[pacerr]

Did I hear someone say "Why bother with the Q?".

There's a time and a use for everything. This Q7 kit covers from the 03 Fisheye through the 02 and 06 zooms to 320mm tele with the A110 70mm lenses. Aside from the obvious compact size the tremendous weight difference is simply amazing.

I carried a two-lens, Oly Pen-F 1/2-frame kit for a few years in the late '60's when the Spotty-bag was simply too much to lug around. The Q-kit's a worthy successor.

I've no doubt there 'll be shots that wouldn't have been taken if left up to the K5-kit.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[blackcloudbrew]

Yep, Hank that about sums it up for me. I love my Q7 for many purposes. Nice post.

[VoiceOfReason]

Because putting on a long lens from your normal kit is fuuuuuuun.

[monochrome]

Because I just enjoy it so much when someone does a double-take and exclaims, "Is that an Interchangeable Lens Camera???"

[Steve.Ledger]

Where's the Q7? Looks like the original Q in that shot.

[CWRailman]

Did I hear someone say "Why bother with the Q?".

There's a time and a use for everything. This Q7 kit covers from the 03 Fisheye through the 02 and 06 zooms to 320mm tele with the A110 70mm lenses. Aside from the obvious compact size the tremendous weight difference is simply amazing.

I carried a two-lens, Oly Pen-F 1/2-frame kit for a few years in the late '60's when the Spotty-bag was simply too much to lug around. The Q-kit's a worthy successor.

I've no doubt there 'll be shots that wouldn't have been taken if left up to the K5-kit.

Exactly!! That is what I have been trying to explain to folks. I call it the tool box of cameras. Like a carpenters screwdriver, saw or hammer each belong in his tool kit yet each have their unique purposes. The same goes for camera’s. Though some people have tried, I do not think the Q series was meant to replace any of the DSLR’s but it does supplement their capabilities. Nice presentation. Do you shoot much film? The only ones who say why bother with the Q are the detractors some of whom I suspect never got over the need to kick over the class room garbage can as they left class.

[pacerr]

Where's the Q7? Looks like the original Q in that shot.

I was wonderin' who'd notice that, Steve. I was shootin' with the Q7. Started to place both Q's in the shot but figured that'd be overkill.

CWR -- I haven't shot film seriously in about 12 years - i.e., wet darkroom B&W. Just occasional Wally-mart family snaps when speedy holiday prints were called for. Digital has been so much more efficient and economical for work tasks that film would be a detriment.

[Anyone lookin' for 35 or MF film development tanks?]

--------

Yo, 'brew -- A quote from something I recently sent to someone we both know. Replace the word "lens(es)" or "FL's" with "bodies" or "systems" and it still makes sense -- to me anyway.

>> " Assigning special jobs to the various FL's artificially limits the practical use of those lenses for no valid reason. It's like age or racial discrimination -- not very practical and definitely self-constraining. It says more about your lack of thought than the true potential of the lens. Meet your lenses on an individual basis, learn their strengths and weaknesses and treat 'em as individuals. Treat a lens' characteristic point of view as you would a friend's perspective or opinion on any given subject and enjoy the "conversation" as you seek a satisfactory answer to what works for you.

Every lens is a portrait lens or a landscape lens or a whatever if the image it portrays is meaningful and you're masterful enough to use it well. " <<

---

Last edited by pacerr; 01-23-2015 at 01:49 PM.

[Steve.Ledger]

I was wonderin' who'd notice that, Steve.

Comes from my work as a trained fault finder

[pacerr]

Ahh, so YOU 're the one mentoring my spousal-unit, eh?

[reh321]

Did I hear someone say "Why bother with the Q?".

There's a time and a use for everything. This Q7 kit covers from the 03 Fisheye through the 02 and 06 zooms to 320mm tele with the A110 70mm lenses. Aside from the obvious compact size the tremendous weight difference is simply amazing.

I carried a two-lens, Oly Pen-F 1/2-frame kit for a few years in the late '60's when the Spotty-bag was simply too much to lug around. The Q-kit's a worthy successor.

I've no doubt there 'll be shots that wouldn't have been taken if left up to the K5-kit.

For a number of years, I have used two cameras; more than one because I have never had a "good" camera that I could take everywhere, and fewer than three because I choose to limit my investment in camera gear (we have other uses for money). Most of the time one of the cameras has been a pocket camera, and I have accepted the fact that it would have limited capabilities; for example, my last film pocket camera was a member of the Olympus Infinity (clamshell) family, which do not zoom.

I was reaching the point where my Canon team (Rebel and Elph) was aging, so after doing serious research (and apparently irritating some people here with all my questions), I got a Pentax Q7 to replace my Canon Elph as the pocket-able camera (and relieving my Canon Rebel of its Birds&Butterflies duties as well); I was able to get a Q7+02+06 "used like new" at a sufficiently low price that I could justify buying a 01 from a Japanese seller to make it pocket-able. Yes, the 01 has its limitations, but I'm no worse off in that sense than I was when i was using the Olympus Infinity. I know that there are some things that the Q7 will not be able to do, but in due time I will replace the Canon Rebel, perhaps by a Pentax K-50 (or whatever Pentax has in that category by then).

This morning I kind of answered the question of this thread. My wife had casually mentioned that there would be a reception after church today celebrating the pastor's 10th anniversary with the church, so I stuffed the Q7+01 into my pocket. Just before the reception started, I took a picture of the cake; I found that an ISO of 800 would allow me to take the picture with a shutter speed of 1/125. Then, the lady organizing the festivities told me that no one else seemed to have a camera with them, and asked me to take a picture of the pastor with the cake, and maybe a casual picture of two of the gathering. I never would have brought a camera with me if I had only the Rebel. The Elph has an ISO limitation of 250, so it would have been of limited use in these circumstances. My Q7 was the right camera at the time.

[drypenn]

Exactly!! That is what I have been trying to explain to folks. I call it the tool box of cameras. Like a carpenters screwdriver, saw or hammer each belong in his tool kit yet each have their unique purposes. The same goes for camera’s. Though some people have tried, I do not think the Q series was meant to replace any of the DSLR’s but it does supplement their capabilities. Nice presentation. Do you shoot much film? The only ones who say why bother with the Q are the detractors some of whom I suspect never got over the need to kick over the class room garbage can as they left class.

I agree. The Q-system is definitely the equivalent of a Swiss knife. It is not the best at any single thing it does, but it gets its job (and lots of them) done.

For the next Q iteration, I would love Pentax to increase the sensor size, even if that means taking away the SR. I would retain my Q7 for adapted lenses. Pentax should also do a wider than 01 if they increase the sensor.

[eyeswideshut]

I agree. The Q-system is definitely the equivalent of a Swiss knife. It is not the best at any single thing it does, but it gets its job (and lots of them) done.

For the next Q iteration, I would love Pentax to increase the sensor size, even if that means taking away the SR. I would retain my Q7 for adapted lenses. Pentax should also do a wider than 01 if they increase the sensor.

Why should they do that? Increased sensor = new lenses, perhaps even a new mount. Might as well go with a 1" from Nikon or even mFT. Those cameras are almost as small as the Q and the sensor is much bigger. I have lots of cameras with bigger sensors, it is the small sensor that is the attraction of the Q - what gives it that swiss army knife versatility :-)

[paulcote]

I have a couple of Q bodies and just ordered the toy lenses and the body cap lens. I have to relearn how to use the Q since I hadn't been using it in a while. But, yes I have the MX-1 also and a Fuji XF-1 both of which take nice photos. (and a bunch of other cameras that are smaller like elphs, HTC re, and some big superzoom point and shoots etc.) I only happen to have two Q bodies because I bought one of them to get the prime lens and the lens and camera was cheaper than getting the lens alone.

So, I debated getting a Q7 or QS1 but I am not going to get one yet. My reasoning is that first, they are expensive and second I need to make use of the Q as it is with its small sensor and that even though it is not as fine as a larger sensor, maybe it will go 'well enough' with the toy lenses I am getting since they are not that sharp etc. After all, if you are going for the toy camera look, do you need a Q7?

[Wolfeye]

I don't try and rationalize camera purchases any more. It all comes down to I have the money and I want to try it. I bought my Q a couple years ago at a local store because I was there, had the money, and liked it. It was the first time I ever saw one in person.

Enjoy life and don't worry too much about the minutiae. As Mr. Howell once so eloquently stated, "Details, details! I HATE to be bothered with details."

[Multi-coated]

Because sometimes less is more.