[geomez]

Pancake primes? How about the mount shield lens? That's a wafer prime

[sapporodan]

No love?? They have updated the body how many times?
And how many lenses do you need?? Get's to the point you have so many you can't make up your mind which one to slap on the camera.

Apart from a slightly larger sensor there has been almost no innovation in the evolution of the Q system.

I know the saying 'if it ant broke don't fix it' but the difference between the original Q and the S1 are not that great, to the point when I got rid of my S1 and went back to the original Q I hardly noticed (Apart from the Q feels so much better to hold!).

As for the lenses, there are gaping holes in the line up, 4 of the 8 lenses are toy lenses!
For those of us who don't want to use the Q for extreme telephoto the selection is very limited.

[reh321]

Apart from a slightly larger sensor there has been almost no innovation in the evolution of the Q system.

I know the saying 'if it ant broke don't fix it' but the difference between the original Q and the S1 are not that great, to the point when I got rid of my S1 and went back to the original Q I hardly noticed (Apart from the Q feels so much better to hold!).

As for the lenses, there are gaping holes in the line up, 4 of the 8 lenses are toy lenses!
For those of us who don't want to use the Q for extreme telephoto the selection is very limited.

Ricoh/Pentax management may view the typical Q-family customer as being a teenaged Japanese girl. If that is the case, then they have plenty of lenses (although even then one could probably justify a pancake version of the 01 lens), and any further development will go into wifi and similar capabilities. There may be only so many of us; I guess we should be glad that we have what we have, but we may not be a large enough group to be worth much in the way of their resources.

[Antonio Marques]

While I'm the first to complain about the lacking line-up of lenses, there's only so much they can do at the same time. It's great that they'll finally have a FF digital (maybe that means APS-C-only lenses will get cheaper on eBay). I don't whine about the lack of lenses, rather about the lack of promises.

[johnmflores]

They should make a Q version of the new 150-450. Imagine how much smaller it would be for the Q mount. Birders would flock to the Q in droves.

[p38arover]

I thought I'd like and use the Q but I find that I simply don't use it. I miss a viewfinder, I'm not happy with using a screen. There's often too much bright sky light that it's hard to use the screen.

The Q sometimes gets taken along but all too often it sits at home, neglected.

P.S. It does have the 01 lens further reducing its usefulness.

[mike.hiran]

I thought I'd like and use the Q but I find that I simply don't use it. I miss a viewfinder, I'm not happy with using a screen. There's often too much bright sky light that it's hard to use the screen.

The Q sometimes gets taken along but all too often it sits at home, neglected.

P.S. It does have the 01 lens further reducing its usefulness.

If I am carrying both my k3 and a Q, the k3 will get the bulk of the duties unless
- I want to be discreet and bringing up a bigger camera will draw too much attention
- if we are moving fast, I may not want the bigger camera swinging around
- I need extreme telephoto/ or if I didn't bring longer focal lengths for the k mount

But there are many times when I don't want to carry the full k3 kit at all in which case having the Q is not a burden at all. When I'm working as a traveling service person, I don't want to have my full size kit, so the Q always sits in my work bag if something interesting happens.

[fuent104]

I bought into the Q system because of what was promised when it was originally released: a system of high quality lenses that would achieve maximum quality for the sensor. That has not been delivered. I think this is why some of us are not happy. I really want wide and telephoto primes. This is not unreasonable. I like the 01 prime, but sometimes a different field of view would be nice.

[sapporodan]

Ricoh/Pentax management may view the typical Q-family customer as being a teenaged Japanese girl. If that is the case, then they have plenty of lenses (although even then one could probably justify a pancake version of the 01 lens), and any further development will go into wifi and similar capabilities. There may be only so many of us; I guess we should be glad that we have what we have, but we may not be a large enough group to be worth much in the way of their resources.

Its strange, but if that is their target, they are making a lot of mistakes.
The selfy craze is huge and the 'kids' are after screens that flip over so they can see their sad little faces. Cameras like the Samsung NX3000/NX Mini or the Panasonic GF7 offer this. Also they want a very compact wide angle lens (at least 21mm), they don't want the 'Bulky' 08 lens cluttering up their handbags as it's too big.

[reh321]

I thought I'd like and use the Q but I find that I simply don't use it. I miss a viewfinder, I'm not happy with using a screen. There's often too much bright sky light that it's hard to use the screen.

The Q sometimes gets taken along but all too often it sits at home, neglected.

P.S. It does have the 01 lens further reducing its usefulness.

I addressed those issues before I bought my Q7. There were people here who told me the camera comes that way, not to ask for any more, but I decided to look for more. I bought an inexpensive Chinese-made enlarging hood which has the effect of turning the LCD into a viewfinder; it is a tad bulky, but it does the job, and recently I have found my Q7 to be almost as useful as my Canon Rebel.

BTW - My Q7 came with 02 and 06 lenses, but I bought an 01 separately from a Japanese seller, because this camera was replacing my Canon Elph and I needed the 01 to make the Q7 pocket-able. In that configuration, it is very similar to my Super Program, which came with a 50mm lens; I'm sorry that you don't find it to be useful.

---------- Post added 02-12-15 at 01:57 PM ----------

I thought I'd like and use the Q but I find that I simply don't use it. I miss a viewfinder, I'm not happy with using a screen. There's often too much bright sky light that it's hard to use the screen.

The Q sometimes gets taken along but all too often it sits at home, neglected.

P.S. It does have the 01 lens further reducing its usefulness.

In restrospect, my first response was not as complete as it should have been. Enough time has passed that I should complete my thought with a second response instead of adding comments that might be missed.

If you read various comments here, you will see that you are not unique. A number of us have problems with LCD-only on the Q-family and on the K-01. Please don't take it personally when others post telling how easy these are to use with just the LCD. Your mileage may differ from theirs. There is a solution! Various companies sell inexpensive enlarging hoods ("loupes") which can be used with the Q. Please don't give up on your Q. Please look into one of these devices and give your Q a second chance.

[drougge]

They should make a Q version of the new 150-450. Imagine how much smaller it would be for the Q mount. Birders would flock to the Q in droves.

Not much smaller at all I think. At least it is my understanding that for focal lengths significantly longer than the image circle diameter you get coverage (or at least illumination) nearly automatically.

[sapporodan]

I addressed those issues before I bought my Q7. There were people here who told me the camera comes that way, not to ask for any more, but I decided to look for more. I bought an inexpensive Chinese-made enlarging hood which has the effect of turning the LCD into a viewfinder; it is a tad bulky, but it does the job, and recently I have found my Q7 to be almost as useful as my Canon Rebel.

BTW - My Q7 came with 02 and 06 lenses, but I bought an 01 separately from a Japanese seller, because this camera was replacing my Canon Elph and I needed the 01 to make the Q7 pocket-able. In that configuration, it is very similar to my Super Program, which came with a 50mm lens; I'm sorry that you don't find it to be useful.

---------- Post added 02-12-15 at 01:57 PM ----------

In restrospect, my first response was not as complete as it should have been. Enough time has passed that I should complete my thought with a second response instead of adding comments that might be missed.

If you read various comments here, you will see that you are not unique. A number of us have problems with LCD-only on the Q-family and on the K-01. Please don't take it personally when others post telling how easy these are to use with just the LCD. Your mileage may differ from theirs. There is a solution! Various companies sell inexpensive enlarging hoods ("loupes") which can be used with the Q. Please don't give up on your Q. Please look into one of these devices and give your Q a second chance.

These 'Loupes' are an interesting solution but they are huge! not very practical when walking around as it kind of cancels out the point of having a compact camera, but using with a tripod I can imagine they give people a good advantage.

[reh321]

These 'Loupes' are an interesting solution but they are huge! not very practical when walking around as it kind of cancels out the point of having a compact camera, but using with a tripod I can imagine they give people a good advantage.

We agree about the facts.
1. A "loupe" significantly adds to the size of a kit (a tripod adds much more, but some add a tripod anyway).
2. an EVF would be a smaller/better solution (but would Pentax do that for where they see the market?)

As I have said many times, Pentax gets to decide how they will design their equipment; each of us gets to decide how to respond.
Since I researched this issue before buying my camera, I could have complained and complained, or I could have gone out and bought something from a different manufacturer.
In my particular case, I decided that for me the best solution was to spend a few extra bucks to turn the system they were selling into the system I need.
Your mileage may differ.

[Heinrich Lohmann]

I thought I'd like and use the Q but I find that I simply don't use it. I miss a viewfinder, I'm not happy with using a screen. There's often too much bright sky light that it's hard to use the screen.

The Q sometimes gets taken along but all too often it sits at home, neglected.

P.S. It does have the 01 lens further reducing its usefulness.

Why would the best lens in the system reduce it's usefulness? I don't get it.

[Biro]

We agree about the facts.
1. A "loupe" significantly adds to the size of a kit (a tripod adds much more, but some add a tripod anyway).
2. an EVF would be a smaller/better solution (but would Pentax do that for where they see the market?)

True and true. At least I have the OVF from my original Q. When I bought my Q-S1, I found the OVF works fine with the 01 prime, even if one's true FOV is now 42mm vs. 47mm with that lens on the original Q. Other than the 01, it's pretty much all DA telephotos and tripods for my Q-S1.