[JeffPolaski]

Sorry to do this on my first post on this forum.

I read somewhere, late last night, that Ricoh has stopped production of the Q-S1. It being late at night, I did not bookmark where I read this and cannot remember. I went to bed with disappointment since I had decided to replace my now-dormant Q with a new body.

The old Q body just wouldn't start after long storage. The battery compartment was spotless. I bought a new battery and charger and still no go. It's a shame because I'm retired now and am picking up on using my cameras again.

Tell me it isn't true! (And, tell me why your think Ricoh will keep supporting Q-S1s for the foreseeable future.

[Adam]

AFAIK it's not in production. Development of the Q line is "on hold", the true meaning of which is still mostly a mystery.

[surfar]

"on hold", the true meaning of which is

More than likely finished which is a shame.

[reh321]

Sorry to do this on my first post on this forum.

I read somewhere, late last night, that Ricoh has stopped production of the Q-S1. It being late at night, I did not bookmark where I read this and cannot remember. I went to bed with disappointment since I had decided to replace my now-dormant Q with a new body.

The old Q body just wouldn't start after long storage. The battery compartment was spotless. I bought a new battery and charger and still no go. It's a shame because I'm retired now and am picking up on using my cameras again.

Tell me it isn't true! (And, tell me why your think Ricoh will keep supporting Q-S1s for the foreseeable future.

The latest official word from Pentax is that they continue to "support" the Q-S1; my understanding is that they have bodies and lenses stored away, and sell out of inventory. The question always is "what will they do when they run out of inventory? - Will they produce more or will they {quietly} stop selling them?". Periodically, @Adam or someone else from here will interview a spokesman for Pentax; as far as I am aware, they have not gotten a clear answer to this question, but at CP+ this past winter, they did tell another interviewer that currently K-mount is their priority.

[LensBeginner]

There's a fine line between active support and life support...
Ricoh being a Japanese brand, it's unlikely we will get a negative answer if someone asks something like "will you continue to support the Q line?": answering negatively is considered impolite in Japan.


I remember once offering a lift to a Japanese friend of mine, who was in Italy for some time. She answer enthusiastically with a: "Yes, thank you very much", then waved her hand, said "I'm going then, bye!" and proceded on her way on foot!

[danielblues]

Could they use a modern 1" sensor with an extra big square aspect ratio and to the maximum of the available lens, would that waste too many pixels?

Just quick idea
Best,

[D1N0]

I think they don't know where to take the q-line, but they don't want to loose it yet either. it is really only feasible as a pocketable second camera, meaning they can't ask too much for it, meaning they can't spend too much on development,meaning it is most likely a dead end.

[twilhelm]

Even if it is dead, if my Q10 decided to stop working one day, I would replace it and likely with the Q-S1. I like having the camera, it’s great for what it is.

[LensBeginner]

To me the biggest appeal of a Q would probably not be size, but the possibility to get humongous "reach" thanks to the big crop and the possibility to adapt K lenses.

I've also heard, however, that you - not surprisingly perhaps - need a lens with really terrific resolving power, beyond what most normal lenses can achieve, to get the most out of it.

I've also heard, however, that you - not surprisingly perhaps - need a lens with really terrific resolving power, beyond what most normal lenses can achieve, to get the most out of it.

That is true, you will really see the limits of resolution of any lens. The pixel pitch is about the same as a 100-120mb sensor would be on full frame. Quality c-mount lenses work well on it, although they are very expensive. Good enlarging lenses work well too. One thing to remember is that diffraction starts at about f2.8 and becomes a limiting factor above f5.6.

To me the biggest appeal of a Q would probably not be size, but the possibility to get humongous "reach" thanks to the big crop and the possibility to adapt K lenses.

It is really fun to adapt a fast 50 or 75mm cine lens to get a functional equivalent of a 230 or a 340mm f1.4 that fits in a jacket pocket. You can also make an excellent compact macro set up as well. The 03 fish-eye (smaller than a film can) is also a riot and makes astounding wide-angle macros.

[LensBeginner]

That is true, you will really see the limits of resolution of any lens. The pixel pitch is about the same as a 100-120mb sensor would be on full frame. Quality c-mount lenses work well on it, although they are very expensive. Good enlarging lenses work well too. One thing to remember is that diffraction starts at about f2.8 and becomes a limiting factor above f5.6.

*snip*

...ouch!
The M 100/2.8... the M50/1.7 probably... the M28/3.5 wide open... not much more I could think of adapting from my collection

You can still use f4 - f5.6, it really doesn't become too bad until f8 and you gain depth of field and better edge to edge sharpness.


I've got the M 100/2.8, it is OK on the Q but is prone to heavy fringing. The M50 1.7 and 1.4 are better but you should really try all of your lenses, some may surprise you. For an example, here is a test of the Pentax 110 lenses adapted to M4/3, you'll notice that the "partway" results (which would be the edge on the Q) improve dramatically going from f2.8 to f5.6 while the center results stay the same.


Q images generally need some careful PP sharpening to get optimum results.

[reh321]

You can still use f4 - f5.6, it really doesn't become too bad until f8 and you gain depth of field and better edge to edge sharpness.

I've got the M 100/2.8, it is OK on the Q but is prone to heavy fringing. The M50 1.7 and 1.4 are better but you should really try all of your lenses, some may surprise you. For an example, here is a test of the Pentax 110 lenses adapted to M4/3, you'll notice that the "partway" results (which would be the edge on the Q) improve dramatically going from f2.8 to f5.6 while the center results stay the same.

Q images generally need some careful PP sharpening to get optimum results.

I did some back yard testing three years ago with a paper target, so the results were based on a consistent subject. I tested at 300mm the five lenses I had that actually go to 300mm
(1) Sigma 70-300mm APO
(2) Pentax-DA 55-300mm
(3) AdaptAll 60-300mm
(4) Ricoh 70-300mm
(5) Takumar 300mm

I started with the widest each lens would go and tried each aperture to f/11; based on the common "received" knowledge I expected the best for each lens to be f/5.6 or less, so this should be me the best for each lens. In actual fact, however, the Sigma lens's best images were at F/8 or f/11. I know this goes against everything that everyone "knows", except people forget one factor - for many of these lenses, decreasing detail from diffraction is offset by increasing detail from using a "better" part of the lens {the innermost cylinder}.

By the way, the numbers above show how I ranked the lenses; (1) and (2) were essentially died at f/5.6, but the Sigma lens continued to get sharper beyond that point while the Pentax-DA did level off as expected.

[reh321]

I think they don't know where to take the q-line, but they don't want to loose it yet either. it is really only feasible as a pocketable second camera, meaning they can't ask too much for it, meaning they can't spend too much on development,meaning it is most likely a dead end.

The sensible thing to do would be to purchase an already existing smart phone system {sensor + processor} from someone and build a "Q" around it; they could use something like a year-old iPhone and come up with a seriously good system.

[ChopperCharles]

I suppose I should do my part and buy an S1. I've got two original Q bodies, and would like the faster operating system and bigger sensor. Probably time I just go ahead and bite the bullet.

Charles.