Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-29-2015, 07:50 PM   #91
Pentaxian
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,334
QuoteOriginally posted by Antonio Marques Quote
Pentax is the Citroen of camera makers, not the Audi.
CitroŽn dominated World Rally Championships, until recently. Audi wins at Le MansÖ

04-29-2015, 07:58 PM   #92
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,434
Subaru. Left-brain cars.

(Look what's happened to their market share since Toyota started sharing engineering and marketing expertise with them.)
04-29-2015, 09:35 PM   #93
Pentaxian
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,334
QuoteOriginally posted by RobA_Oz Quote
CitroŽn dominated World Rally Championships, until recently. Audi wins at Le MansÖ
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Subaru. Left-brain cars.

(Look what's happened to their market share since Toyota started sharing engineering and marketing expertise with them.)
Spot the CitroŽn and Subaru drivers (and Qusers)...
04-30-2015, 05:06 PM   #94
Veteran Member
patarok's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 388
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Subaru. Left-brain cars.

(Look what's happened to their market share since Toyota started sharing engineering and marketing expertise with them.)
now you are getting rude... ts ts ts.

05-11-2015, 03:35 PM - 1 Like   #95
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
I just want a native Q7 super zoom like a 50-300mm (EFL 250-1500mm) This manual focusing my DA-55-300 is getting old

Hans
05-11-2015, 07:01 PM - 1 Like   #96
Veteran Member
magkelly's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,905
One of the reasons I like the Q cameras is the simplicity of using them. If I wanted half the stuff mentioned above I'd be using my K-DSLR's. It's just too much function for such a little camera. I don't want to see using the Q's become as complicated as using a DSLR. I would appreciate a touch screen with touch focus like on my Olympus E-P3's. That feature is killer with my M43 cameras and it almost makes the use of my EVF unnecessary at times. It would be a huge help with the Q's. I will miss it working on my QS1. The QS1 not having that was one of the few things that kept me from getting one for a long time and why I went for my Oly M43's instead. One touch and BOOM, there's perfect focus nearly every time. Articulating the screen, might be nice, but it's not a must have for me. Otherwise all the other stuff above just doesn't appeal to me though I suppose I can see how wifi might be useful for people who are social media types.

The reason I wanted a Q was so that I could play and not have to think all the time because I wanted a camera that could still change a lens once in a while but that really could fit into a pocket, albeit maybe a larger one. I love my Oly M43 cameras but they're not as small as I'd like. I haven't actually held my QS1 as yet. I won't actually have my Q till tomorrow or Weds. It's still en route, but I was hoping it was significantly smaller with the kit lens than the E-P3's. The E-P3's as I love them they don't really fit into a pocket. The specs though, they're not as different as I'd hoped. The Oly's are a little bigger I think, but the QS1 is not as small as I thought it was it doesn't look like.

4.13 x 2.28 x1.33 (QS1)
4.80◊ 2.72 ◊ 1.35 (E-P3)

The EP-3's are way lighter and easier to tote than a DSLR, credit due, but they're still not really what I consider compact. By the time I get a lens on one, except for the 17mm because that's a pancake basically, they're just a tiny bit too big to be portable every single day, thrown into my purse, or better yet slid into a pocket for a long walk sans heavy purse and all. They're kind of weighty for small cameras, solidly built and of course they're even a tad heavier because I did the bling thing. (Swarovski crystals don't weigh a ton but they do add a little bit of weight.) I thought I would be able to do that a lot, just carry one in my purse but I find I still end up using a neck strap or toting them in my smaller camera bag most of the time. I was hoping the Q would be tons smaller and lighter somewhere closer to a pocket P&S than my M43 cameras but I'm not sure, not yet. By the time I get the 02 zoom lens on it I think I'm looking at about the same dimensions. The difference is so minimal that I don't think it's going to make much difference for me. I think I am still going to end up using it pretty much the same way as I do my E-P3's.

Adding too much more I just think it would be a "bit much" as they say, but that's me. I don't want the Q's to be mini DSLR's. I just want them to be Q's if that makes any sense?
05-12-2015, 02:19 AM   #97
Senior Member
sapporodan's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 123
Kind of the opposite, sadly I have decided to sell off my Q and lenses. I was thinking about a selling the Q at Christmas but decided to hold off because it's such a dam fun camera, and I really do like it.

I was desperately hoping Pentax would release new lenses but alas no, the Q system sadly does not have the lenses (Only 4 with autofocus!) and I am not sure Pentax is fully supporting the system any more, so I not don't believe I will ever see the lenses with the focal ranges that I want.

I bought into the Q system for the ability to have a tiny camera with interchangeable lenses and it's great, but the 02 just makes it too big to pocket, and keeping the 01 on it all the time looses flexibility for me. I know people who love extreme telephoto appreciate the crop factor but I've never been in to that.

I am off to pick up a Panasonic GM1 with the 12-32, I certainly don't think it's better than the Q system I am under no illusion about that, the Q system is without doubt the most fun camera I have ever used, but I found the GM1 more pocketable than the Q + 02. and as pocketability/flexability was my main consideration in buying the Q, it's sadly never really fulfilled that for me (we all have different needs).

Now micro four thirds have a selection of lenses that are only slightly larger, and some even slimmer then the Q lens equivalents. I can get a similar setup. But ultimately I wanted a slim zoom and a 35mm pancake to suits my needs.

I suppose I am saying this out of frustration, as the Q was very nearly the perfect camera for me, just so dam frustrated the system never got the support it deserved.

Now no longer owning anything Pentax ill probably not be visiting this site that often, so ill just like to say thanks to all and keep rocking those Q's guys.







P.S you know as soon as I press post Pentax will release 5 new lenses and a new camera just to spite me

Last edited by sapporodan; 05-12-2015 at 08:31 AM.
05-12-2015, 02:56 AM   #98
Veteran Member
patarok's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 388
Morpheus says:

Attached Images
 
05-12-2015, 07:09 AM   #99
Forum Member
paulcote's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 96
QuoteOriginally posted by magkelly Quote
One of the reasons I like the Q cameras is the simplicity of using them. If I wanted half the stuff mentioned above I'd be using my K-DSLR's. It's just too much function for such a little camera. I don't want to see using the Q's become as complicated as using a DSLR. I would appreciate a touch screen with touch focus like on my Olympus E-P3's. That feature is killer with my M43 cameras and it almost makes the use of my EVF unnecessary at times. It would be a huge help with the Q's. I will miss it working on my QS1. The QS1 not having that was one of the few things that kept me from getting one for a long time and why I went for my Oly M43's instead. One touch and BOOM, there's perfect focus nearly every time. Articulating the screen, might be nice, but it's not a must have for me. Otherwise all the other stuff above just doesn't appeal to me though I suppose I can see how wifi might be useful for people who are social media types.

The reason I wanted a Q was so that I could play and not have to think all the time because I wanted a camera that could still change a lens once in a while but that really could fit into a pocket, albeit maybe a larger one. I love my Oly M43 cameras but they're not as small as I'd like. I haven't actually held my QS1 as yet. I won't actually have my Q till tomorrow or Weds. It's still en route, but I was hoping it was significantly smaller with the kit lens than the E-P3's. The E-P3's as I love them they don't really fit into a pocket. The specs though, they're not as different as I'd hoped. The Oly's are a little bigger I think, but the QS1 is not as small as I thought it was it doesn't look like.

4.13 x 2.28 x1.33 (QS1)
4.80◊ 2.72 ◊ 1.35 (E-P3)

The EP-3's are way lighter and easier to tote than a DSLR, credit due, but they're still not really what I consider compact. By the time I get a lens on one, except for the 17mm because that's a pancake basically, they're just a tiny bit too big to be portable every single day, thrown into my purse, or better yet slid into a pocket for a long walk sans heavy purse and all. They're kind of weighty for small cameras, solidly built and of course they're even a tad heavier because I did the bling thing. (Swarovski crystals don't weigh a ton but they do add a little bit of weight.) I thought I would be able to do that a lot, just carry one in my purse but I find I still end up using a neck strap or toting them in my smaller camera bag most of the time. I was hoping the Q would be tons smaller and lighter somewhere closer to a pocket P&S than my M43 cameras but I'm not sure, not yet. By the time I get the 02 zoom lens on it I think I'm looking at about the same dimensions. The difference is so minimal that I don't think it's going to make much difference for me. I think I am still going to end up using it pretty much the same way as I do my E-P3's.

Adding too much more I just think it would be a "bit much" as they say, but that's me. I don't want the Q's to be mini DSLR's. I just want them to be Q's if that makes any sense?
Yeah I just bought a Q-S1 which has yet to arrive. I bought it on ebay and gave an offer to get it a little below the buy it now price so it was sort of a spontaneous purchase. I already have 2 Original Q's and all the lenses save the wide zoom 08. A part of me wanted to get that new OMD-EM10 which is 500 bucks now or a bit more with the pancake. Truth is though none of these mirrorless are that pocketable. I think Q more-so than the rest I think. But, the Olympus does have two shield mount lenses! I like the shield mount on my Q. If Olympus can make different shield mounts like the fisheye, maybe Pentax can too!. What I like about the OMD-EM-10 is the flip down screen and viewfinder. I am going to make it a go with all my Q kit though and see what I can do with it. I think I have to work on one piece at a time to learn it.

I do think Q is more about the art factor and better adapted to that than the other cameras. I think it was intended to be a high end sort of toy camera.

I have not used my DSLR in quite a while, but don't really see huge advantages of the other mirrorless cameras over my Pentax DSLR. You can't pocket neither of them!
05-12-2015, 08:05 AM   #100
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,983
QuoteOriginally posted by sapporodan Quote
Kind of the opposite, sadly I have decided to sell off my Q and lenses. I was thinking about a selling the Q at Christmas but decided to hold off because it's such a dam fun camera, and I really do like it.

I was desperately hoping Pentax would release new lenses but alas no, the Q system sadly does not have the lenses (Only 4 with autofocus!) and I am not sure Pentax is fully supporting the system any more, so I not don't believe I will ever see the lenses with the focal ranges that I want.

I bought into the Q system for the ability to have a tiny camera with interchangeable lenses and it's great, but the 02 just makes it too big to pocket, and keeping the 01 on it all the time looses flexibility for me. I know people who love extreme telephoto appreciate the crop factor but I've never been in to that.

I am off to pick up a Panasonic GM1 with the 12-32, I certainly don't think it's better than the Q system I am under no illusion about that, the Q system is without doubt the most fun camera I have ever used, but I found the GM1 more pocketable than the Q + 02. and as pocketability/flexability was my main consideration in buying the Q, it's sadly never really fulfilled that for me (we all have different needs).

Micro four thirds have a selection of lenses that are only slightly larger, and some even slimmer then the Q lens equivalents. so I can pretty much go like for like if I wanted. But ultimately I wanted a slim zoom and a 35mm pancake that suits my needs.

01 - Pani 20mm
02 - Pani 12-32 or Oly 14-42
03 - Oly fisheye lenscap
04 - Oly 17 f2.8
05 - Sigma 60?
06 - Pani 35-100 (f4 version)
07 - Lenscap body thing!
08 - Oly 9-18 (Certainly not as good as the 08!)

I suppose I am saying this out of frustration, as the Q was very nearly the perfect camera for me, just so dam frustrated the system never got the support it deserved.

Now no longer owning anything Pentax ill probably not be visiting this site that often, so ill just like to say thanks to all and keep rocking those Q's guys.







P.S you know as soon as I press post Pentax will release 5 new lenses and a new camera just to spite me
I'm sorry that you feel that way. With a camera like my Super Program, I had a total of three lenses - a prime standard, a prime wide-angle, and a zoom telephoto. With the 01 and 06, I'm 2/3 of the way to what I expect from a primary camera.
05-12-2015, 03:02 PM   #101
New Member




Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2
QuoteOriginally posted by sapporodan Quote
Kind of the opposite, sadly I have decided to sell off my Q and lenses. I was thinking about a selling the Q at Christmas but decided to hold off because it's such a dam fun camera, and I really do like it.

I was desperately hoping Pentax would release new lenses but alas no, the Q system sadly does not have the lenses (Only 4 with autofocus!) and I am not sure Pentax is fully supporting the system any more, so I not don't believe I will ever see the lenses with the focal ranges that I want.

I bought into the Q system for the ability to have a tiny camera with interchangeable lenses and it's great, but the 02 just makes it too big to pocket, and keeping the 01 on it all the time looses flexibility for me. I know people who love extreme telephoto appreciate the crop factor but I've never been in to that.

I am off to pick up a Panasonic GM1 with the 12-32, I certainly don't think it's better than the Q system I am under no illusion about that, the Q system is without doubt the most fun camera I have ever used, but I found the GM1 more pocketable than the Q + 02. and as pocketability/flexability was my main consideration in buying the Q, it's sadly never really fulfilled that for me (we all have different needs).

Now micro four thirds have a selection of lenses that are only slightly larger, and some even slimmer then the Q lens equivalents. I can get a similar setup. But ultimately I wanted a slim zoom and a 35mm pancake to suits my needs.

I suppose I am saying this out of frustration, as the Q was very nearly the perfect camera for me, just so dam frustrated the system never got the support it deserved.

Now no longer owning anything Pentax ill probably not be visiting this site that often, so ill just like to say thanks to all and keep rocking those Q's guys.







P.S you know as soon as I press post Pentax will release 5 new lenses and a new camera just to spite me

I think the pocketability is a major point.

From an interview it sounds like Pentax-Ricoh's vision of mirrorless is that small size is more important image quality. So I doubt we will see a Pentax Q with a larger sensor anytime in the near future.

The Q system was indeed the smallest interchangable lens system when it was introduced. But the market hasn't been standing still. The m43 now have the GM1 and GM5 with a 12-32 pancake. Nikon has the S2 with the 11-27mm pancake. Both of these are comparable in height and width to a Pentax Q and actually shorter in depth due to the pancake lenses.

If the Q wants to stay competitive, assuming they can't go to a larger sensor they need to introduce some high quality pancake zooms. A higher resolution LCD, possibly with articulation and wifi.

---------- Post added 05-12-15 at 03:11 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by jwills1213 Quote
I think the pocketability is a major point.

From an interview it sounds like Pentax-Ricoh's vision of mirrorless is that small size is more important image quality. So I doubt we will see a Pentax Q with a larger sensor anytime in the near future.

The Q system was indeed the smallest interchangable lens system when it was introduced. But the market hasn't been standing still. The m43 now have the GM1 and GM5 with a 12-32 pancake. Nikon has the S2 with the 11-27mm pancake. Both of these are comparable in height and width to a Pentax Q and actually shorter in depth due to the pancake lenses.

If the Q wants to stay competitive, assuming they can't go to a larger sensor they need to introduce some high quality pancake zooms. A higher resolution LCD, possibly with articulation and wifi.
Apparently, I can't edit posts...yet?

Anyway, in addition I think one possibility of expanding the Q market is to introduce a weather sealed Q with a weather sealed lens or two.

Weather sealing has always been a Pentax hallmark. And if they manage to improve the video a bit you can market it to the outdoors/adventurous market, maybe eat into GoPro's market share a bit.

I know Pentax is primarily focusing on still images but the Q seems like a relatively low risk place where they can experiment a bit with more usable video features. Especially since I bet most GoPro video users aren't looking for the same level of control as videographers using a GH4 or an A7.
05-12-2015, 03:28 PM   #102
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,983
QuoteOriginally posted by jwills1213 Quote
I think the pocketability is a major point.

From an interview it sounds like Pentax-Ricoh's vision of mirrorless is that small size is more important image quality. So I doubt we will see a Pentax Q with a larger sensor anytime in the near future.
I agree. With the 01 lens, my Q7 is a fine pocket-able camera. A pancake version of the 01 would be very nice; so would a similar wide-angle lens.

QuoteOriginally posted by jwills1213 Quote
Anyway, in addition I think one possibility of expanding the Q market is to introduce a weather sealed Q with a weather sealed lens or two.

Weather sealing has always been a Pentax hallmark. And if they manage to improve the video a bit you can market it to the outdoors/adventurous market, maybe eat into GoPro's market share a bit.
The problem with weather-sealing the camera is that they would also have to introduce several weather-sealed lenses. I don't know how much work would have to go into 10,11, and 16 lenses (my names for a weather-sealed wide-angle prime lens, and weather-sealed versions of the 01 and 06 lenses)
05-13-2015, 03:59 PM   #103
Veteran Member
patarok's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 388
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I agree. With the 01 lens, my Q7 is a fine pocket-able camera. A pancake version of the 01 would be very nice; so would a similar wide-angle lens.

The problem with weather-sealing the camera is that they would also have to introduce several weather-sealed lenses. I don't know how much work would have to go into 10,11, and 16 lenses (my names for a weather-sealed wide-angle prime lens, and weather-sealed versions of the 01 and 06 lenses)
several lenses ... several... muhahahah.. i would be happy with one standard WR Q zoom. One is completely OK for the beginning. Isn't it?
07-20-2015, 01:49 PM   #104
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,983
A week ago I was taking a picture with my K-30, when I lurched sideways just as I pressed the shutter button. I was surprised at how long it took for the shutter to actually respond, but the picture showed no sign of my lurch. Then I remembered that I had checked the "automatic horizon correction" box - and the logic had worked perfectly to correct the effect of my lurch (and the extra work explained the extra delay). That is a great feature of my K-30, and I would really really like to have it on my Q also.
07-22-2015, 11:01 PM   #105
New Member




Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 23
the q does not need a larger sensor it needs Foveon X3 panoramic sensor. ^^ put the bmpcc in the ground. bmpcc glitches are just too much. take the 02 standard zoom "from 27mm" and make it start at 17/19mm. everything out there that high dollar amount atm is promoting panoramic...if pentax jumped on that market with something that had 3x the effective megapixels at the current Q... it would devastate bmpcc an make them cry like babies.

Last edited by xerxal; 07-22-2015 at 11:11 PM.
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!
body, camera, church, future, grip, kit, lens, lenses, mirrorless, model, nikon, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q-s1, q10, q7, sensor, video, water
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What is your take on the Da 70 vs Fa77 or the upstart Samyang 85? Canmannac Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 27 01-03-2014 11:52 AM
What's the weirdest thing that's ever been in your camera bag? ASheffield General Talk 50 11-26-2013 05:11 AM
What's the first thing you did with your Q when it arrived? Lowell Goudge Pentax Q 22 04-18-2013 03:24 AM
What's your support for your Q? Clicker Pentax Q 4 05-03-2012 10:59 AM
New-York trip: what shot do you take ? what's the best spot? TanGU Photographic Technique 47 07-24-2010 08:55 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:43 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