Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-29-2016, 08:54 PM   #46
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,252
I shoot 95% of my Q images in Raw. Develop the majority in Silkypix. I like the way the Q handles like a real tool. The designers were photographers. The camera gets out of the way. Interested in the next Q.
Thanks
barondla

09-29-2016, 09:45 PM   #47
Pentaxian
Fogel70's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,738
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote
Say what? Their lp/mm resolution is way above the resolution of most larger optics.
That's noticeable when you put K-mount lenses on the adapter.
The 06 at 40mm clearly outperforms my DA40XS, for example.
(Although the 06 is actually longer than the DA40XS, if not as wide.)
Of course Q lenses show better lp/mm resolution, but they need 3-4x better lp/mm resolution than APS-C lenses as Q use much smaller sensor with much smaller pixels.
Try comparing LW/PH ("Line widths per picture height") instead to compare resolution of captured images.

This review show LW/PH Q 01. Compare that to lenses on larger sensors get.
SMC Pentax 01 8.5mm f/1.9 AL IF : ERPhotoReview
SMC Pentax 02 5-15mm f/2.8-4.5 ED AL IF Q : ERPhotoReview

QuoteQuote:
Photozone tested the 01-03 on the original Q.
On the 1/1.7" sensor, the lenses will show more lp/ih.
Yes, a slightly larger sensor will give a slightly better lens score in LW/PH as it use more of the lens.

QuoteQuote:
In real use, the Q system often outperforms APS-C systems for sharpness,
where the PDAF may not be accurate enough.
It's the difference between lab tests and actual practice.

Of course, other aspects of IQ like DR are a different story.

---------- Post added 09-29-16 at 08:44 PM ----------



The people who don't use Photoshop?
09-29-2016, 11:58 PM - 1 Like   #48
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 6,087
QuoteOriginally posted by CWRailman Quote
Producing something that others can benefit from is very rewarding. I have a lot of experience with what I say check out my CWRailman Adventures in Model Railroading Every week I hear from individuals who have gotten something from my site and sometimes those comments come from countries that are (pun intended) foreign to me. There are probably some basic post processing settings that you use for all images such as contrast, clarity, color saturation, sharpness, highlight or shadow improvements or complete changes in the tone curves. To the best of my knowledge, such recommendations have not been discussed in depth in other threads. It seems more folks are focused on the technical aspects and like to argue about them and less on implementation of photographic techniques. [COLOR=silver]
OK, Denny, I'll aim to pull something together over the coming days.

I love your website - some great photos and lots of useful info there
09-30-2016, 01:45 AM - 1 Like   #49
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,252
BigMackCam, I look forward to your tutorial.
Thanks for sharing,
barondla

09-30-2016, 06:56 PM   #50
Pentaxian
GateCityRadio's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro,NC
Posts: 496
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
I feel like Pentax needs to figure out a direction for the Q. Yes, it's small, but it needs something more IMO to continue being marketable.
It needs NFC and WiFi or bluetooth, it needs a touch screen, and it needs smaller (pocket-able) lenses. This isn't a serious professional camera and never will be, so they need to appeal to the cell phone user market. Market it like an extension of your social networks. Add facebook and instagram support, full android would be awesome (the ability to edit and upload to your favorite social network all in camera) but I know that probably wouldn't happen.

I know to most people who shoot with DSLRs this stuff isn't as important, but to the demographic this type of camera is supposed to be marketed to, these are important things. They could get away with the smaller sensor size in that market and be okay because its still an improvement over cell phones. Right now it competes with the sony nex/a5000, fuji x, and m4/3 and it just doesn't compete there.

Last edited by monochrome; 10-01-2016 at 03:47 PM.
10-01-2016, 08:24 AM   #51
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,098
QuoteOriginally posted by GateCityRadio Quote
It needs NFC and WiFi or bluetooth, it needs a touch screen, and it needs smaller (pocket-able) lenses. This isn't a serious professional camera and never will be, so they need to appeal to the cell phone user market. Market it like an extension of your social networks. Add facebook and instagram support, full android would be awesome (the ability to edit and upload to your favorite social network all in camera) but I know that probably wouldn't happen.

I know to most people who shoot with DSLRs this stuff isn't as important, but to the demographic this type of camera is supposed to be marketed to, these are important things. They could get away with the smaller sensor size in that market and be okay because its still an improvement over cell phones. Right now it competes with the sony nex/a5000, fuji x, and m4/3 and it just doesn't compete there.
With features like built-in ND filters, leaf shutters, constant F2.8 telephoto zoom, and high flash sync speeds, is it possible that the Q was not originally targeted at people stepping up from cell phones but rather serious DSLR users looking for something fun to play with and take on vacation?
10-01-2016, 11:49 AM - 1 Like   #52
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,706
And the magazine covers it is capable of are QQQQuite nice!
10-01-2016, 01:05 PM   #53
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 68
I am a raw shooter with my Q and QS-1, using Adobe CC to get the best out of the images. I happen to think that the jpegs have a film quality about them. So I consider myself lucky to enjoy either form. I must admit the raw images are usually favourites but some jpegs on occasion share top billing. YMMV

10-01-2016, 03:40 PM   #54
Pentaxian
CarlJF's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Quebec City
Posts: 661
QuoteOriginally posted by spinno Quote
I am a raw shooter with my Q and QS-1, using Adobe CC to get the best out of the images. I happen to think that the jpegs have a film quality about them. So I consider myself lucky to enjoy either form. I must admit the raw images are usually favourites but some jpegs on occasion share top billing. YMMV
For the jpg, in my case, I often find the "bold monochrome" to be good enough not to care to process from the raw.
10-01-2016, 04:48 PM - 2 Likes   #55
Loyal Site Supporter
Pioneer's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Elko, Nevada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,206
I can't say that the Q/Q7 are my primary cameras as I don't really think I have a primary camera per se. But it has certainly been my primary digital camera ever since I picked my first one up. I use film almost exclusively but I am still blown away by the quality of photographs that I get from this small kit.

Everything, two cameras, full set of lenses, charger, batteries, SD cards, adapters, macro tubes, etc. fit into one small to medium camera bag. I can say without any reservation that I do not own any other system that is as capable and flexible that has that small a footprint.

I shoot RAW + jpeg. In some cases I use only the jpeg as that is all I need. In other circumstances the RAW file is extensively manipulated in Photoshop to get me the photograph I am looking for. My workflow is really no different with Q files than it is with any digital file I work with. There are certainly a few differences; I am not so free to crop as much as I can with bigger files, and I make adjustments in much smaller steps than I do with the larger files. For example, I make a lot of small changes with levels and curves rather than using just one or two curves adjustments that I might do with other files. Likewise with sharpening. I typically do not sharpen at all until the end, and then the sharpening is done much more carefully. The same is done if I want to increase the size of the file for printing. By approaching final print file size in small increments I get a much smoother photograph with terrific tonal information than if I just jump immediately to my print size. You can get away with a lot more on a larger file from the K5iiS and the 645D than you can with a file from the Q. But if you are careful, the information is there to print quite large. I have printed up to 13x19 so far, and perhaps I can get a little larger if I want. So far 13x19 prints stand up pretty well to close inspection. Maybe not quite as much detail as what I see in the K5iiS or especially the 645D, but if you don't have a similar print to compare to you would not know.

I have no doubt that my K5iiS, with the right lens, can run circles around the Q system with regards to image quality. But if I am really looking for that level of quality I have typically begun using my 645D more and more often. In fact, my poor K5iiS has gotten very little love in recent months, and it has nothing to do with how good it is. Rather, it is the fact that my Q system handles everything I need to do in digital up to a certain point, and if I need to go further than that, then I may as well take out the big gun and go all the way. In other words, if I know, or believe I know, that I may want to print really big sometime in the future, then the Q file is probably not going to be my best choice.

However I doubt very many people are going to print that large anyway. To be truthful, large prints are hard to make, are far more expensive, and are usually difficult to store. Most of us who still print are usually working with smaller prints, right now I am personally exploring what type of photograph works best in a 4x5 or 5x7 print. For me, smaller prints are far more personal. They are typically picked up and looked at, like many we find in photo books. Either that or they sit on the end table or a shelf in a small, self standing frame. These are the photographs I remember as a kid. Even today, when I go into a gallery or a museum, I find myself captivated by those prints that are 8x10 or smaller. A lot of very famous photographs are actually much smaller than we commonly believe. Edward Weston's work was 8x10. Dorothea Lange's Migrant Mother was 12x10. I absolutely love Martine Franck's work as well as her husband's, HC Bresson. But their photographs depend on the content, not their size.

For my purposes, the Q and Q7 provides more than adequate size and detail for my work. It is up to me to find some content to make them worthy of looking at.

And it is wayyy easier to carry around.
10-01-2016, 05:00 PM   #56
Pentaxian
GateCityRadio's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro,NC
Posts: 496
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
With features like built-in ND filters, leaf shutters, constant F2.8 telephoto zoom, and high flash sync speeds, is it possible that the Q was not originally targeted at people stepping up from cell phones but rather serious DSLR users looking for something fun to play with and take on vacation?
Most serious photographers would just take a DSLR and a few lenses on vacation. I agree that Pentax is targeting these "serious" people who want a smaller system and there are a few pentaxians that like the Q system, but Sony and Fuji are clearly the winners in that market. What I am saying is Pentax could position these cameras in a way that makes them appeal to the younger generation (and not just with funky colors) and it might have a better chance in that market if you add the things I originally mentioned. Social network and cell phone integration is something no camera manufacturer seems to be good at right now, sony has their app store but it is garbage and not easy to use. This is an opportunity for pentax to step up and really shine. It would bring attention to the brand and potentially more revenue, which means in the long run more R&D money.
10-01-2016, 07:54 PM   #57
Pentaxian
GateCityRadio's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro,NC
Posts: 496
QuoteOriginally posted by Professor Batty Quote
That would require an enormous amount of R&D of a kind that Ricoh probably isn't capable of. To make it bigger with more attachments would turn it into a different beast. With the demise of the Nikon 1 series, the Q has no competition in the very-small sensor MILC class. The Q could be made to sync with a phone, but a phone already has a camera in it and nobody would want to carry both. Used strictly as a point and shoot, it is nothing special. As a specialized photographic tool, it is unique. Can it limp along for another couple of years? Probably not. A better sensor and viewing screen would help, or add-on EVF. If the 09 Macro does come out next year, and Pentax offers an improved body it would sell some, but not a lot.
It doesn't really do anything unique vs the other mirrorless cameras out there. It has a disadvantage at sensor size. It doesn't have very many advantages over the 1" advanced point and shoots out there other than you can change the lens and maybe the introductory price. Yes it has leaf shutters in the lenses, it has high flash sync speeds, cool....but what does this mean to the average consumer who would buy a small mirrorless camera?

I'm not dissing the Q, its an interesting quirky camera....but it hasn't sold well here for a reason. Sometimes you have to grow your market share and to do that you may have to spend a little money on R&D and marketing to make a unique option that has what the masses want. Most millennials don't want to use anything but their phone mostly because its easy to get their images to the social networks. However a lot of those same people want better image quality. Make a Q camera that can do the same (take the photo, edit, and upload on one device) and you might be onto something.
10-01-2016, 08:14 PM   #58
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hamilton, Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 645
QuoteOriginally posted by GateCityRadio Quote
Most millennials don't want to use anything but their phone mostly because its easy to get their images to the social networks. However a lot of those same people want better image quality. Make a Q camera that can do the same (take the photo, edit, and upload on one device) and you might be onto something.
Those "millenials" who want to get into photography in a serious way need to learn the conventional, PC-based workflow. If all they know is uploading from their phones to Instagram or whatnot, they might have no clue about SD cards, importing files into Lightroom, adjusting the images, exporting, etc. This is still how a lot of professional or semi-professional photographic work is still done and will continue to be done, and the Q series could be a great introduction to that. I think it could be a fantastic camera for students.
10-01-2016, 09:31 PM   #59
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,098
QuoteOriginally posted by GateCityRadio Quote
It doesn't really do anything unique vs the other mirrorless cameras out there. It has a disadvantage at sensor size. It doesn't have very many advantages over the 1" advanced point and shoots out there other than you can change the lens and maybe the introductory price.
You just answered your own question...

QuoteQuote:
Yes it has leaf shutters in the lenses, it has high flash sync speeds, cool....but what does this mean to the average consumer who would buy a small mirrorless camera?
And a constant 2.8 tele zoom that fits in your pocket, and a 4.7 crop factor for extreme telephoto, and a bunch of other things. I'm not sure if all these things that you want to add will result in sales to cell phone users. Samsung has tried this and it failed. And regarding social media features and uploading, you have to remember 2 things-
  1. You'll definitively need a bigger battery
  2. It's not just the photo. Trying to tap out a sentence or hashtags on a tiny (compared to a modern cellphone) non-touch screen while holding onto a camera and lens is a poor user experience. Terrible, actually.
10-01-2016, 09:46 PM   #60
Pentaxian
GateCityRadio's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro,NC
Posts: 496
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
You just answered your own question...



And a constant 2.8 tele zoom that fits in your pocket, and a 4.7 crop factor for extreme telephoto, and a bunch of other things. I'm not sure if all these things that you want to add will result in sales to cell phone users. Samsung has tried this and it failed. And regarding social media features and uploading, you have to remember 2 things-
  1. You'll definitively need a bigger battery
  2. It's not just the photo. Trying to tap out a sentence or hashtags on a tiny (compared to a modern cellphone) non-touch screen while holding onto a camera and lens is a poor user experience. Terrible, actually.
Those samsung cameras failed because they tried to be a cell phone with a large camera attached, that doesn't make sense as a primary device, its too large to carry every day. I'm thinking the camera as being an optional companion to the phone. The camera does all of the work, then sends it to the phone (via bluetooth or wifi) where it is automatically uploaded through a background process via 4g. No need to take the phone out of your pocket. Put a large enough screen on the back of the camera and it shouldn't be an issue to type on. Most all of the target market knows how to type on a screen either directly or through swipe gestures. Several power saving features could help with the battery issue. Turn the wifi/bluetooth radio off when not in use is just one that wouldn't be hard to do.

BTW, f2.8 on such a small sensor really isn't all that spectacular. It turns out being the FF equiv of f13, the advantage of the shallow DOF of a fast lens is lost on that sensor. And while the leaf shutter lenses and high sync speeds are great, it isn't something your average user needs or really even cares about. The people who want those types of features are up market on DSLRs and Medium Format.

I'm not saying the Q series are bad or anything, I know there is a small group of people here that love the things and honestly I'm considering getting one just for fun....but there is an untapped market and this camera system could take advantage of it. But instead it looks like it will be cancelled....and that feels like a waste.


---------- Post added 10-02-2016 at 12:48 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Tony Belding Quote
Those "millenials" who want to get into photography in a serious way need to learn the conventional, PC-based workflow. If all they know is uploading from their phones to Instagram or whatnot, they might have no clue about SD cards, importing files into Lightroom, adjusting the images, exporting, etc. This is still how a lot of professional or semi-professional photographic work is still done and will continue to be done, and the Q series could be a great introduction to that. I think it could be a fantastic camera for students.
Who says in 3 or 4 years from now we'll even have SD cards or that type of work flow? Not that long ago in the film era the work flow was completely different and I bet those film photographers felt the same way you do now. The only constant is change my friend. That is the whole point of making a camera with similar connectivity and functionality to a cell phone, that SD card importing editing exporting is slow. Besides we're hardly talking about people who are trying to go pro. These are people who are just taking pictures of their everyday life and posting it to instagram...there is no point in having such a drawn out workflow for those types of pictures. Plus this faster "workflow" would be excellent for photojournalists.

Last edited by GateCityRadio; 10-01-2016 at 10:21 PM.
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!
adventures, camera, canon, check, individuals, lenses, line, mirrorless, model, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, people, photokina, q-mount, q-s1, q10, q7, system, vision, week
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Q-s1 discontinued. The end of Q? D1N0 Pentax News and Rumors 170 10-13-2016 08:19 AM
Is the KS-2 a quantum leap from the K-r? weijen Pentax K-S1 & K-S2 9 06-10-2015 08:40 AM
Is this the current state of the GOP?? larryinlc General Talk 2 04-01-2012 09:50 AM
ABC (.net.au) on the state of the union address jolepp General Talk 3 01-25-2012 03:51 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:04 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