Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

**Tony Belding** · 11-02-2015, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

? Why ?

That's where most of the glare comes from. When I'm holding the camera normally and looking somewhat-downward at the LCD screen, my shirt is what's reflected in it. If my shirt is very light in color, it's awful. If my shirt is very dark, the glare is greatly reduced.

**UncleVanya** · 11-02-2015, 03:50 PM

Originally posted by Tony Belding

That's where most of the glare comes from. When I'm holding the camera normally and looking somewhat-downward at the LCD screen, my shirt is what's reflected in it. If my shirt is very light in color, it's awful. If my shirt is very dark, the glare is greatly reduced.

DOH! Hand smacking forehead moment.

**PenPusher** · 11-03-2015, 11:13 AM

Actually I found it was my face that was being reflected in the screen, as I've been familiar with it for more than 70 years now I really did not see the need to see it again and would much prefer to be looking at an EVF.

If we generate enough "The Q needs an EVF' threads somebody in Japan might listen

CD

reh321 · 11-03-2015, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by PenPusher

If we generate enough "The Q needs an EVF' threads somebody in Japan might listen

Right now the only effect seems to be to irritate CWRailman

patarok · 11-03-2015, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

? Why ?

What could be another reason for wearing a black oversized t-shirt when photographing with a MILC that doesnt offer an EVF:

*drumroll*

so you can use it as a "black photographers cloth".

You may now ask: "What is a -black photographers cloth- ?"

Hm. I suggest that you take a close look at the following picture.

I am sure the penny will drop real soon.

**UncleVanya** · 11-03-2015, 03:35 PM

Sadly using the shirt as a black photographer's cloth means showing off my very white belly and frightening people.
Luckily I don't have anything without an optical viewfinder yet.

**BigMackCam** · 11-03-2015, 03:43 PM

Reflections on the screen is an interesting point. Years ago, I had a Nikon D40X... and I fitted it with a screen protector (a habit I continue with my cameras to this day). But that first protector was finely grooved and non-reflective. The downside was that it reduced the clarity of the screen - and back then, I "chimped" a lot, checking each photo in detail on the screen. These days I rarely check individual photos once I know the exposure is within limits - and so I'm thinking... Not just for my Q7, but maybe my DSLRs too, non-reflective screen protectors might be a good idea...

patarok · 11-03-2015, 03:46 PM

Conclusion:

A Viewfinder would be a real painkiller. not only for professionals.

I read a ridiculous statement in some other thread where some user stated something like: "people are used to shoot with smartphones... only pros need viewfinders...no need for that on a Q".

So if you read this, read closely:

It is not a fact that people who are used to shoot with phone-displays are cretins who would deny having a better option... no, you just live with what you get.
But yes, you would welcome a Viewfinder, even my son when he was 8 years old tended to use the EVF of the old Oly-Bridge i bestowed him instead of the LCD-Screen.
Because when the sun makes the Display glare, it doesnt matter if you are used to shoot with phones... its just a sh... situation and you will wish for a viewfinder in such a situation. - There is no magic when you buy a DSLR that makes you a superior photographer... really.

patarok · 11-03-2015, 03:55 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

Sadly using the shirt as a black photographer's cloth means showing off my very white belly and frightening people.
Luckily I don't have anything without an optical viewfinder yet.

---------- Post added 11-03-15 at 03:56 PM ----------

Just in case you consider a Q-S1... when it is cold wearing a second smaller shirt under the black XXL is a pretty nice solution...

**UncleVanya** · 11-03-2015, 03:58 PM

Originally posted by patarok

\There is no magic when you buy a DSLR that makes you a superior photographer...

You Tube

Quser215 · 11-03-2015, 04:59 PM

So far nothing suggests there will be another Q, Q S-2. With the new stacked type sensors coming out the Q could be made a killer camera. I am thinking on-chip phase detection, very fast autofocus generally, faster shooting overall, improved low-light sensitivity, etc. I hope they don't drop the Q as it has been such a joy, pain at times. The new breed of sensors could make the Q much much better.

patarok · 11-03-2015, 05:38 PM

Originally posted by Quser215

So far nothing suggests there will be another Q, Q S-2. With the new stacked type sensors coming out the Q could be made a killer camera. I am thinking on-chip phase detection, very fast autofocus generally, faster shooting overall, improved low-light sensitivity, etc. I hope they don't drop the Q as it has been such a joy, pain at times. The new breed of sensors could make the Q much much better.

there will be...

any links that offer info on those sensors you wrote about? stacked type? d'ya mean some kind of foveon related tech? foveon sensors capitulate pretty soon, when you raise the ISO...
I tried every generation of sigmas merrill at the last photokina... and the thing is, IQ ends at ISO 800... or more precisely: you get signifcant color noise at ISO 800 and above.

I even like results of the Q-S1 at ISO 1600. If i would see easily recognizable color noise starting at 800 i would rather play frisbee with it then shoot photos.

Quser215 · 11-03-2015, 06:17 PM

Originally posted by patarok

there will be...

any links that offer info on those sensors you wrote about? stacked type? d'ya mean some kind of foveon related tech? foveon sensors capitulate pretty soon, when you raise the ISO...
I tried every generation of sigmas merrill at the last photokina... and the thing is, IQ ends at ISO 800... or more precisely: you get signifcant color noise at ISO 800 and above.

I even like results of the Q-S1 at ISO 1600. If i would see easily recognizable color noise starting at 800 i would rather play frisbee with it then shoot photos.

Here is link to some info. Sony has released several of those recently for I-phones, also the RX100 IV has a 1" stacked sensor.
I like to shoot my Q original in low light, candid type photography; its size is fantastic, but low light ability is rather
poor. I wish they continue the Q with these new sensors and not grow it any bigger.
http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/cx_news_archives/img/pdf/vol_68/sideview_vol68.pdf

Quser215 · 11-03-2015, 07:15 PM

An example attached, regular JPEG, no post processing at all, not bad for the original Q, 06 lens, f2.8, 1/80s, ISO-400.

Lobalobo · 11-04-2015, 04:50 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by CWRailman

Another EVF thread?? REALLY folks!!! That dead horse has been beaten long enough. Now I know how Bill Murray’s character in Ground Hog Day felt. Instead of wasting time talking about what it isn’t how about contributing photo’s to the threads demonstrating what it is? The “Let’s Share Shots with Q” thread is looking for contributions. Go to that thread to see my latest contribution. What have you posted in that thread lately?

Here's a suggestion, Denny. If you don't like a thread, don't join it. Easy, see.

11-03-2015, 03:27 PM	#20
patarok Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Photos: Gallery Posts: 389	Originally posted by UncleVanya ? Why ? What could be another reason for wearing a black oversized t-shirt when photographing with a MILC that doesnt offer an EVF: drumroll so you can use it as a "black photographers cloth". You may now ask: "What is a -black photographers cloth- ?" Hm. I suggest that you take a close look at the following picture. I am sure the penny will drop real soon. Attached Images

11-03-2015, 03:55 PM	#24
patarok Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Photos: Gallery Posts: 389	Originally posted by UncleVanya Sadly using the shirt as a black photographer's cloth means showing off my very white belly and frightening people. Luckily I don't have anything without an optical viewfinder yet. ---------- Post added 11-03-15 at 03:56 PM ---------- Just in case you consider a Q-S1... when it is cold wearing a second smaller shirt under the black XXL is a pretty nice solution... Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax K-S2 compatibility with lenses	Britta	Pentax K-S1 & K-S2	4	09-11-2015 05:34 AM
Photos with New Pentax K-S2	cainmh	Pentax K-S1 & K-S2	3	06-22-2015 06:03 AM
Fotodiox Q to K with Pentax DA 40mm f/2.8 Lens on Pentax Q	SonDa5	Pentax Q	3	12-26-2012 06:29 PM
EVF for K-01 - The EVF Solution that some want in a product that already exists?!	spade111	Pentax K-01	36	02-07-2012 03:13 PM

11-02-2015, 03:10 PM	#16
Tony Belding Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Hamilton, Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 787	Originally posted by UncleVanya ? Why ? That's where most of the glare comes from. When I'm holding the camera normally and looking somewhat-downward at the LCD screen, my shirt is what's reflected in it. If my shirt is very light in color, it's awful. If my shirt is very dark, the glare is greatly reduced.

11-02-2015, 03:50 PM	#17
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,472	Originally posted by Tony Belding That's where most of the glare comes from. When I'm holding the camera normally and looking somewhat-downward at the LCD screen, my shirt is what's reflected in it. If my shirt is very light in color, it's awful. If my shirt is very dark, the glare is greatly reduced. DOH! Hand smacking forehead moment.

11-03-2015, 11:13 AM	#18
PenPusher Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Ireland Posts: 1,048	Actually I found it was my face that was being reflected in the screen, as I've been familiar with it for more than 70 years now I really did not see the need to see it again and would much prefer to be looking at an EVF. If we generate enough "The Q needs an EVF' threads somebody in Japan might listen CD

11-03-2015, 01:54 PM	#19
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,186	Originally posted by PenPusher If we generate enough "The Q needs an EVF' threads somebody in Japan might listen Right now the only effect seems to be to irritate CWRailman

11-03-2015, 03:35 PM	#21
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,472	Sadly using the shirt as a black photographer's cloth means showing off my very white belly and frightening people. Luckily I don't have anything without an optical viewfinder yet.

11-03-2015, 03:43 PM	#22
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,705	Reflections on the screen is an interesting point. Years ago, I had a Nikon D40X... and I fitted it with a screen protector (a habit I continue with my cameras to this day). But that first protector was finely grooved and non-reflective. The downside was that it reduced the clarity of the screen - and back then, I "chimped" a lot, checking each photo in detail on the screen. These days I rarely check individual photos once I know the exposure is within limits - and so I'm thinking... Not just for my Q7, but maybe my DSLRs too, non-reflective screen protectors might be a good idea...

11-03-2015, 03:46 PM	#23
patarok Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Photos: Gallery Posts: 389	Conclusion: A Viewfinder would be a real painkiller. not only for professionals. I read a ridiculous statement in some other thread where some user stated something like: "people are used to shoot with smartphones... only pros need viewfinders...no need for that on a Q". So if you read this, read closely: It is not a fact that people who are used to shoot with phone-displays are cretins who would deny having a better option... no, you just live with what you get. But yes, you would welcome a Viewfinder, even my son when he was 8 years old tended to use the EVF of the old Oly-Bridge i bestowed him instead of the LCD-Screen. Because when the sun makes the Display glare, it doesnt matter if you are used to shoot with phones... its just a sh... situation and you will wish for a viewfinder in such a situation. - There is no magic when you buy a DSLR that makes you a superior photographer... really.

11-03-2015, 04:59 PM	#26
Quser215 New Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 9	So far nothing suggests there will be another Q, Q S-2. With the new stacked type sensors coming out the Q could be made a killer camera. I am thinking on-chip phase detection, very fast autofocus generally, faster shooting overall, improved low-light sensitivity, etc. I hope they don't drop the Q as it has been such a joy, pain at times. The new breed of sensors could make the Q much much better.

11-03-2015, 05:38 PM	#27
patarok Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Photos: Gallery Posts: 389	Originally posted by Quser215 So far nothing suggests there will be another Q, Q S-2. With the new stacked type sensors coming out the Q could be made a killer camera. I am thinking on-chip phase detection, very fast autofocus generally, faster shooting overall, improved low-light sensitivity, etc. I hope they don't drop the Q as it has been such a joy, pain at times. The new breed of sensors could make the Q much much better. there will be... any links that offer info on those sensors you wrote about? stacked type? d'ya mean some kind of foveon related tech? foveon sensors capitulate pretty soon, when you raise the ISO... I tried every generation of sigmas merrill at the last photokina... and the thing is, IQ ends at ISO 800... or more precisely: you get signifcant color noise at ISO 800 and above. I even like results of the Q-S1 at ISO 1600. If i would see easily recognizable color noise starting at 800 i would rather play frisbee with it then shoot photos.

11-03-2015, 06:17 PM	#28
Quser215 New Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 9	Originally posted by patarok there will be... any links that offer info on those sensors you wrote about? stacked type? d'ya mean some kind of foveon related tech? foveon sensors capitulate pretty soon, when you raise the ISO... I tried every generation of sigmas merrill at the last photokina... and the thing is, IQ ends at ISO 800... or more precisely: you get signifcant color noise at ISO 800 and above. I even like results of the Q-S1 at ISO 1600. If i would see easily recognizable color noise starting at 800 i would rather play frisbee with it then shoot photos. Here is link to some info. Sony has released several of those recently for I-phones, also the RX100 IV has a 1" stacked sensor. I like to shoot my Q original in low light, candid type photography; its size is fantastic, but low light ability is rather poor. I wish they continue the Q with these new sensors and not grow it any bigger. http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/cx_news_archives/img/pdf/vol_68/sideview_vol68.pdf

11-04-2015, 04:50 AM - 1 Like	#30
Lobalobo New Member Join Date: Sep 2015 Location: New York Posts: 22 Original Poster	Originally posted by CWRailman Another EVF thread?? REALLY folks!!! That dead horse has been beaten long enough. Now I know how Bill Murray’s character in Ground Hog Day felt. Instead of wasting time talking about what it isn’t how about contributing photo’s to the threads demonstrating what it is? The “Let’s Share Shots with Q” thread is looking for contributions. Go to that thread to see my latest contribution. What have you posted in that thread lately? Here's a suggestion, Denny. If you don't like a thread, don't join it. Easy, see.

Pentax Q-S2 with EVF

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!