How would you sell someone on the Pentax Q?

ZombieArmy · 07-07-2015, 04:56 PM

What makes this camera so worth while? It's a neat little curiosity, but why I would someone pick it up over the NEX/A5000 Series?

Curious to hear your answers on this, I wonder how distinct you Q fans can make the camera seem

CWRailman · 07-07-2015, 05:10 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by ZombieArmy

What makes this camera so worth while? It's a neat little curiosity, but why I would someone pick it up over the NEX/A5000 Series?

Curious to hear your answers on this, I wonder how distinct you Q fans can make the camera seem

I would not even bother. You’re mixing row boats and aircraft carriers. Pick something that is in the Q’s league as far as price and sensor size.

**jrpower10** · 07-07-2015, 05:11 PM

I'll get the ball rolling, even though I don't own one. Smaller and lighter.

fuent104 · 07-07-2015, 05:20 PM

In the past, when I thought they'd release pancake primes for it, it seemed like a great idea. Now, that it looks like there may never be a wide and telephoto primes? I don't know that I'd recommend it any more.

tvdtvdtvd · 07-07-2015, 05:28 PM - **1 Like**

The Q is fun. Plain and simple as that. The Q single handedly resurrected my dormant interest in photography
as an art form, not just a means of documenting activities.

Plaidshirt · 07-07-2015, 05:47 PM

I second the fun factor. I've had both a Q and a NEX 3n (similar to A5000) and the Q offers more physical controls. The Q menu system was WAY more intuitive. But it sounds like the A5000 is pretty good. If I had to choose again I would definitely choose the Q. I don't dislike the Sony cameras, they just seem a little utilitarian and the Pentaxes have soul.

ZombieArmy · 07-07-2015, 05:59 PM

Originally posted by CWRailman

I would not even bother. You’re mixing row boats and aircraft carriers. Pick something that is in the Q’s league as far as price and sensor size.

I can get them for similar prices used, they're in the same ballpark.

The A5000 is incredibly cheap.

Just because one option is more powerful doesn't mean the other doesn't have merit in a comparative sense.
Like honestly I'd list the crop factor as one cool thing you'll never get with a Sony, turn even basic lenses into extreme telephotos for kicks!

Last edited by ZombieArmy; 07-07-2015 at 06:07 PM.

reh321 · 07-07-2015, 06:23 PM

I bought mine primarily for sensor size (crop factor) - I needed something that I could use for birding without having to spend a small fortune on lenses. To me, the primary competitors are the various bridge cameras, and I chose the Q7 instead because, compared to a bridge camera
(1) the 01 lens makes Q7 pocketable
(2) slightly larger sensor, features, and other lenses make Q7 more general-purpose.

BTW - and I agree that a wide-angle lens similar in size and price to the 01 would be a great addition to the line

Last year at this time, my two cameras were a Canon Rebel and a Canon Elph.
I really wanted to keep it down to two cameras, but somehow improve my birding capability.

In August I bought a doubler for the Rebel; it kind of did the job

In October I almost bought a Canon SX-50 to "replace" the Elph, but then I would no longer have a pocket-able camera.

In November I almost bought a Sony A6000 to "replace" the Elph, but that would leave the birding function still not met.

In December I bought the Q7 and a 01 lens (to make it pocket-able), a hoodman clone, and several adapters (to turn regular zoom lenses into birding lenses) for slightly more than half of what the A6000 would have cost.

Professor Batty · 07-07-2015, 06:23 PM

The Sony body is small but the lenses sure aren't. A Q with a Pentax 110 50mm f2.8 (with sensor stabilization!) is in a class by itself. There are numerous C mount lenses that are great with the Q as well, (also with sensor stabilization!). The smaller Q sensor, while it can't match the ultimate IQ of an APS-C, allows for a much greater effective depth of field. The IQ is certainly good enough for anything smaller than a poster-sized print. The small sensor also makes macro and tele photography much easier.

Did I mention that the Q has sensor stabilization which will work with any lens ever made?

**dms** · 07-07-2015, 06:41 PM

Don't know all the makes/options, but my Q w/ 04 wide lens (or likely the 01 lens) in a Zing pouch fits in a standard sports jacket pocket. First time I really could carry a camera w/ me every day. (And I require Raw.)
And as a bonus there are interesting likely unique possibilities adapting lenses w/ the K-to-Q adapter.

chiepapi · 07-07-2015, 08:19 PM

On a lighter side... Saying "it's so NEX" or "A5000" sounds weird than saying "it's so Q" when referring to something cool

**geomez** · 07-07-2015, 11:18 PM - **1 Like**

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.

aglet · 07-07-2015, 11:37 PM

Originally posted by ZombieArmy

What makes this camera so worth while? It's a neat little curiosity, but why I would someone pick it up over the NEX/A5000 Series?

Curious to hear your answers on this, I wonder how distinct you Q fans can make the camera seem

I don't have any of the Sonys, haven't liked them enough yet, but I have a a kit of some high end gear. Despite that,
the Q series (I've got 4 of them) is still very FUN to use. They're versatile, small, could be a had for real cheap if you timed it right. Battery life isn't fabulous is the only real downer.
I find the Q7 a very capable imaging machine when attached to a decent lens and really hope they bring out a good, fast, dedicated macro lens for it around 20mm.

If you recognize the limitations and the benefits of these small cameras, you can really squeeze some great shots from them. That challenge can also be part of the fun.
Did anyone mention they're SMALL?... I have a Q7 & Q10 with half a dozen lenses (in padding), 2 spare batteries, charger & cord, extra SD cards, all in a miniature backpack-shaped bag that was meant to carry a toddler's handheld Nintendo game device. So it's about the size of a smallish ladies purse. If I leave out the charger and cord I have room for a folding tabletop tripod. Great for a super-light little hiking kit except the mini backpack I'm using requires a 20-lb sherpa to carry it or I swing it off one finger.

They're small with big IQ. You can plunk one in your garden to do a time-lapse shoot without it being obvious. Same for street-photography.
Cheap adapters attach manual tele lenses for super-tele results but you do need a good lens to adapt to it as the small hi-pixel-density sensor quickly shows the shortcomings of older lens designs.
Only thing I really miss on the Q series is something it's never had, and EVF. If the Q7 had an EVF it'd be the ultimate super-compact camera.

raider · 07-08-2015, 04:24 AM

Originally posted by ZombieArmy

What makes this camera so worth while? It's a neat little curiosity, but why I would someone pick it up over the NEX/A5000 Series?

Curious to hear your answers on this, I wonder how distinct you Q fans can make the camera seem

I think it depends if one wanted to buy a NEX/A5000 and use that as the only camera. If the intention is to own only one camera and given the choice between NEX and the Q, I would say go get the NEX.

Sandy Hancock · 07-08-2015, 04:33 AM - **2 Likes**

FUN. Fun. fun.
Tiny.
The remarkable image quality of the 01, 06 and 08 and lenses.
The flippant stupidity of the 07 pinhole, the absurd wideness of the 03.
And it's a 5x teleconverter for your K-mount lenses without losing light.

And it's fun.

07-07-2015, 04:56 PM	#1
ZombieArmy Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Florida Posts: 3,210	How would you sell someone on the Pentax Q? What makes this camera so worth while? It's a neat little curiosity, but why I would someone pick it up over the NEX/A5000 Series? Curious to hear your answers on this, I wonder how distinct you Q fans can make the camera seem

07-07-2015, 06:23 PM	#8
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,181	I bought mine primarily for sensor size (crop factor) - I needed something that I could use for birding without having to spend a small fortune on lenses. To me, the primary competitors are the various bridge cameras, and I chose the Q7 instead because, compared to a bridge camera (1) the 01 lens makes Q7 pocketable (2) slightly larger sensor, features, and other lenses make Q7 more general-purpose. BTW - and I agree that a wide-angle lens similar in size and price to the 01 would be a great addition to the line Last year at this time, my two cameras were a Canon Rebel and a Canon Elph. I really wanted to keep it down to two cameras, but somehow improve my birding capability. In August I bought a doubler for the Rebel; it kind of did the job In October I almost bought a Canon SX-50 to "replace" the Elph, but then I would no longer have a pocket-able camera. In November I almost bought a Sony A6000 to "replace" the Elph, but that would leave the birding function still not met. In December I bought the Q7 and a 01 lens (to make it pocket-able), a hoodman clone, and several adapters (to turn regular zoom lenses into birding lenses) for slightly more than half of what the A6000 would have cost. Last edited by reh321; 07-07-2015 at 06:54 PM.

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 & K-3 II	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

07-07-2015, 05:10 PM - 1 Like	#2
CWRailman Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Scottsdale, Arizona Photos: Albums Posts: 510	Originally posted by ZombieArmy What makes this camera so worth while? It's a neat little curiosity, but why I would someone pick it up over the NEX/A5000 Series? Curious to hear your answers on this, I wonder how distinct you Q fans can make the camera seem I would not even bother. You’re mixing row boats and aircraft carriers. Pick something that is in the Q’s league as far as price and sensor size.

07-07-2015, 05:11 PM	#3
jrpower10 Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Richland, Washington, USA Posts: 935	I'll get the ball rolling, even though I don't own one. Smaller and lighter.

07-07-2015, 05:20 PM	#4
fuent104 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,356	In the past, when I thought they'd release pancake primes for it, it seemed like a great idea. Now, that it looks like there may never be a wide and telephoto primes? I don't know that I'd recommend it any more.

07-07-2015, 05:28 PM - 1 Like	#5
tvdtvdtvd Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 1,665	The Q is fun. Plain and simple as that. The Q single handedly resurrected my dormant interest in photography as an art form, not just a means of documenting activities.

07-07-2015, 05:47 PM	#6
Plaidshirt Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2015 Location: Traverse City, MI Posts: 29	I second the fun factor. I've had both a Q and a NEX 3n (similar to A5000) and the Q offers more physical controls. The Q menu system was WAY more intuitive. But it sounds like the A5000 is pretty good. If I had to choose again I would definitely choose the Q. I don't dislike the Sony cameras, they just seem a little utilitarian and the Pentaxes have soul.

07-07-2015, 05:59 PM	#7
ZombieArmy Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Florida Posts: 3,210 Original Poster	Originally posted by CWRailman I would not even bother. You’re mixing row boats and aircraft carriers. Pick something that is in the Q’s league as far as price and sensor size. I can get them for similar prices used, they're in the same ballpark. The A5000 is incredibly cheap. Just because one option is more powerful doesn't mean the other doesn't have merit in a comparative sense. Like honestly I'd list the crop factor as one cool thing you'll never get with a Sony, turn even basic lenses into extreme telephotos for kicks! Last edited by ZombieArmy; 07-07-2015 at 06:07 PM.

07-07-2015, 06:23 PM	#9
Professor Batty Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 118	The Sony body is small but the lenses sure aren't. A Q with a Pentax 110 50mm f2.8 (with sensor stabilization!) is in a class by itself. There are numerous C mount lenses that are great with the Q as well, (also with sensor stabilization!). The smaller Q sensor, while it can't match the ultimate IQ of an APS-C, allows for a much greater effective depth of field. The IQ is certainly good enough for anything smaller than a poster-sized print. The small sensor also makes macro and tele photography much easier. Did I mention that the Q has sensor stabilization which will work with any lens ever made?

07-07-2015, 06:41 PM	#10
dms Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: New York, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,192	Don't know all the makes/options, but my Q w/ 04 wide lens (or likely the 01 lens) in a Zing pouch fits in a standard sports jacket pocket. First time I really could carry a camera w/ me every day. (And I require Raw.) And as a bonus there are interesting likely unique possibilities adapting lenses w/ the K-to-Q adapter.

07-07-2015, 08:19 PM	#11
chiepapi Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: AZ Posts: 308	On a lighter side... Saying "it's so NEX" or "A5000" sounds weird than saying "it's so Q" when referring to something cool

07-07-2015, 11:18 PM - 1 Like	#12
geomez Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Roanoke, Virginia, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,760	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.

07-07-2015, 11:37 PM	#13
aglet Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Alberta, central Posts: 99	Originally posted by ZombieArmy What makes this camera so worth while? It's a neat little curiosity, but why I would someone pick it up over the NEX/A5000 Series? Curious to hear your answers on this, I wonder how distinct you Q fans can make the camera seem I don't have any of the Sonys, haven't liked them enough yet, but I have a a kit of some high end gear. Despite that, the Q series (I've got 4 of them) is still very FUN to use. They're versatile, small, could be a had for real cheap if you timed it right. Battery life isn't fabulous is the only real downer. I find the Q7 a very capable imaging machine when attached to a decent lens and really hope they bring out a good, fast, dedicated macro lens for it around 20mm. If you recognize the limitations and the benefits of these small cameras, you can really squeeze some great shots from them. That challenge can also be part of the fun. Did anyone mention they're SMALL?... I have a Q7 & Q10 with half a dozen lenses (in padding), 2 spare batteries, charger & cord, extra SD cards, all in a miniature backpack-shaped bag that was meant to carry a toddler's handheld Nintendo game device. So it's about the size of a smallish ladies purse. If I leave out the charger and cord I have room for a folding tabletop tripod. Great for a super-light little hiking kit except the mini backpack I'm using requires a 20-lb sherpa to carry it or I swing it off one finger. They're small with big IQ. You can plunk one in your garden to do a time-lapse shoot without it being obvious. Same for street-photography. Cheap adapters attach manual tele lenses for super-tele results but you do need a good lens to adapt to it as the small hi-pixel-density sensor quickly shows the shortcomings of older lens designs. Only thing I really miss on the Q series is something it's never had, and EVF. If the Q7 had an EVF it'd be the ultimate super-compact camera.

07-08-2015, 04:24 AM	#14
raider Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Perth, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,989	Originally posted by ZombieArmy What makes this camera so worth while? It's a neat little curiosity, but why I would someone pick it up over the NEX/A5000 Series? Curious to hear your answers on this, I wonder how distinct you Q fans can make the camera seem I think it depends if one wanted to buy a NEX/A5000 and use that as the only camera. If the intention is to own only one camera and given the choice between NEX and the Q, I would say go get the NEX.

07-08-2015, 04:33 AM - 2 Likes	#15
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,275	FUN. Fun. fun. Tiny. The remarkable image quality of the 01, 06 and 08 and lenses. The flippant stupidity of the 07 pinhole, the absurd wideness of the 03. And it's a 5x teleconverter for your K-mount lenses without losing light. And it's fun.