Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-30-2016, 01:21 PM   #31
Site Supporter
Stone G.'s Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North Zealand, Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,508
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
This is a good way to have fun with Q into 2020.
To me, the Q is actually bit more than just 'fun' although I must admit that I am just a happy amateur. Anyway, I have great faith in my current Q10. I find the build quality very reassuring, so that body alone should carry me into the 2020's.(I hope). I am thinking of my Q-investments (lenses and adaptors of various kinds) in a longer perspective.......

08-31-2016, 07:04 AM   #32
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,777
QuoteOriginally posted by CarlG Quote
Probably, the French importer (and possibly the UK one) is on the verge of loosing the Ricoh Pentax franchise.
There is no such thing as a French (third party) importer. Ricoh Imaging Europe are headquartered in France and the French 'importer' is therefore a fully-owned subsidiary of the Ricoh group.
09-02-2016, 10:35 AM   #33
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
It would really be sad to see the end of the Q line. I think it was a fun and innovative line that was poorly presented to the market. Some of my most memorable personal photographic moments happened with a Q. I think the series is a testament to the core of Pentax - small, powerful, and intuitive. However, I can understand if Ricoh wants to cut the Q to divert it's limited resources to their core market of DSLR and potentially mirrorless K-mount. That trade is worth it to me in the long term. The Q will always be available on the market to those who want it. Look at the K-01. It's still easily available.

If the Q disappears then the u4/3 or 1" sensor market becomes the new "small". Something like native from Sony and Fuji becomes the new "medium". Full frame is now "big". Going beyond that takes you to another realm that is beyond mass market.
09-02-2016, 09:13 PM - 1 Like   #34
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,221
Original Poster
Not sure Q is much of a drain on Ricoh's resources, since Pentax doesn't make the Q lenses. Building Q bodies can't be much more of a drain than all the Thetas, GR, or weatherproof cameras. Most Q stuff should be paid for by now.

Q will survive!
Thanks,
barondla

09-02-2016, 09:28 PM   #35
Loyal Site Supporter
Pioneer's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Elko, Nevada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,167
A truly amazing system. Able to do everything from macro to extreme telephoto.

Ah well. Its not like Pentax hasn't shot themselves in the foot before. It is almost like they are afraid of their own potential. Witness the LX. They built it, equipped it with everything it needed to be a magnificent success, and then just walked away and let it die.
09-09-2016, 03:08 AM   #36
Junior Member




Join Date: May 2014
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 39
Interesting post about the death of the Q system
How Do You Know When Your System is Discontinued? | Sans Mirror | Thom Hogan
09-09-2016, 08:20 AM   #37
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,721
QuoteOriginally posted by morane_j Quote
One interesting comment here:
QuoteOriginally posted by Hogan:
Pentax didnít really pay much attention to what the world actually wanted and produced a miniature DSLR that only produced consumer-camera results
I'm not sure what this means; what are "consumer camera" results? I see nothing to contradict what I've been saying for two years now; the appropriate niche for the "Q" family is the one currently occupied by bridge cameras, most of which have sensors smaller than what current "Q"s have, but Pentax doesn't seem to see that or else they aren't interested in addressing that market.

I would really like a few updates, such as an EVF, but I've made my Q-7 address my needs (*), and as long as it continues to work, I will use it. Since I'm currently 68, that may be enough {but once I'm truly convinced it is gone, I may buy another one to live in the closet just in case this one dies too soon, but that would require finding one at a reasonable price, and right now most are priced $350 or more}

(*) I value mine for two reasons:

(1) it's crop-factor allows it to be the major component in a good, but inexpensive, birding system

(2) it's whisper-quiet leaf shutter makes it very useful at events
09-09-2016, 09:44 PM   #38
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 42
To me, the small 1/1.7" sensor is an asset, not a limitation.

I think of all the things that could be enabled by the relative low cost and crop magnification of this sensor. You could make a tiny, high-end camera where the only difference is that it's using a compact sensor rather than an aps-c or full frame. Why not put in pixel shift? Why not put in hybrid autofocus? In my dreams of an absolute madman I imagine a tiny, fast mirror lens with quick and accurate AF. An EVF could easily be place atop the camera and be no larger than Canon's G5X.

The potential of tiny sensor cameras excites me. It saddens me that the harsh reality is that none of this will be realized for the Q system, and, in fact, will die off.

Am I just thinking crazy?!

09-10-2016, 12:24 AM   #39
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
Your imagination isn't crazy, @adjutant. Panasonic created the camera you describe minus only a few features like pixel shift. It was called the LUMIX GM5. How did that work out for them? I don't think there is a successor planned for the GM5. Was it a failure or did Panasonic experiment with something? I honestly don't know. Now compare it to something like the Sony RX 100 series. That family of cameras is still going strong.

So, nearly everything you desire in a camera body already exists. It just doesn't exist in Ricoh-Pentax-Land.
09-10-2016, 01:03 AM   #40
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 42
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
Your imagination isn't crazy, @adjutant. Panasonic created the camera you describe minus only a few features like pixel shift. It was called the LUMIX GM5. How did that work out for them? I don't think there is a successor planned for the GM5. Was it a failure or did Panasonic experiment with something? I honestly don't know. Now compare it to something like the Sony RX 100 series. That family of cameras is still going strong.

So, nearly everything you desire in a camera body already exists. It just doesn't exist in Ricoh-Pentax-Land.
Lumix GM5 doesn't have any of the things I mentioned and the sensor is several times larger than 1/1.7 with significantly less crop factor and larger lenses than Q system.
09-10-2016, 07:24 AM   #41
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by adjutant Quote
Lumix GM5 doesn't have any of the things I mentioned and the sensor is several times larger than 1/1.7 with significantly less crop factor and larger lenses than Q system.


The GM5 is tiny, has fast accurate AF, a smaller sensor, and an EVF. That captures a good part of your list.

Ok, so there's no pixel shift and the sensor is bigger than 1/1.7". I'll agree to that ... but the GM5 is probably the closest thing out there that would succeed the Q series today.


09-10-2016, 07:38 AM   #42
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,721
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
The GM5 is tiny, has fast accurate AF, a smaller sensor, and an EVF. That captures a good part of your list.

Ok, so there's no pixel shift and the sensor is bigger than 1/1.7". I'll agree to that ... but the GM5 is probably the closest thing out there that would succeed the Q series today.
That depends on what you use the "Q" for. GM5 is not ILC, and the built-in lens has very limited zoom. At its price, I'd buy an A6000 long before I bought a GM5, and neither could replace the Q-7 for what I do with it.
09-10-2016, 08:04 AM   #43
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,777
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
That depends on what you use the "Q" for. GM5 is not ILC, and the built-in lens has very limited zoom. At its price, I'd buy an A6000 long before I bought a GM5, and neither could replace the Q-7 for what I do with it.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 is definitely an ILC.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Review: Digital Photography Review
09-10-2016, 09:11 AM   #44
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,721
QuoteOriginally posted by Mistral75 Quote
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 is definitely an ILC.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Review: Digital Photography Review
OK, the first source I used was misleading.
Everything else I said comparing to the A6000 is still true, however.
And it could never meet the needs I meet using a Q-7.
09-10-2016, 05:36 PM   #45
Site Supporter
CWRailman's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Photos: Albums
Posts: 495
QuoteOriginally posted by adjutant Quote
To me, the small 1/1.7" sensor is an asset, not a limitation.

The potential of tiny sensor cameras excites me.
Am I just thinking crazy?!


If that EXCITES you I hate to see what putting a lawn mower engine in a Ferrari does to your pants.


The Panasonic GM-1 and 5 were not failures. In fact the GM-5 was considered by many as the epitome of the small ILC. The reason the GM-5 has been dropped is that Panasonic is coming out with a similar camera but slightly larger as most consumers are saying that the small size of the GM series was too small for their hands and many of the folks added extra grips etc. and Panasonic is responding to those potential customers The GM-5 with the 12-32mm zoom lens is smaller than the Q7 with either the 02 or 06 lens and not much larger than the Q7 with the 01 lens. The GM-5 has a much better resolving power and better dynamic range but has a bit less depth of field. The sales people at my local camera store admit that the Q series was interesting but that it has been overrun by cell phones which now have similar abilities. They no longer have any of the Q series in stock and will only bring it in as a special order item.
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!
aps-c, argument, body, camera, cameras, lens, mirrorless, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, photokina, q-s1, q10, q7, ricoh, sensor, system, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Think they will toss any freebies in for us preorder poeple? VoiceOfReason Pentax K-1 15 03-19-2016 01:01 AM
News article-Pentax will anounce a new DSLR at the CP+ show Feb 9 cadmus Pentax News and Rumors 71 02-08-2012 07:55 PM
I think the Pentax FF will be announced at Photokina 2010 whatever7 Pentax News and Rumors 106 02-04-2010 12:45 AM
Any other new DSLRs at Photokina GoldenWreckedAngle Pentax News and Rumors 98 03-04-2009 11:15 AM
New low-end model Pentax K2000D will be close to Photokina ogl Pentax News and Rumors 236 09-15-2008 10:22 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:26 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