Q Discontinued?

**Tony Belding** · 01-13-2017, 07:36 PM

Originally posted by zosxavius

It seems the north american website no longer lists the Q-S1 as a product. It is no longer available at B&H except by special order for a couple of limited colors.

uhh. . . All the lenses are still available, and they're not on sale. Is that normal for a cancelled system?

kb244 · 03-10-2017, 03:16 AM

Pentax Q system no longer listed on Ricoh Imaging US website | Pentax Rumors (January 3rd 2017)

Quote:

In an interview at Photokina last year, Ricoh representatives confirmed that the Pentax Q mirrorless camera line is alive and will continue to be developed.

You can still get the Q-S1 at B&H in either red (~$216) or white (~$250) as well as all their lens... except the 01 Standard Prime (Adorama seems to carry it, but not sure why B&H doesn't).

Seems as others have said, it's just probably not deemed to be worth marketing in the US, though not sure why not, being under $300 with a few lens options under $100 is a much nicer price point compared to what they used to be priced at ($500 and up). But I guess 2014 is getting a bit dated (... and I say that while still using a 2012 Olympus E-M5 mirrorless as my primary professional workhorse).

philter · 04-13-2017, 12:26 PM

As of 04-11-17, when I looked at B&H and Adorama, Pentax Q-S1 is discontinued in the USA. Remaining stock of lenses and accessories are still shown on each store. It is no longer on the Ricoh Imaging Americas site either. Is it time to update the PF footer to show it as legacy?

D1N0 · 04-13-2017, 01:06 PM

As long as Ricoh Japan has is as current it is no legacy.

mee · 04-13-2017, 03:48 PM

Originally posted by D1N0

As long as Ricoh Japan has is as current it is no legacy.

If the product line is dead, they may or may not announce it. Instead possibly just keep quiet while vendors still have it in stock.. until supply is gone.

That could take years..

D1N0 · 04-13-2017, 04:24 PM

Originally posted by mee

That could take years..

The horror!

mee · 04-13-2017, 04:45 PM

Originally posted by D1N0

The horror!

Haha.. well no new lenses or bodies. Perhaps repair support at least through that time period.. however long it was.

That is the biggest issue I find when companies quit.. repair services and support for their previous products.

Unregistered User · 04-13-2017, 05:04 PM

I've noticed an uptick in the price of Q-7s and Q-S1 bodies and outfits lately (since Christmas) on Amazon and eBay. There must still be a demand, even if the retail supply is diminished. There's nothing quite like a Q!

**i_trax** · 04-14-2017, 12:05 AM

Q-S1 still available in Australia in 7 different kit configuration.
All 8 lenses still listed as available but 01 and toy wide is stock only.

wildman · 04-14-2017, 12:13 AM

Originally posted by Adam

The problem is that the interchangeable lens aspect itself isn't that appealing.

Yes. I think the logic of the Q was flawed from the beginning.

All the quality limitations of a PS with all the cost, complication, and hassle of a system camera in a body with no proper way to control composition nor exposure especially during daylight (no VF).

Sure I can get some good results out of the Q but how many prospective Q customers are willing to master shooting RAW ETTR exposures and Photoshop?

See:
The "reach" of the Q - images - Page 81 - PentaxForums.com

I personally think the Q approach might work (ILC) but, at the present state of tech, no smaller than a 1" sensor with a drop dead great Evf such as you might find on a Fuji.

The truth is the Q approach may have some merit but it was implemented by the wrong company - Pentax a dedicated old school SLR company instead of a specialist small format mirroless company like Fuji, Oly, Panasonic or even Sony. Even so, given all that, a small format ILC would probably remain a specialist niche market until sensor tech gets much better than it is now.

At the present state of tech, and I'm no gearhead, I would guess that without a 1" sensor controlled by a proper Evf the Q concept is dead in the water at least here in the States.

Mistral75 · 04-14-2017, 01:36 AM

Originally posted by wildman

(...)

At the present state of tech, and I'm no gearhead, I would guess that without a 1" sensor controlled by a proper Evf the Q concept is dead in the water at least here in the States.

Not that the MILCs with one-inch sensor are particularly alive (Samsung NX Mini and Nikon One cameras)...

wildman · 04-14-2017, 01:52 AM

Originally posted by Mistral75

Not that the MILCs with one-inch sensor are particularly alive (Samsung NX Mini and Nikon One cameras)...

I agree. But they were not serious system cameras. No focus peaking nor Evf for instance. The Nikon 1 was the very definition of half-assed and deserves to fail. I'm thinking in terms of about $800 body only.

Mistral75 · 04-14-2017, 04:57 AM

Nikon One Vx had/have an electronic viewfinder and a rather good one actually. No metering with third-party lenses though.

normhead · 04-14-2017, 05:37 AM

Originally posted by reh321

The only reason I even considered a Q-7 was its small sensor, which combined with a long adapted lens, gave me lots of what Normhead prefers to call "magnification". My backyard testing confirms that, although this concept has issues, it gives me much better clarity than cropping a K-30 iimage would. Yes, I could get better images with a $$$$ lens on a $$$$ camera, but I don't happen to have the $$$$ for the lens, let alone more for the camera, and I did have the funds necessary to put together my sigma 55-300 + Q-7 + loupe birding kit. This would have been easier if Pentax had seen a market here and had provided a native long lens, but I was willing to do it.

Incidentally, the runner-up camera was a Canon SX-50, which has a 1/2.3" sensor. Something I hadn't taken into account in my figuring was that none of the adaptable lenses I tried was good enough to hit the tiny Q-7 pixels, so I don't get quite the detail I had expected - but I believe the Q-7 still has better low-light performance than the SX-50, and because it is ILC, it provides me more flexibility - for example, for our Holy Week services this week, I put an 01 lens on the Q-7 to give a much smaller unit than an SX-50 could ever be.

I don't believe a 1" sensor would provide what I want - but these companies aren't in the business of serving me. I did purchase a Q-7 when the opportunity was there. I am currently 69, so I have a reasonable hope that my Q-7 will last as long as I need it too {I don't work it that hard}, as long as I'll be able to hobble down a trail with my bird-watching wife on one side and my meFoto walking stick / monopod on the other.

Oh man, you're even older than me, that's gotta suck.

But when I got my QS-1, I was thinking, if the arthritis in my shoulders gets really bad, I'll still always be able to manage this little guy.

**Heinrich Lohmann** · 04-15-2017, 05:52 AM

Originally posted by normhead

Oh man, you're even older than me, that's gotta suck.

But when I got my QS-1, I was thinking, if the arthritis in my shoulders gets really bad, I'll still always be able to manage this little guy.

That same thought crossed my mind when I started buying Qs a few years back. (I'm a few weeks away from 85)

04-14-2017, 12:13 AM	#25
wildman Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Flyover America Posts: 4,469	Originally posted by Adam The problem is that the interchangeable lens aspect itself isn't that appealing. Yes. I think the logic of the Q was flawed from the beginning. All the quality limitations of a PS with all the cost, complication, and hassle of a system camera in a body with no proper way to control composition nor exposure especially during daylight (no VF). Sure I can get some good results out of the Q but how many prospective Q customers are willing to master shooting RAW ETTR exposures and Photoshop? See: The "reach" of the Q - images - Page 81 - PentaxForums.com I personally think the Q approach might work (ILC) but, at the present state of tech, no smaller than a 1" sensor with a drop dead great Evf such as you might find on a Fuji. The truth is the Q approach may have some merit but it was implemented by the wrong company - Pentax a dedicated old school SLR company instead of a specialist small format mirroless company like Fuji, Oly, Panasonic or even Sony. Even so, given all that, a small format ILC would probably remain a specialist niche market until sensor tech gets much better than it is now. At the present state of tech, and I'm no gearhead, I would guess that without a 1" sensor controlled by a proper Evf the Q concept is dead in the water at least here in the States. Last edited by wildman; 04-14-2017 at 12:57 AM.

04-14-2017, 01:52 AM	#27
wildman Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Flyover America Posts: 4,469	Originally posted by Mistral75 Not that the MILCs with one-inch sensor are particularly alive (Samsung NX Mini and Nikon One cameras)... I agree. But they were not serious system cameras. No focus peaking nor Evf for instance. The Nikon 1 was the very definition of half-assed and deserves to fail. I'm thinking in terms of about $800 body only. Last edited by wildman; 04-14-2017 at 02:02 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Q Owner: Q-S1 worth the upgrade? New Q anytime soon?	zwmg	Pentax Q	24	11-11-2016 08:43 PM
Q-s1 discontinued. The end of Q?	D1N0	Pentax News and Rumors	170	10-13-2016 08:19 AM
645D discontinued?	Imp	Pentax News and Rumors	17	05-13-2016 01:28 PM
Black Q with 8.5mm prime discontinued	lytrytyr	Pentax Q	3	11-25-2012 02:31 AM
Pentax Q discontinued?	RayGunn	Pentax Q	37	05-03-2012 06:56 PM

01-13-2017, 07:36 PM	#16
Tony Belding Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Hamilton, Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 781	Originally posted by zosxavius It seems the north american website no longer lists the Q-S1 as a product. It is no longer available at B&H except by special order for a couple of limited colors. uhh. . . All the lenses are still available, and they're not on sale. Is that normal for a cancelled system?

03-10-2017, 03:16 AM	#17
kb244 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 372	Pentax Q system no longer listed on Ricoh Imaging US website \| Pentax Rumors (January 3rd 2017) Quote: In an interview at Photokina last year, Ricoh representatives confirmed that the Pentax Q mirrorless camera line is alive and will continue to be developed. You can still get the Q-S1 at B&H in either red (~$216) or white (~$250) as well as all their lens... except the 01 Standard Prime (Adorama seems to carry it, but not sure why B&H doesn't). Seems as others have said, it's just probably not deemed to be worth marketing in the US, though not sure why not, being under $300 with a few lens options under $100 is a much nicer price point compared to what they used to be priced at ($500 and up). But I guess 2014 is getting a bit dated (... and I say that while still using a 2012 Olympus E-M5 mirrorless as my primary professional workhorse).

04-13-2017, 12:26 PM	#18
philter New Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: North Carolina Photos: Gallery Posts: 8	As of 04-11-17, when I looked at B&H and Adorama, Pentax Q-S1 is discontinued in the USA. Remaining stock of lenses and accessories are still shown on each store. It is no longer on the Ricoh Imaging Americas site either. Is it time to update the PF footer to show it as legacy?

04-13-2017, 01:06 PM	#19
D1N0 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2012 Location: --- Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,802	As long as Ricoh Japan has is as current it is no legacy.

04-13-2017, 03:48 PM	#20
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Originally posted by D1N0 As long as Ricoh Japan has is as current it is no legacy. If the product line is dead, they may or may not announce it. Instead possibly just keep quiet while vendors still have it in stock.. until supply is gone. That could take years..

04-13-2017, 04:24 PM	#21
D1N0 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2012 Location: --- Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,802	Originally posted by mee That could take years.. The horror!

04-13-2017, 04:45 PM	#22
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Originally posted by D1N0 The horror! Haha.. well no new lenses or bodies. Perhaps repair support at least through that time period.. however long it was. That is the biggest issue I find when companies quit.. repair services and support for their previous products.

04-13-2017, 05:04 PM	#23
Unregistered User Guest	I've noticed an uptick in the price of Q-7s and Q-S1 bodies and outfits lately (since Christmas) on Amazon and eBay. There must still be a demand, even if the retail supply is diminished. There's nothing quite like a Q!

04-14-2017, 12:05 AM	#24
i_trax Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Perth Western Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,621	Q-S1 still available in Australia in 7 different kit configuration. All 8 lenses still listed as available but 01 and toy wide is stock only.

04-14-2017, 01:36 AM	#26
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527	Originally posted by wildman (...) At the present state of tech, and I'm no gearhead, I would guess that without a 1" sensor controlled by a proper Evf the Q concept is dead in the water at least here in the States. Not that the MILCs with one-inch sensor are particularly alive (Samsung NX Mini and Nikon One cameras)...

04-14-2017, 04:57 AM	#28
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527	Nikon One Vx had/have an electronic viewfinder and a rather good one actually. No metering with third-party lenses though.

04-14-2017, 05:37 AM	#29
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by reh321 The only reason I even considered a Q-7 was its small sensor, which combined with a long adapted lens, gave me lots of what Normhead prefers to call "magnification". My backyard testing confirms that, although this concept has issues, it gives me much better clarity than cropping a K-30 iimage would. Yes, I could get better images with a $$$$ lens on a $$$$ camera, but I don't happen to have the $$$$ for the lens, let alone more for the camera, and I did have the funds necessary to put together my sigma 55-300 + Q-7 + loupe birding kit. This would have been easier if Pentax had seen a market here and had provided a native long lens, but I was willing to do it. Incidentally, the runner-up camera was a Canon SX-50, which has a 1/2.3" sensor. Something I hadn't taken into account in my figuring was that none of the adaptable lenses I tried was good enough to hit the tiny Q-7 pixels, so I don't get quite the detail I had expected - but I believe the Q-7 still has better low-light performance than the SX-50, and because it is ILC, it provides me more flexibility - for example, for our Holy Week services this week, I put an 01 lens on the Q-7 to give a much smaller unit than an SX-50 could ever be. I don't believe a 1" sensor would provide what I want - but these companies aren't in the business of serving me. I did purchase a Q-7 when the opportunity was there. I am currently 69, so I have a reasonable hope that my Q-7 will last as long as I need it too {I don't work it that hard}, as long as I'll be able to hobble down a trail with my bird-watching wife on one side and my meFoto walking stick / monopod on the other. Oh man, you're even older than me, that's gotta suck. But when I got my QS-1, I was thinking, if the arthritis in my shoulders gets really bad, I'll still always be able to manage this little guy.

04-15-2017, 05:52 AM	#30
Heinrich Lohmann Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Airdrie, Alberta Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,097	Originally posted by normhead Oh man, you're even older than me, that's gotta suck. But when I got my QS-1, I was thinking, if the arthritis in my shoulders gets really bad, I'll still always be able to manage this little guy. That same thought crossed my mind when I started buying Qs a few years back. (I'm a few weeks away from 85)