Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-25-2016, 05:49 AM   #16
ebk
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: utrecht
Posts: 84
agree with adam: first a new model model !!!!!!!!!.


understand now it hasn,t a high priority by Ricoh Pentax,


or there is coming a new and even better model

09-25-2016, 06:21 AM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,674
QuoteOriginally posted by ebk Quote
agree with adam: first a new model!
Yes, realistically, I also believe that Adam's skepticism is well-placed.
QuoteOriginally posted by ebk Quote
understand now it hasn,t a high priority by Ricoh Pentax,
They certainly need to be profitable to continue any real development of the Q system,
so I think we can be patient while they're busy making money with the K-1.
QuoteOriginally posted by ebk Quote
or there is coming a new and even better model
From Adam's interview, it sounds like the "S" suffix is history,
so a quick refresh of the Q7/QS-1 design would be in order.
Q5, anyone (since we've had K10/K7/K5)?

That shouldn't take a lot of R&D effort,
but it would be a challenge from the marketing side.

Longer-term, bringing out the 09 tele-macro is essential.

Then we can dream about pixel-shift,
which would really build on the BSI technology
to give even better IQ from the 1/1.7" sensor.

Personally, I wouldn't mind if a beefier processor
needed a slightly bigger body, or drained the battery a little more.
09-25-2016, 12:03 PM   #18
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Coloroado
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 247
QuoteQuote:

That would detract from the specific strengths of the Q system,
the compactness of the high-quality zooms (06, 08),
and the tremendous depth of field.
Size is hardly a concern.

Compare camera dimensions side by side

Even though that GM5 has been discontinued, I would like to point out that it features an integrated EVF. I have really enjoyed my Q cameras, but you cannot deny that the Q has very limited appeal to mainstream or enthusiast photographers, at the same time offering a very shallow number of available lenses. The Q system has all but been abandoned by Pentax (understanding that the K-1 certainly takes priority). On the other hand, joining Micro 4/3 would make the Q much more in demand by photographers, increase its image quality and instantly provide scores of available lenses from a variety of manufacturers.

Pentax says that is likes to fill niches - well, with the discontinuation of the Panny GM1 and GM5, there is now a niche in M43 that is in serious need of attention, and I think a Q would be quite successful there - not only for the company, but for its customers.
09-25-2016, 12:56 PM   #19
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,866
QuoteOriginally posted by emergo Quote
Size is hardly a concern.

Compare camera dimensions side by side

Even though that GM5 has been discontinued, I would like to point out that it features an integrated EVF. I have really enjoyed my Q cameras, but you cannot deny that the Q has very limited appeal to mainstream or enthusiast photographers, at the same time offering a very shallow number of available lenses. The Q system has all but been abandoned by Pentax (understanding that the K-1 certainly takes priority). On the other hand, joining Micro 4/3 would make the Q much more in demand by photographers, increase its image quality and instantly provide scores of available lenses from a variety of manufacturers.

Pentax says that is likes to fill niches - well, with the discontinuation of the Panny GM1 and GM5, there is now a niche in M43 that is in serious need of attention, and I think a Q would be quite successful there - not only for the company, but for its customers.
Size of camera may not be a concern, but size of sensor is vital to me.
I chose my Q-7 because I could mate it with a K-mount lens to give me the best birding system I've ever had, at a price much less than a super-long lens.
Put a larger sensor in, and I lose most of that.
I still believe there is a market for this niche, as demonstrated by the Nikon P-900 and Canon SX-50.

09-25-2016, 02:12 PM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,699
QuoteOriginally posted by emergo Quote
with the discontinuation of the Panny GM1 and GM5
The GM and GF prefixes have been abandoned, however, the small size Panos apparently havent, thats the concensus of opinion on the M43 forums.So we may(?) see some newer models with similar size.

I,personally,would like to see Ricoh enter the M43 mount area.YI, just released their first model and it looks reasonably good.

Obviously,it cant be a Q. A new line altogether,2x crop still gives plenty of reach AND apart from the native lens range, theres AF adapters to some very good glass.

.
09-25-2016, 02:17 PM   #21
Pentaxian
Edgar_in_Indy's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indiana, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,596
QuoteOriginally posted by emergo Quote
Pentax says that is likes to fill niches - well, with the discontinuation of the Panny GM1 and GM5, there is now a niche in M43 that is in serious need of attention, and I think a Q would be quite successful there - not only for the company, but for its customers.
The Olympus E-PLx cameras are still very small, and my E-PM2 is even smaller...almost as small as the GM5. It doesn't have an EVF, but it does have IBIS, which the GM5 sadly lacks.

I would love to see Pentax make a nice m43 camera, but it would probably be an uphill battle as Olympus and Panasonic m43 customers seem to be very loyal.
09-25-2016, 04:03 PM   #22
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,674
QuoteOriginally posted by emergo Quote
Size is hardly a concern.
Compare camera dimensions side by side
We're talking about the size of high-quality wide-angle and telephoto zooms,
because that is what really matters, not the size of the body alone.
QuoteOriginally posted by emergo Quote
you cannot deny that the Q has very limited appeal to mainstream or enthusiast photographers
I cannot deny that the Leica had very limited appeal to ingrained press and view camera users when it first appeared.
It takes a while for people to catch on, and Q reviews with the 02 kit zoom don't show the system's real potential.
Blunty was one of the few reviewers who got it.
QuoteOriginally posted by emergo Quote
at the same time offering a very shallow number of available lenses.
The 01, 03, 06, and 08 give pretty good coverage.

Of course, the 09 telephoto macro would be nice,
and if the system is to be developed,
a standard zoom at the optical level of the 06 and 08 would be desirable.

With adapters, there are thousands of lenses available.
QuoteOriginally posted by emergo Quote
The Q system has all but been abandoned by Pentax (understanding that the K-1 certainly takes priority). On the other hand, joining Micro 4/3 would make the Q much more in demand by photographers
Micro 4/3 does not do the photographic jobs that the Q does, and it's too close to APS-C.
Anyway, Pentax already abandoned the four-thirds format a long time ago:
PENTAX auto 110 Super - Pentax Auto 110 SLRs - Pentax Camera Reviews and Specifications
09-25-2016, 04:22 PM - 1 Like   #23
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,866
QuoteOriginally posted by surfar Quote
.... 2x crop still gives plenty of reach ....
Nope, less than half the "reach" of a Q-7.
Nowhere near adequate for my purposes.

{it has barely more "reach" than my K-30 - why bother??}


Last edited by reh321; 09-25-2016 at 04:34 PM. Reason: parrenthetical comment
09-25-2016, 04:37 PM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,699
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
{it has barely more "reach" than my K-30, why bother??}
Yes, barely....450mm becomes 600mm.....just a smidgin! of course theres the AF aspect as well.

Now, i do like the 5.6 crop(barely more than the Q7) of the Q/q10.....it gets those offshore surfing reefs and passing whales "up close and personal"!
09-25-2016, 04:52 PM   #25
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,866
QuoteOriginally posted by surfar Quote
Yes, barely....450mm becomes 600mm.....just a smidgin! of course theres the AF aspect as well....
More to the point
my 300mm lens gives the view of a 450mm lens {FF} when mounted on my K-30
my 300mm lens gives the view of a 600mm lens {FF} when mounted on a MFT camera
my 300mm lens gives the view of a 1395mm lens {FF} when mounted on my Q-7.

I have become proficient at focusing it manually {the focus peaking helps a lot with that}.
I have a MeFoto walking stick / monopod which enables me to stabilize it.
It took me a year, but I am quite comfortable using this combination now.

If Pentax sells a Q-mount camera with an EVF I will buy it.
I cannot imagine myself ever buying a Pentax MFT system.
09-25-2016, 05:16 PM   #26
Pentaxian
Edgar_in_Indy's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indiana, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,596
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
More to the point
my 300mm lens gives the view of a 450mm lens {FF} when mounted on my K-30
my 300mm lens gives the view of a 600mm lens {FF} when mounted on a MFT camera
my 300mm lens gives the view of a 1395mm lens {FF} when mounted on my Q-7..
I think that for a true apples-to-apples comparison you would need to take a 12MP center-crop out of the larger sensor cameras, which would give them a little bit more effective reach. Not that they're going to be 1395mm, but this comparison paints a slightly rosier comparison for the Q than might be fair.

It also means that one would get more reach with a 24MP K-3 than a 16MP K-30.
09-25-2016, 08:53 PM   #27
Loyal Site Supporter
pacerr's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Henry, TN
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,878
QuoteOriginally posted by Edgar_in_Indy Quote
It also means that one would get more reach with a 24MP K-3 than a 16MP K-30.
Nope, sensor's the same APS-C dimensions so no crop difference.
09-25-2016, 09:21 PM - 1 Like   #28
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,866
QuoteOriginally posted by Edgar_in_Indy Quote
It also means that one would get more reach with a 24MP K-3 than a 16MP K-30.
QuoteOriginally posted by pacerr Quote
Nope, sensor's the same APS-C dimensions so no crop difference.
I think he meant

if I crop a K-30 image to give a 12MP image, I would have an effective crop factor of 1.73 = 1.5 * sqrt(16/12), so my 300mm lens would have the same effect as a 520mm lens on an FF camera

if I crop a K-3 image to give a 12MP image, I would have an effective crop factor of 2.12 = 1.5 * sqrt(24/12) so my 300mm lens would have the same effect as a 636mm lens on an FF camera


But, my reaction is that neither of these is anywhere close to my 12MP Q-7's crop factor of 4.65, which gives my 300mm lens the same effect as a 1395mm lens on an FF camera
09-25-2016, 10:32 PM   #29
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,737
Latest m4/3 sensors are 20mp. Which gets us an effective crop factor of 2.58x if you crop down to 12mp, still a long way from the q series crop ratios. (775"mm" from the 300mm. )
09-26-2016, 12:05 AM   #30
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,699
Pano GM5 is around Q7 size.EVF with 16mp.

Add the 100-400 Canon with 2x TC and AF adapter, plus the 2x crop of m43 sensor....not a bad birding set up.

Last edited by surfar; 09-26-2016 at 12:14 AM.
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, gxr, interview, mirrorless, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, photokina, q-s1, q10, q7, ricoh
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I knew that one day it will happen to me (ebay) micromacro General Talk 20 08-18-2016 03:25 PM
What will I be missing or gaining if I continue to be with Pentax? TropicalMonkey Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 44 01-05-2016 04:07 AM
To Q today or not to Q, that is the Question nvarner Pentax Q 6 05-26-2013 04:37 AM
Need help to confirm that my new K-5 and kit lens is not a bad copy kkx Pentax K-5 12 01-07-2012 02:53 PM
Pentaxians, are we willing to be called Ricoh, assuming they continue the K mount? Clinton Pentax News and Rumors 34 07-06-2011 02:52 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:51 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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