[eschmeling]

Hi Everyone,
I'm brand new to the forum and thinking about a return to more photography - I pretty much stopped taking pictures 10 years ago after first kid and no more time in the lab, and at this point I don't even know where my Nikon SLR is located. We got a couple of cheapo point and shoots in the years since but somehow they just didn't do it for me (an Olympus, a Panasonic, whatever Costco had on sale - you get the picture) - so besides my iPhone 3GS camera, which is kind of dying, I haven't taken many pictures.
My brother was suggesting I'd either go for a used K-5 or go for a Sony RX 100 but I am drawn to the Q.
I'd like to get more of a camera again, and the Q system is appealing to me because it feels like a "real camera", but at the same time is so small.
From what I've been reading the prime lens gets great reviews - and I found a Q with a prime (01) lens on Amazon for about $250. For the same prize, I could get the Q-S1 with the 02 lens as well.
What would you recommend between those 2 options?
I am a little embarrassed to admit this, but one of my first goals with a new camera would be to photograph our fast moving, black puppy...

Thanks in advance!
elke

[dansamy]

It's not embarrassing. We have a huge thread of pet photos here. Dogs are the best kind of people.

I don't know much about the Q series. I don't own one. I can tell you that the K-5ii/s has a better AF module than the K-5.

[toodas]

Hi,

For owning the Q, QS1 and the 01 and 02 lenses, I can tell you this:
the 01 prime is better than the 02 zoom but the QS1 is quicker and have a better image quality than the original Q.
For your needs, I would recomand you to buy the QS1 with the 02 standard zoom. And if you feel to upgrade

[VoiceOfReason]

The 02 wasn't a bad lens, but I would get an aftermarket lens hood. It makes a big difference in IQ.

[TER-OR]

Agreed, the 02 is more flexible.

That 01 is a better lens, and with it you have a mini rangefinder camera. The 01 does make the camera fun, and can be pocketed. Do get a lens hood, though. for protection if nothing else.

[UncleVanya]

Check the marketplace also.

[CarlJF]

If you were used to having a SLR, you're probably better to go the DSLR road. You can get an entry-level DSLR kit for cheaper than a Q-S1 kit... Unless size and weight are important above all else, the DSLR will allow you to fo much more things than the Q system.

I am a little embarrassed to admit this, but one of my first goals with a new camera would be to photograph our fast moving, black puppy..

For a fast moving subject, the Q, or any MILC for that matter, isn't the best choice. Compared to a DSLR, the slow AF, absence of of a viewfinder, and screen blackout in continous shooting all combine to make it difficult to get a good shot. Although you can get something acceptable, it's more a matter of luck than anything else.

[UncleVanya]

I recently pondered this for a travel camera. I looked at the Panasonic LX7,ZS50, LX100 as well as the Pentax Q/Q10/Q7/QS1 and Sony Rx100 series. I ended up pulling the trigger on the Panasonic LX7. The Sony did not appeal until version III and the LX100 was larger; both were more than I felt like spending. B&H has the LX7 on sale for under $300.

I find it focuses quickly and makes nice pictures. It fits in my large front pockets of my jeans but is a tight fit there for some people. If light and compact appeal it makes a lot of sense. The Q series is more versatile.

A small DSLR like the ks1 is a good option also IF you are willing to carry it.

[luftfluss]

If you were used to having a SLR, you're probably better to go the DSLR road. You can get an entry-level DSLR kit for cheaper than a Q-S1 kit... Unless size and weight are important above all else, the DSLR will allow you to fo much more things than the Q system.

For a fast moving subject, the Q, or any MILC for that matter, isn't the best choice. Compared to a DSLR, the slow AF, absence of of a viewfinder, and screen blackout in continous shooting all combine to make it difficult to get a good shot. Although you can get something acceptable, it's more a matter of luck than anything else.

I haven't used a K-3, but the Nikon 1 system's tracking AF is faster than any Pentax I've used, and a number of Nikonians claim that it's faster than any of their non-pro bodies. Also, AF-C in the newest Olympus OMD cameras is said to be quite good.

Anyway, to the OP: I'd go with the Q-S1 + 02 lens, and then get the 01 as soon as funds are available.

[VoiceOfReason]

Yeah, to the OP I'd also go QS-1 and 02, but if you would carry it I'd go KS-1 with 18-55 since it si cheap now.

[johnmflores]

one of my first goals with a new camera would be to photograph our fast moving, black puppy...

Hate to say it, but this eliminates the Q from consideration. This also eliminates a whole bunch of other otherwise good cameras from consideration as a fast moving black puppy is one of the hardest subjects. Seriously. The closest thing that I can think of that within shouting distance of the Q's budget and size is the Nikon 1 J5.

[Sliver-Surfer]

I would get a K-s1 or k5 or ..the Q series shoots about the same quality as High quality cameraphone.

[reh321]

I would get a K-s1 or k5 or ..the Q series shoots about the same quality as High quality cameraphone.

This is a really misleading statement. Even if the Image Quality were the same for both of them, getting to that image is completely different because the phone has only the lens built into it. Six days ago, as I walked to my car, I saw a hawk in the tree above it. I really wished I had had my Q-7 kit with me that moment, but I had been in a hurry and had forgotten to pack it. The hawk was really patient; s/he even flew to a lower branch. But my cell-phone still didn't have the reach - I had to crop away over half the dimensions in each direction to get a half-way decent view. I had to do a lot of Post-Processing to halfway compensate for the fact that the phone provided me with no ability to adjust for the lighting conditions. My Q-7 would have provided a much better image in much less time.

added: The OP has already said that the size of the Q is appealing, so going to a K-mount may not be the best action. I can't imagine taking a K-mount to work (I teach part-time at a local college), but my small Q kit goes assuming I don't forget it. We went to the Madrigal Dinner last Saturday night. Afterwards I talked to the lady who sat in front of us in the first row. She had an older Nikon DSLR, so I guess camera age worked against her. But she did have better sight (no her ahead of her) and a DSLR; she asked me to email her the couple pictures I took of her daughter, who was one of the soloists, because my natural light pictures were so much better than hers.

[surfar]

2 works well on Q7 and Qsi....1 works on all Q models.....buy both, then get 6 & 3.....and that's a great kit


As for the fast moving puppy, wait till it slows down!


REH, my phn is a Sammy S4 zoom....24/240mm 16mp, it gets shots that most other phones cant.....they are pretty cheap because its superceded by the K zoom model.I wouldn't go back to a normal phn.

[eschmeling]

thanks for all the answers so far! I have multiple tabs open on my laptop checking out all the other camera options people have mentioned - but I think I am stuck on the q, despite the fact that, as pointed out, it comes with some flaws for my (puppy) purpose. I am really, really drawn to the small size, and the idea that despite that, different lenses can be fitted on it.
I can get a q-s1 with 02 and 06 on Amazon for $320. Also checked the market place here because someone here (thank you!!) pointed me to a q-01 lens combo for only $150 - but after everyone weighing in on the subject, it seems the s1 is the better way to go than the original.
maybe it will need to be sleeping puppy pics - he does a lot of that, too!
e