[aurele]

A good compact 28mm is missing for the Q line-up. Would make the Q a kind of GRIV

[luftfluss]

How much would you/we pay for that camera?

IIRC the original Q was laughed out of the party because it was 'overpriced'. The plastic-body Q10 was the response and the Q7 was the upgrade cycle camera.

I personally would like a q-style camera with GR DNA (IOW an interchangeable lens GR).

The original Q was laughed out of the party because it was $799 with a sensor found in $99 digicams.

The Canon EOS M line is the closest thing to a ILC-GR.

[kentishrev]

If you look at the rear lens element of a Q lens, and then look at the sensor inside the Q-S1 body, you will see that the element just barely covers the size of the sensor. There can't even be a Q with a 1" sensor that will utilize the current lens lineup.

You can get a small Nikon 1 system body like the J4, which is of similar size to the Q, and has better image quality thanks to the 1" sensor. And, the Nikon 1's kit zoom is just a smidgen larger than the Q's!

Thank you for the clear explanation. Just looked closely at the Q-S1 and can see what you mean. Never realised it was that obvious. This group is great for education and learning!

[drypenn]

A larger chip variant of that sensor may be interesting. The thing is how much of the iphones quality is based on the sensor, the lens, or software?

After pixel-peeping an iphone 5s' image, que horror!, , I daresay that much of Apple's vaunted IQ is software based. Understandably, it lacks a lot of details.

But the 1) contrast, 2) saturation and 3) sharpening are pretty spot-on when perused casually, never mind the details that we all get excited about. And that's probably enough for 99% of the population. Apple, as usual, understands this, and has nailed what most would expect from a "good, interesting photograph". Honestly, I have yet to see a printed and framed photograph from a phone.

Samsung has, and can probably have an access to a better camera hardware, but lacking that Apple savvy in software, my iphone 5s definitely takes better pictures than my wife's S5. So, by deduction, it's more like software (jpeg processing) than hardware.

[Wired]

After pixel-peeping an iphone 5s' image, que horror!, , I daresay that much of Apple's vaunted IQ is software based. Understandably, it lacks a lot of details.

But the 1) contrast, 2) saturation and 3) sharpening are pretty spot-on when perused casually, never mind the details that we all get excited about. And that's probably enough for 99% of the population. Apple, as usual, understands this, and has nailed what most would expect from a "good, interesting photograph". Honestly, I have yet to see a printed and framed photograph from a phone.

Samsung has, and can probably have an access to a better camera hardware, but lacking that Apple savvy in software, my iphone 5s definitely takes better pictures than my wife's S5. So, by deduction, it's more like software (jpeg processing) than hardware.

thats what I was leaning toward the more I thought about it....

[reh321]

If you look at the rear lens element of a Q lens, and then look at the sensor inside the Q-S1 body, you will see that the element just barely covers the size of the sensor. There can't even be a Q with a 1" sensor that will utilize the current lens lineup.

You can get a small Nikon 1 system body like the J4, which is of similar size to the Q, and has better image quality thanks to the 1" sensor. And, the Nikon 1's kit zoom is just a smidgen larger than the Q's!

At another discussion board, every-so-often someone will ask "How can I take pictures in an old church, where the lighting is dim and they don't allow tripods or flash?" The answer usually involves buying a camera for $1000+ and then adding on an f/2.8 (or better) lens for at least another $1000. I have "just" a Q-7 kit that cost me just over $400, including the extra 01 lens I bought. Attached here is a picture I took using that Q7+01 in an old mission church, where they didn't allow tripods, didn't allow flash, and they keep the church quite dark. This is not a perfect picture; I could fix it up some in post-processing, but I think looking at the original is more instructive. Perhaps a more expensive kit would be needed if I were producing a picture for a poster, but for display on my computer, this will be just fine. A Pentax Q-7 has nothing to apologize for.

---------- Post added 03-13-15 at 01:57 AM ----------

With the release of the Q-S1 and the rest of the "-Sx" Pentax cameras (like the K-S1/S2), Ricoh has begun another model line for "innovation" cameras, with the K-(x)/(xx) and Q(x) remaining as the "core" models. If it's true, then could it be possible for two Q models to be out at once? Right now Pentax is focusing on the K- and 645 mounts, so we can expect a development for the Q model either very late in the year or even later in the future.

What's your take on future Q models? Let's try to build a hypothetical model to succeed the QS-1 and Q7.

Here's my idea of a future Q:

Core concept 1: "Q5"
A Q model for the adventurous enthusiast, allowing it to be taken to many environments like its bigger K brothers, but without the extra pounds of weight. It would be perfect for trekkers, cross-country travelers, and summer camps. On the other hand, it may also work nicely for hobbyist photographers who mostly upload to mobile and social media sites, and can function as a "sidearm" camera too for professionals like press/journalists, fashion, lifestyle photographers.

Features:
1. 6 or 8mp "better low light"-capable sensor (if how the Sony A7s did it holds true for other sensors too)
2. Weather-sealed magnesium-alloy body
3. On-chip PDAF
4. Tilting screen
5. 120fps movie option (even if it's lower than 720p?)
6. Built-in WiFi/NFC/Bluetooth
7. Grip options:
--a. WR Power grip option: houses an extra battery (AAA-size Li-ion?lol thinking twice about this) and microSD card slot.
8. Wireless tethering
9. Faint back-lit buttons for use in the dark
10. Mic port for video
10. WR versions of the 01, 02, 06, 08 lenses
11. Sturdy, ergonomic design in base colors: white and black
12. "Clarity enhancement" technology from Ricoh
13. 14-bit RAW option
14. New, improved processor to accommodate enhanced stills and video

Core concept 2: "Q-S2"
A highly-stylized, more affordable model designed for beginners and enthusiasts who want the best value camera system in a fairly compact package, even in comparison to m4/3 systems.

Features:
All of the above, except:
1(!). Same 12MP BSI CMOS sensor found in Q7
2. Weather-sealed plastic body with stainless-steel chassis
6. No built-in WiFi
7. Grip options:
--a. WR Power grip option: houses an extra battery (AAA-size Li-ion? lol thinking twice about this) and microSD card slot.
--b. WR Connectivity grip: houses WiFi/NFC/Bluetooth module, rechargeable mini-battery
11. Eye-catching design in collection-series colors

Concept future accessories:
1. WR mini-flash
2. Pentax Q speedbooster (is this even possible? haha)
3. Q-mount 1.4x WR teleconverter
4. Pentax Q travel case with built-in powerbank
5. Pentax Q Bluetooth microphone
6. Pentax Q LED array for video (similar to the Yongnuo YN160C, but lighter and more compact)
7. Q-system video rig (lol just thinking)

I believe that the primary audience for the Q-family is, and (in the minds of Pentax) will continue to be, the average teen-aged Japanese girl. Under that supposition, and in looking at what was done with the K-S2, I believe that the following are the most likely upgrades to show up in the Q-S2:


(1) flippy screen (just tilt, not articulated) - to make taking "selfies" easier.


(2) WiFi - to enable quick posting of "selfies" and other pictures to the Internet


(3) possibly weather resistance - so taking and posting these pictures can be done under any conditions

[surfar]

Q with WR...yes...go back to Q7 shape....WR lenses ....45-90mm tele.....orange white purple sky blue red yellow bright green....a WR adapter with aperture control and comes with 2 spare batteries.....

[Alizarine]

My concern is, how much market is there for the Q? Does Ricoh/Pentax feel that it is worth developing the system further? AFAIK, there is no better 1/1.7" sensor available... can Sony develop a successor that has more megapickles but retains all of the same characteristics of the current sensor? Why isn't there a super-long tele available, to exploit a benefit of the Q's crop factor? A 600/4 would be pretty awesome.

Q: If the Q system is designed primarily for the Japanese market, how does the Japanese consumer use the Q? Tinkerers, like so many here on PF, or just use the retail kit?

Q: Is there a benefit to Ricoh to return the Q system to its roots, with a magnesium-alloy body, and design lenses that have the build quality of the 02, rather than the flimsier construction of the 06? Make the camera simply a pleasure to hold, an object worth owning as well as worth using.

There was a previous interview with Ricoh concerning the Q when the Q-S1 came out - I'm not sure who was it who answered, but from Pentax's response it seems they're pretty dedicated to continuing the Q line, albeit many of its sales lie in Japan. Not sure about your first question as to what's the usual thing the Japanese do with their Qs- though I see a lot of them trying lenses from other small mounts like 110 and for CCTVs, of sorts. One of the biggest problems though, like what you said, is sensor development - aside from Sony who else makes a 1/1.7" nowadays? It would've been a lot better if Pentax had its own sensor fab... but that's dreaming too big.

As for returning the Q to its first "premium" iteration - like the premium version of the GR - that would be even more niche. While it's true that many of us here in PF give value to a high-quality body, many of the purchases came when the Q moved to a plastic body construction... and also, Pentax wants the Q mount to be the most "fun" of their ILC's, and if that's the case, then the bigger the sensor, the more "serious" things are getting (as how I see Pentax with the progression from Q to 645, the latter which they relegate to professionals).

One problem, I suppose, is that the mFT lenses require an active electronic mount in order to power the focus-by-wire system. And one problem with the Nikon 1 system is that it doesn't have many lenses, so there wouldn't be much of an accessible market. So maybe this is a dumb idea .... Threadjack over.

The Nikon 1 system I think has more lenses than the Q... if I'm not mistaken they have around 13 now compared to the Q's 8. But I would really love it if a speedbooster would come for the Q!

[jethro10]

A lot of these replies either will be too expensive, have too limited an audience, or make the Q go larger than a Mcdonalds 3000 calorie drink.

I've recently took apart a dropped camera for curiosity sake, and the tilt screen mechanism and sealing plastic is very thin and takes little space. My wish list I believe is more realistic and achievable.

1. tilt screen, may make the camera a bit bigger maybe, but not a lot.
2. The circle of 4 buttons round the OK button made a circular dial like the Sony Alpha A6000, makes fully manual easier.
3. If 2 is not realistic, make the focus ring an aperture ring when manual focusing is disabled, so we can still achieve both adjustments of shutter/f stop when in manual mode for only the cost of a F/W update.
4. higher res screen. Has technology not moved on enough in the several years from the original Q to allow this with minimal extra power drain?
5. wifi - as it's not used often, re power drain. Perhaps bluetooth can do a lot of the same?
6. possibly expand the sensor vibrate/ stabilisation function work like a recently announced camera (can't remember which one) where it moves in a rectangle and increases resolution on certain picture types.
7. 10MP, or 8MP sensor for better low light pics

A lot of this seems easily achievable at minimal cost and battery drain.


I'd be happy with this

J

[cmar]

Build the Q7 in the style of the original Q with a weather sealed metal body, add a long telephoto and a macro lens to the lineup, make the 06 Zoom better, more like the 02 construction, allow more things to be assigned to the front dial, and I think it will will sell. The problem was the original Q was too expensive for a new camera. Now we have had it for a few years, its obvious some people would buy it for the looks, for the nice feel and obvious quality build, the small size and ease of carrying around, some for the flexability, and to use with long lenses. In short for a variety of reasons. Most of these people are not THAT worried about the small sensor, or have modified their shooting habits to work around it. The problem is that now Pentax have improved the sensor slightly, but have taken away pretty much everyting else that made the original so interesting to so many people. So they just ended up with an expensive P&S. So they were selling a concept, as much as a camera and may have overlooked that. I say now that it has made a name for itself, go back to the original formula, but not quite so expensive.

[Pioneer]

How much would you/we pay for that camera?

IIRC the original Q was laughed out of the party because it was 'overpriced'. The plastic-body Q10 was the response and the Q7 was the upgrade cycle camera.

I personally would like a q-style camera with GR DNA (IOW an interchangeable lens GR).

If I remember I paid the guy $650 for a new Q with the prime. I have never regretted it and use the daylights out of it.

I do own the Q7 and appreciate the larger sensor and the slightly domed buttons.

The Q is the one that goes with me around town in my vest pocket. The Q7 goes on longer trips by car, plane or hiking.

I would love a Q7 with the Q body with some small enhancements that does not increase its size.

[jethro10]

allow more things to be assigned to the front dial

Oh yeah forgot about that one. I'm all for simple /cheap things that will give great benefit

J

[Biro]

I agree with those who say that the Q system will either stick with a 1/1.7" sensor or have to change to another mount. For that reason - and the fact that Pentax doesn't make its own sensors - the next Q will probably be equipped with whatever the best off-the-shelf 1/1.7" sensor is available at the time, most likely from Sony. But that's okay. Sensor technology continues to improve. That's why the Q system (which is a big hit in Japan) will probably continue to exist and be developed as long as there are sensors being made that it can use.

Otherwise, I personally would like the next Q to go back to a magnesium body and include an integrated electronic viewfinder and much-higher resolution rear LCD (how about using Sony's "White Magic" technology that's employed in the Ricoh GR's screen?). Weather resistance would also be appealing but Ricoh would have to be convinced that enough enthusiasts would buy lenses with WR for the feature to be worthwhile.

Myself, I had the original Q with the 01, 02 and 06 lenses. While I really liked it, I found that it was always my second choice when picking a camera to take with me in any given situation. So I sold off the kit. Ratchet forward to this year when the Q-S1 body (with its larger sensor) was on sale for under $200 on Amazon.com. I scooped that up because I still had my Q-to-K converter and wanted to experiment with my DA 55-300 lens. I have since added back the fast 01 prime and I think I'll leave it at that - unless the wide-angle 08 lens goes on sale for half price.

[Tony Belding]

I agree with those who say that the Q system will either stick with a 1/1.7" sensor or have to change to another mount.

They could put in a bigger sensor, maybe 2/3". So, the lenses wouldn't fully cover it -- but it could use a variable portion of the sensor to produce different aspect ratios. That's something very few other cameras do, and it would be cool.

Otherwise, I personally would like the next Q to go back to a magnesium body and in lude an integrated electronic viewfinder and much-higher resolution rear LCD.

This!

I'd like to imagine a sort of "Super Q" with a magnesium body, oversized sensor, and an EVF. Let it be Pentax's answer to the OM-D.

[snostorm]

I'd like a Q mount designed specifically for use with adapted lenses. Size is not a priority since most adapters pretty much negate any size advantage the body might have, and the very small body actually makes it harder to hold. This model would have a good integrated EVF, a tilting higher res LCD, and a larger battery since small body size is not a priority.

I'd also like them to update the flash protocols to at least industry standard, and add master/controller remote wireless TTL capability to the pop up flash.

I have the original Q (actually 2 of them), and have not felt compelled to purchase any of the newer models, but would buy one of these if they made it.

Scott