Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-29-2015, 08:00 AM   #76
Site Supporter
CWRailman's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Photos: Albums
Posts: 495
QuoteOriginally posted by starbase218 Quote
Or let's just keep it simple: show the pictures, then show the camera. This may be the best way to "sell" someone on the Pentax Q.
I totally agree with this part of your statement. I have always believed that no matter what the subject the demonstrated results speak volumes that no amount of rhetoric can dispute. That is why when I suggest a Q7 to someone I show them what I am using it for or send them to my WEB site to see examples. If someone wants to experiment by applying the Q series to some aspect of photography that does not interest me or that I do not consider to be one of the Qs strengths then so be it. Its their life minutes and money to waste and if they achieve the desired results then more power to them.

08-02-2015, 08:09 PM   #77
Pentaxian
MD Optofonik's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 900
QuoteOriginally posted by geomez Quote
I was first sold on the 5.6x crop factor. I bought my q strictly to adapt DSLR lenses. Well I quickly became more intrigued with the Q, and bought the 01 lens. Which led to me buying the 03, then the 06, and finally the 02, and lastly upgrading to the Q-S1. The Q is exactly what people say it is. It is an enjoyable, fun, soulful camera. If I would have read what I'm writing now a couple years ago before I had the Q, I'd think I had gone crazy. I'm a fairly logical and utilitarian purchaser. But for me and a lot of other people, the Q incites emotions, not logic. So I'd say if you're trying to sell someone on the Q, say buy it for the reach, and buy it because people love it.
Exactly my experience except I ended up getting a Q7 instead of the Q-S1.I also ended up with the toy lenses and Mount Shield because I prefer doing any special FX "in camera" as opposed to post. I have to say, though, that I can't imagine spending the kind of money Pentax is asking for the 08 on any single lens for the Q and I'm a bit disappointed that Pentax has only one real prime lens on offer.

It's a fun system that all fits into a very small bag that looks nothing like a "camera bag".
08-03-2015, 12:47 PM   #78
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by MD Optofonik Quote
Exactly my experience except I ended up getting a Q7 instead of the Q-S1.I also ended up with the toy lenses and Mount Shield because I prefer doing any special FX "in camera" as opposed to post. I have to say, though, that I can't imagine spending the kind of money Pentax is asking for the 08 on any single lens for the Q and I'm a bit disappointed that Pentax has only one real prime lens on offer.

It's a fun system that all fits into a very small bag that looks nothing like a "camera bag".
I've been eying the prices of the 08 from Japanese sellers. That lens can be had for $350-$375 now which is close to what an APS equivalent would cost.
08-03-2015, 01:08 PM   #79
Loyal Site Supporter
pacerr's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Henry, TN
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,848
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
That lens can be had for $350-$375 now which is close to what an APS equivalent would cost.
Agreed, and I bought one for ~$350 recently and have absolutely no regrets. It's a fine lens and its product is comparable to the APS-C and full frame lenses of a similar category.

Don't let the fact that it's a 'small' system body compromise the value vs. cost problem. It now makes my Q7 a preferred carry-camera when there's no other special plan in mind.

And I'm slowly learning that to be really useful this is a system that relies on AF and AE and does it very well with the option of personal intervention when I'm "smarter than the camera". The Q-fun-factor has to be appreciated as well to make this apparent, IME.

08-03-2015, 08:38 PM   #80
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 634
QuoteOriginally posted by MD Optofonik Quote
I also ended up with the toy lenses and Mount Shield because I prefer doing any special FX "in camera" as opposed to post. I have to say, though, that I can't imagine spending the kind of money Pentax is asking for the 08 on any single lens for the Q and I'm a bit disappointed that Pentax has only one real prime lens on offer.
Heh... That's exactly the opposite of my philosophy. The only lenses I don't have are the two "toy" lenses and the Mount Shield. I reckon if I ever feel an urge to produce blurry and vignetted images, I can easily add that in post. I love wide angles, though, so the 08 was a must-have. I would have bought it even if it hadn't come in the Premium Kit. I also later went for the 03 Fish Eye, which I have more mixed feelings toward.

One quirk that not many people seem to have noticed is that Fujifilm and Kodak both have made small cameras using the same battery as the Q. I have both a Fuji XF1 and a Fuji REAL 3D W3. Either of these can slip into my vest pocket in exactly the way that the Q7 doesn't. The XF1 is a premium "retro" style camera with a telescoping lens and 2/3-inch sensor. The W3 is an actual stereo camera, and the photos look quite amazing on a big-screen 3D TV! Having all these cameras with different capabilities but using the same battery is convenient. Even the Fuji battery charger is worth having, because it doesn't require a cord; it has the fold-out prongs that plug directly into a wall socket.
08-03-2015, 08:49 PM   #81
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,722
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
I've been eying the prices of the 08 from Japanese sellers. That lens can be had for $350-$375 now which is close to what an APS equivalent would cost.
Yeah, which is why I don't have wide-angle capability for my K-30 either.

I did have a Sigma 10-20mm for my Canon Rebel, but when that camera suddenly died and I chose to replace it with the K-30, part of the cost to me was losing serious wide-angle capability. I guess I'll have to miss several shots because of no serious wide-angle capability before I'll be willing to spend that much cash for one again.
08-03-2015, 10:34 PM   #82
Pentaxian
MD Optofonik's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 900
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
I've been eying the prices of the 08 from Japanese sellers. That lens can be had for $350-$375 now which is close to what an APS equivalent would cost.
That's still more than I would want to spend. Let the price drop to around $250 and I might could consider one.
08-04-2015, 01:35 AM   #83
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,423
for wide angle ,,,,,,,,,, those cheap ebay lenses that screw into the filter thread do an ok job for jpegs....and the price is fair

08-04-2015, 04:07 AM   #84
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 223
i wish 3rd parties would make lens for the Q system (tokina tamron sigma samyang etc)
08-05-2015, 05:30 PM   #85
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,722
QuoteOriginally posted by surfar Quote
for wide angle ,,,,,,,,,, those cheap ebay lenses that screw into the filter thread do an ok job for jpegs....and the price is fair
Yes, I bought one of those for my Rebel before I tried the Sigma 10-20mm.
The price was much better than the Sigma, but I wasn't very happy with the edge effects.
I now have one that would work on either my K30 or my Q7 - it has 52mm threads, but it was packaged with a 52mm-40.5mm converter so it could be used with some camcorder.
My main use for wide angle is in museums, so I haven't used it yet, but I plan to try it with both cameras once I do have an opportunity.
My expectation is that edge effects will be less of a problem with the Q7, but I won't know until my next visit to a museum.
11-24-2015, 08:55 AM   #86
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 634
I feel compelled to revive this thread and try to answer the original question. "How would you sell someone on the Pentax Q?"

1. Put one in their hands, and let them experience up-close how nifty it is. Specifications and internet reviews don't fully convey this.

2. Point them toward the Let's share shots with Q! thread and encourage them to peruse it at length.

There is no step 3. If they aren't sold on it by this point, it's probably not for them.
11-24-2015, 12:45 PM   #87
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,423
3.Explain that an ebay adapter will let them use just about any lens they possess which in some cases will provide extreme telephoto for a small amount(then they can afford a reasonably good mono/tripod)


4.Direct them to the adapted lenses thread
12-04-2015, 11:28 PM   #88
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,722
QuoteOriginally posted by surfar Quote
for wide angle ,,,,,,,,,, those cheap ebay lenses that screw into the filter thread do an ok job for jpegs....and the price is fair
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
Yes, I bought one of those for my Rebel before I tried the Sigma 10-20mm.
The price was much better than the Sigma, but I wasn't very happy with the edge effects.
I now have one that would work on either my K30 or my Q7 - it has 52mm threads, but it was packaged with a 52mm-40.5mm converter so it could be used with some camcorder.
My main use for wide angle is in museums, so I haven't used it yet, but I plan to try it with both cameras once I do have an opportunity.
My expectation is that edge effects will be less of a problem with the Q7, but I won't know until my next visit to a museum.
The conclusion, which I have written in green above,was completely wrong. I used the screw-in adapter during our Thanksgiving dinner because I just couldn't back up enough to take a particular picture with my Q7+02 and I didn't think I had time to run out for my K-30, move the flash from the Q-7 to Q-30, and change lenses on the K-30 from my 18-135 to my 10-20; simply screwing in the adapter seemed so much quicker and less obvious, It was also a very bad idea. It turns out that the pictures I took using this adapter had some vignetting as well as serious distortion on the edges. Unless I convince myself to pay out the serious dollars required to buy a 08, I guess I'll have to do any serious wide-angle with my K-30 and the Sigma 10-20 I bought for it.
12-11-2015, 04:25 PM   #89
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,245
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I just couldn't back up enough to take a particular picture with my Q7+02. Unless I convince myself to pay out the serious dollars required to buy a 08, I guess I'll have to do any serious wide-angle with my K-30 and the Sigma 10-20 I bought for it.
Don't forget that that the 02 is a "standard zoom", intended to roughly match the field of view of a 24-70 on full frame. Expressing disappointment that it can't do what a highly specialised lens like the Sigma 10-20 does is a little disingenuous.

When I got the 08 I no longer felt any need for the 02. If I want something between the 08 and 06, the 01 fills the gap nicely. But if you're feeling cheap, the 03 will give you more width than you can handle

P.S. I'm really glad I unsubscribed from this thread long enough to miss the Great War of Equivalence....
12-11-2015, 05:44 PM   #90
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,722
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
{posted on 8/3}
Yeah, which is why I don't have wide-angle capability for my K-30 either.

I did have a Sigma 10-20mm for my Canon Rebel, but when that camera suddenly died and I chose to replace it with the K-30, part of the cost to me was losing serious wide-angle capability. I guess I'll have to miss several shots because of no serious wide-angle capability before I'll be willing to spend that much cash for one again.
QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
{posted on 12/11}
Don't forget that that the 02 is a "standard zoom", intended to roughly match the field of view of a 24-70 on full frame. Expressing disappointment that it can't do what a highly specialised lens like the Sigma 10-20 does is a little disingenuous.

When I got the 08 I no longer felt any need for the 02. If I want something between the 08 and 06, the 01 fills the gap nicely. But if you're feeling cheap, the 03 will give you more width than you can handle

P.S. I'm really glad I unsubscribed from this thread long enough to miss the Great War of Equivalence....
And you missed a lot during the four months you weren't here.

I never claimed that my Q7 was meant to an all-purpose camera. I never said I expected 16-32mm ("FF equivalence") from it. I am very happy at what it delivers in a small package. In fact, six days ago I took it to a Madrigal Dinner, and the lady in front of me with an older Nikon DSLR asked me to email my pictures to her, especially the ones of her daughter, because mine were so much better. Please note that I am not saying a current Q is better than a current Nikon DSLR, but this small package does deliver very good results, and I am very pleased with it.

I have consistently said that the one weakness of the Q, which kind of offsets it's advantage in telephoto, is wide-angle. That is just fine. Only in recent years have I been able to justify buying a pricey wide-angle APS-C lens, so I feel that is a rather small cost to pay for the other things it gives me! (and unlike some who post here, it is the only camera I have that is smaller than APS-C, and I have no intention of changing that fact!!)




Last edited by reh321; 12-14-2015 at 08:29 PM. Reason: fix word
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!
camera, dslr, exposure, kit, lens, lenses, light, mirrorless, noise, nonsense, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q-s1, q10, q7, screen, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Would you sell these lenses to purchase the new HD Pentax-D FA* 70-200mm F2.8 ? Driline Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 42 01-30-2016 07:09 AM
How would YOU market the Pentax Q? cheekygeek Pentax Q 41 06-11-2014 04:23 PM
How would you improve the K-3 Tesla Pentax K-3 61 03-12-2014 05:59 PM
Would you get the original Q? mano Pentax Q 51 01-19-2014 08:37 AM
Could Pentax sell you on the Q if they had better lenses? devorama Pentax Compact Cameras 17 06-29-2011 09:34 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:22 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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