q7 is quite good, and the Q7 gives me options that the Elph never did, such as producing RAW files and using "tungsten" WB (to preserve sense of "warmth")
01-07-2015, 10:51 AM   #42
Loyal Site Supporter
Pioneer's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Elko, Nevada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,167
I wonder sometimes if people are actually embarrassed by the size of the camera. Or maybe they are having problems taking it seriously themselves so they really haven't taken the time to explore the options.

Will it take the place of a dSLR? I don't know. Maybe. It really all depends on how you use a camera. It works for me in all areas except action sports, and it would probably work there if I used it more like my older manual focus SLR cameras where I anticipate the action. In fact, I am going to try it more this year in baseball by using its telephoto strengths from beyond the outfield fence. Soccer and football are a bit tougher.

It is like any other camera. Does it fit your needs and your style of photography. If so, great! Enjoy it, I do. If it doesn't, that's OK too. Go find something else that does what you need. There are more options available today in photography than at any other time in history.
01-07-2015, 01:07 PM   #43
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Vancouver BC
Posts: 54
QuoteOriginally posted by Pioneer Quote
Personally I have no problems. The OP asked for any dissatisfactions moving from dSLR to Q, and that opens the door for the normal wishlist to pop up.

My concerns have nothing to do with the camera or its performance. I love it. From the moment it arrived I was intrigued and bought in quite quickly. Even in the original configuration I was happy. Finally, a camera that delivered on the promise that digital brought to the table. The promise of a new type of camera that was small enough to slide into a pocket and take everywhere, yet powerful enough to produce terrific photographs. I could switch lenses depending on what I wanted to accomplish. It is certainly not a dSLR, but the longer I used it and the better I became at getting the best out of it, the less I needed my dSLR. This camera had the potential to become the Leica of our century. A small camera that made use of a new format and small, but high quality lenses, to produce photographs that were "good enough." The longer others use it the more potential is revealed. It is a great documentary camera. It takes stunning, long range, wildlife photographs. I have seen several stunning portraits taken with the Q. The Q has better image quality right now than the Leica had early on.

My concerns have everything to do with the fact that everyone seems to want to turn it into something that it isn't. They have many camera options available, but only one Q. But they want to turn their Q into a small dSLR. In our digital world I have seen this happen to many other really good cameras. Let's just keep adding things and by doing so we enlarge the camera and increase the weight. The feature creep ends up ruining the concept. Sure, we could change the display, we could add an EVF, we could put in a tilt screen, we can add a bigger battery. Suddenly we turn around and we have lost that unique little Q. Now we have a camera just like Nikon or Canon or Sony or Fuji or...

I sincerely hope that does not happen. I am not against improvements. But lets not ruin what we have in a rush to change things. If you really want a camera that is half again as large and twice as heavy, go buy one. Every other manufacturer out there has one of those and would love to sell it to you.

Positives?
- Small
- Great design
- Great Image Quality
- Huge display screen for camera size
- Full control of exposure
- RAW output
- huge selection of jpg output adjustments, scene modes, filters, etc.
- Built in flash
- Very solid build
- Reliable
- Capable of Macro all the way to extreme telephoto
- Quick auto focus
- Manual focus aids
- Growing selection of high quality lens options
- More lenses in the pipeline
- Manufacturer designed adapter for Pentax K lenses including shutter
- Growing selection of accessories

A quick list off the top of my head. I know that more will come to mind and I'll add them as I think of them.
+1 Pioneer, could not agree more.
01-07-2015, 02:16 PM   #44
Senior Member
kentishrev's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 180
Original Poster
Wow, this thread has generated a few comments to say the least! I asked the question at the start as I wanted to know if there were areas where Q fans (you bought them) had made compromises for the Q (coming from DSLRs), so I could consider if these were compromises I'd be happy to make. I understand some were concerned I hadn't asked for the positives and just wanted to focus on the negative. I already had lots of positives on my list (from reviews, from forum posts, etc), but was looking for some of that Pentaxian honesty we all know and love

I've found your answers really helpful. My concern before starting this was around IQ, and I was surprised how few thought this was really an issue (especially with the improved noise handling of the Q7), so asking for the negatives revealed a positive through exception.

The lack of EVF is something I've got used to from the GR, but the poor LCD doesn't sound so good.

Q7 remains on my list for all the positive features I know it has. I'll keep scouring for those good deals.

Thanks to all.
01-07-2015, 03:10 PM - 1 Like   #45
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 4,989
QuoteOriginally posted by kentishrev Quote
The lack of EVF is something I've got used to from the GR, but the poor LCD doesn't sound so good.
Honestly it never occurred to me that the LCD was "poor" until I read this thread. I've had no trouble with it, and at least half my Q usage is with adapted lenses where I have to manually focus.
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!
beach, camera, cycle, dslr, gr, k-30, lens, lenses, mirrorless, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q-s1, q10, q7, quality, seals, tide, travel
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What features you want to add to the Q7? ElvisQ Pentax Q 27 06-13-2013 04:39 PM
What is your biggest photography problem / challenge? slackercruster Photographic Technique 93 06-02-2012 06:44 PM
What has been your biggest print ? westmill Pentax K-5 20 02-21-2012 10:11 AM
What was your biggest LBA score? cheekygeek Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 112 04-27-2011 06:54 PM
Your biggest disappointment lens of 2008 Eastern Shore Charlie Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 108 01-28-2009 12:10 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:36 PM. | 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