[lytrytyr]

Give me a WA 4mm or 5mm prime at f/1.2.

f/1.4 good enough for you?

Ricoh 4.4mm F1.4(1/1.7")?????????????So-net???

[6BQ5]

OoooooOOOOoo! Bring it on!

That's a lot of little pieces of glass if I understand the picture right.

[saladin]

Agree entirely, Boris, on the two extra primes. Ive been a tad surprised that the system shifted entirely to zoom lenses (excluding the "toys").

[CheepShot]

I wonder if Pentax is holding on putting these out until enough 08's are sold. If the IQ is close, I'd buy the 4.4mm first and probably forget the 08.

[CWRailman]

Agree entirely, Boris, on the two extra primes. Ive been a tad surprised that the system shifted entirely to zoom lenses (excluding the "toys").

Considering that most cameras are now sold by non camera stores such as Best Buy, Target, Sears and the like to many amateur photographers, this is quite understandable. Talking with a salesman at the Best Buy store in Scottsdale, Arizona last year he told me he had been in their Photography dept for two years and never sold a Prime lens for the Nikon or Canon cameras they sell. EVERYBODY buys zooms including many of those adequately informed about the benefits of a fixed focal length lens. Every time I am at the Grand Canyon I check out the lenses on the DSLR and SLR’s and I have never seen a fixed focal length lens which is the more appropriate name for a prime lens, on any of the cameras carried by the visitors. Variable focal length lenses have gotten so good that most photographers, who do not want to be accompanied by a pack mule carrying a collection of lenses, different filter sizes etc. don’t even consider using fixed focal length lenses. Why would anyone want to schlep around a bag full of primes and associated filters when one variable focal length lens will accomplish the same. Try hiking up any of the trails in Colorado with a bag full of lenses and you will soon be a zoom convertie. (Those of you under 30 or who weigh less than the recommend weight for your height need not reply to that comment.)

I can’t remember the last time I saw a photographer at a sporting event, professional or amateur, who was NOT using a Zoom lens. In the mid 1970’s when camera manufactures started selling “body only”, Central Camera in Chicago said the sale of fixed focal length lenses slowed down substantially as even back then many buyers opted for zoom lenses. All things considered I doubt Pentax sold more than a few thousand of the 08 lenses. They probably knew that in advance hence the high price which was computed to amortize the costs of the 08’s development over fewer sold units.

[reh321]

I wonder if Pentax is holding on putting these out until enough 08's are sold. If the IQ is close, I'd buy the 4.4mm first and probably forget the 08.

If the 4.4 is priced close to the price of an 01, I would buy it very quickly. I will never buy the 08! (I have limited need for that range, and I will never pay twice the cost of my camera under those circumstances).

---------- Post added 04-19-15 at 01:10 PM ----------

Considering that most cameras are now sold by non camera stores such as Best Buy, Target, Sears and the like to many amateur photographers, this is quite understandable. Talking with a salesman at the Best Buy store in Scottsdale, Arizona last year he told me he had been in their Photography dept for two years and never sold a Prime lens for the Nikon or Canon cameras they sell. EVERYBODY buys zooms including many of those adequately informed about the benefits of a fixed focal length lens. Every time I am at the Grand Canyon I check out the lenses on the DSLR and SLR’s and I have never seen a fixed focal length lens which is the more appropriate name for a prime lens, on any of the cameras carried by the visitors. Variable focal length lenses have gotten so good that most photographers, who do not want to be accompanied by a pack mule carrying a collection of lenses, different filter sizes etc. don’t even consider using fixed focal length lenses. Why would anyone want to schlep around a bag full of primes and associated filters when one variable focal length lens will accomplish the same. Try hiking up any of the trails in Colorado with a bag full of lenses and you will soon be a zoom convertie. (Those of you under 30 or who weigh less than the recommend weight for your height need not reply to that comment.)

I can’t remember the last time I saw a photographer at a sporting event, professional or amateur, who was NOT using a Zoom lens. In the mid 1970’s when camera manufactures started selling “body only”, Central Camera in Chicago said the sale of fixed focal length lenses slowed down substantially as even back then many buyers opted for zoom lenses. All things considered I doubt Pentax sold more than a few thousand of the 08 lenses. They probably knew that in advance hence the high price which was computed to amortize the costs of the 08’s development over fewer sold units.

I understand the value of zoom for telephoto lenses; in 1979, when I got my first Pentax SLR, my first addition was a 75-205mm Vivitar lens ... but I believe that zoom was very uncommon for wide-angle until fairly recently. Considering how I usually use wide-angle lenses (for example, in museums where the aisles are crowded), a lens like the 4.4 is all that I would need, and hopefully it would be less pricey, and that would also take me back to the capabilities I had with my film Pentax SLRs.

[CWRailman]

I understand the value of zoom for telephoto lenses; in 1979, when I got my first Pentax SLR, my first addition was a 75-205mm Vivitar lens ... but I believe that zoom was very uncommon for wide-angle until fairly recently. Considering how I usually use wide-angle lenses (for example, in museums where the aisles are crowded), a lens like the 4.4 is all that I would need, and hopefully it would be less pricey, and that would also take me back to the capabilities I had with my film Pentax SLRs.

Your purchase in 1979 of a 75-205 Vivitar was quite common for that time period and was probably representative of the buying patterns of many buyers at that time. The highly rated Vivitar was a bit out of my price range at that time. I purchased a 35-70mm Soligar in the mid 1970’s as my first lens purchase and basically never again used the 55mm standard lens that came with my used Pentax Spotmatic.

In his book titled “The Pentax Way” Herbert Keppler does not consider variable lenses less than 50mm as Zoom lenses. Zoom is used to imply a lens that could increase the image size from the standard focal length of 50-55 depending on camera manufacture to greater than that. That agrees with the definition of Zoom used by most dictionaries. I have no idea who started to call wide angle variable lenses Zoom but it is a serious misnomer which as I have previous said, I cringe whenever I hear someone use when talking about wide angle variable focal length lenses.

Based on the number of photographers who would buy a fixed focal length wide angle lens and considering the costs of development and of course manufacture in relatively small quantities, I am surprised Pentax is considering such a lens for this camera series. It would be nice though especially if carrying a retail price under $200.

[reh321]

Your purchase in 1979 of a 75-205 Vivitar was quite common for that time period and was probably representative of the buying patterns of many buyers at that time. The highly rated Vivitar was a bit out of my price range at that time. I purchased a 35-70mm Soligar in the mid 1970’s as my first lens purchase and basically never again used the 55mm standard lens that came with my used Pentax Spotmatic.

In his book titled “The Pentax Way” Herbert Keppler does not consider variable lenses less than 50mm as Zoom lenses. Zoom is used to imply a lens that could increase the image size from the standard focal length of 50-55 depending on camera manufacture to greater than that. That agrees with the definition of Zoom used by most dictionaries. I have no idea who started to call wide angle variable lenses Zoom but it is a serious misnomer which as I have previous said, I cringe whenever I hear someone use when talking about wide angle variable focal length lenses.

Based on the number of photographers who would buy a fixed focal length wide angle lens and considering the costs of development and of course manufacture in relatively small quantities, I am surprised Pentax is considering such a lens for this camera series. It would be nice though especially if carrying a retail price under $200.

The difference in our approaches is interesting. The 75-205 lens was the only variable focal-length lens I purchased for my two Pentax SLRs (which I used 1979-95); I took most of my pictures with the 50mm prime lens that came with my camera, just as I now take more pictures with the 01 that I added to my Q7 than with the 02 and 06 that came with it; maybe I would be one of the few who would see value to a wide-aperture fixed-focus wide-angle lens, such as the 4.4 that we've been talking about here.

added thought: it is usually believed that variable-focal-length lenses are more subject to issues reflecting defects (CA, spots out-of-focus, etc). Thus, it is quite likely that a fixed-focus wide-angle lens would provide better images at lower cost (at the cost of flexibility) than what we commonly get from the 08 lens.

[JPT]

RX100 m4

One of the interesting things about Sony's announcements today are the sensor in the RX10/100. These use the same technology (Exmor RS - stacked sensor) as the high end 20mp 1/1.7 sensor in the list I posted at the beginning of this thread. It should interesting to watch is performance. It's also interesting to see that some of these new sensors are starting to see the light of day. Perhaps we'll get a significantly updated Q soon.

[Tony Belding]

One of the interesting things about Sony's announcements today are the sensor in the RX10/100. These use the same technology (Exmor RS - stacked sensor) as the high end 20mp 1/1.7 sensor in the list I posted at the beginning of this thread.

I wonder if those cameras use the RGBW filter array with clear, or "white", photosites as Sony had touted earlier? I couldn't find any mention of it in the RX10/100 press releases.

The stacked circuitry technology is very interesting and promising. I rather hope future Qs don't go above 12 MP, though. The optical characteristics of the system -- especially diffraction -- are limiting factors, and adding "empty" pixels that don't deliver more real resolving power would just be a waste. Improved high-ISO performance is a more tangible benefit.

[hnikesch]

I would also like to see a 16mp sensor, I have an old Canon SD990 with a 1/1.7 16mp CCD sensor and in bright sun it is amazing and out performs my Q7 and Canon S100 both having a 12mp 1/1.7 sensors But when things get dark the 12mp sensors are much better out of the camera. If I shoot raw with the SD990 and process in LR5 with a little work I can get shots as good as the Q7. That being said with newer camera processors and sensor design I believe 16mp could be better overall than the current Q7 sensor.

Hans

[reh321]

I would also like to see a 16mp sensor, I have an old Canon SD990 with a 1/1.7 16mp CCD sensor and in bright sun it is amazing and out performs my Q7 and Canon S100 both having a 12mp 1/1.7 sensors But when things get dark the 12mp sensors are much better out of the camera. If I shoot raw with the SD990 and process in LR5 with a little work I can get shots as good as the Q7. That being said with newer camera processors and sensor design I believe 16mp could be better overall than the current Q7 sensor.

Hans

What is the dynamic range of the SD990 like? My Pentax Q-7 replaced a Canon SD1100, which had an 8mp 1/2.5 sensor. The place I always noticed the small sensor was when I would take a picture of (Caucasian) people in sunlight - their facial features were nearly always washed out because of the limited DR of that camera.

[magkelly]

EVF and touch screen focus, that's all I'd like to see. The lack of these two things they keep the Q from being perfect IMHO. I'd settle for the latter but if they could give us Oly type touch focus via the LCD screen I'd be very happy to see that.

[hnikesch]

What is the dynamic range of the SD990 like? My Pentax Q-7 replaced a Canon SD1100, which had an 8mp 1/2.5 sensor. The place I always noticed the small sensor was when I would take a picture of (Caucasian) people in sunlight - their facial features were nearly always washed out because of the limited DR of that camera.

I have been in the habit of shooting all of my Canon P&S cameras at -.3 stop to avoid highlight clipping. This habit started in 04 with my S400 and I have maintained it for the S500, S900, S990, and S100. With CHDK I can shoot raw with the S900 and SD990 when processed in LR5 it has great DR All of the cameras have a 1/1.7 sensor. The S100 has a cmos sensor similar to the Q7 and it's IQ is almost identical but the Q7 has the advantage of interchangeable lenses but the S100 is pocketable. So when I need the reach or want to be creative I use the Q7 but when I don't plan to shoot I carry the S100 or the SD990. I also find myself carrying both the S100 in a belt case and the Q7 with the 06 attached with a shoulder strap.

Hans

[CFWhitman]

This is an interesting discussion. I have my doubts about a higher MP sensor right now. However, I will keep an open mind, and if they prove that they can make the pros outweigh the cons, then I would be willing to use one.

My lenses in order of how often I use them from most to least are as follows:
01
06
08
02

Of course, even though the 08 is so far my second to least used lens, I certainly wouldn't want to give it up. You could of course make an argument that on some of my outings a Ricoh GR would be a better camera for me to use, but I like my Q7 kit. Maybe if I actually had a GR I would love that camera too, but I'm not sorry I got the Q7.

So I'm one of those people who still likes to shoot with primes, especially when they are as small and light as Q lenses. In a way, I wonder if the size and weight of the lenses couldn't make the Q series a great vehicle for a set of prime lenses. Still, it seems that only people who are seriously into photography have any appreciation for the value of a prime lens. Regular people will only use a prime lens if it's attached to their cell phone. Then again, regular people probably don't appreciate the Q series at all in the first place, so why not try selling a few more primes.