[ZombieArmy]

WR Q with EVF, WR lenses, 4k recording and a unicorn pls ty.

The Q7/QS1 still has the most modern 1/1.7 sensor. No one has released a better sensor yet, and you know Ricoh - they will release a camera when they think it's a camera worth releasing. Otherwise, there's nothing wrong with buying the current Q models.

There is now the 1/1.7 used in the Huawei P20/Mate 20 Pros that has a 40MP resolution, I'm pretty sure I read about a newer one but I'll have to look for it. I would be seriously tempted by a Q that oversampled like the Nokia 808 and have you a choice of resolutions, oversized sensor for aspect ratio change like the LX7 would be good too.

Must get a Q for the collection anyway...

[Rondec]

I don't see why they don't release a new one and also the macro lens that we saw the prototype of. I know it probably doesn't deliver a whole lot different image quality from a nice smart phone camera, but being able to change lenses and have better ergonomic controls actually makes a huge difference in the shooting experience with a camera versus a cell phone.

[Tony Belding]

The Q7/QS1 still has the most modern 1/1.7 sensor. No one has released a better sensor yet, and you know Ricoh - they will release a camera when they think it's a camera worth releasing. Otherwise, there's nothing wrong with buying the current Q models.

I'll go out on a limb and say the biggest deficiency of my Q7 is the quality of the LCD. It's noticeably inferior to the one on my GRD-IV, even.

[Pioneer]

Yeah. An improved LCD would certainly be nice as long as battery life doesn't get worse.

The odd fact about image quality is that I have never, ever had anyone tell me that the prints I handed them were deficient whether the image was captured with my Q, my Q7, K10D or my K5iis. I quit worrying about Q image quality in prints a LONG time ago.

Composition is still a far more important thing to worry about but camera reviewers don't seem to test for that.

[punkrachmaninov]

do any of y'all think Pentax would ever consider offering up the next model in the "Q" series as some kind of newfangled smartphone with a lens?

i know, i know... like many things i say, perhaps it seems farfetched at first, but there is the old addage: the camera with you is the best camera.

compact cameras are nearing obsolescence on the sales reports, so i am with adam in that i don't think they will be rushing development on the Q series. typing this on a cellular phone with a 40 megapixel sensor of the exact same form factor as the q system... it occurred to me, then i thought about it a bit more and realized i would use an interchangeable lens cellphone (of course), if they managed to make it a pleasurable experience.

perhaps it is the worst idea i have ever had, but i am not quitting my day job to attend the industrial design program at the tokyo institute of technology, am i? we're just talking here.

what would happen if ricoh/pentax release the world's first interchangeable lens android device? would any of us pentaxian-types buy it? would it be impractical? would we all prefer to stick with apple?

[Lowell Goudge]

Yeah. An improved LCD would certainly be nice as long as battery life doesn't get worse.

The odd fact about image quality is that I have never, ever had anyone tell me that the prints I handed them were deficient whether the image was captured with my Q, my Q7, K10D or my K5iis. I quit worrying about Q image quality in prints a LONG time ago.

Composition is still a far more important thing to worry about but camera reviewers don't seem to test for that.

My Q replaced a very capable Kodak bridge camera that had an eye level electronic view finder. Although the resolution was not great and lack of interchangeable lenses and all the other things that made the Q a better camera, overall the Kodak camera was a great little camera because of the Electronic view finder. I had mine set up so the check image appeared in the viewfinder, today's EVF are much better than what Kodak had in 2005, and this plus a revamped sensor, and at least one lens in the 100mm range (500mm full frame equivelent) whether zoom or fixed would be great. Presently I am using CCTV lenses for extra reach, or my K135/2.5 because I get the 1/1000 mechanical shutter of the Pentax K/Q adaptor

[Pioneer]

My Q replaced a very capable Kodak bridge camera that had an eye level electronic view finder. Although the resolution was not great and lack of interchangeable lenses and all the other things that made the Q a better camera, overall the Kodak camera was a great little camera because of the Electronic view finder. I had mine set up so the check image appeared in the viewfinder, today's EVF are much better than what Kodak had in 2005, and this plus a revamped sensor, and at least one lens in the 100mm range (500mm full frame equivelent) whether zoom or fixed would be great. Presently I am using CCTV lenses for extra reach, or my K135/2.5 because I get the 1/1000 mechanical shutter of the Pentax K/Q adaptor

I had a nice little bridge camera, I think it was a Sony, that I gave away after I picked up my Q. Nice little camera but the flexibility of the Q was more useful for me and I quit using the Sony all together.

I picked up the K/Q adaptor as well and I used some pretty long glass in the beginning. Now I am using my FA 135/2.8 or my DA 100 Macro but not much else. Those two give me plenty of reach for what I do and I can still pretend that I can handhold them in good light. (Handholding with those two lenses usually turns out ok if I don't try and print too big; but I get a lot of failures as well.)

Lately I have my original Q set to monochrome with the yellow filter and a 1:1 aspect ratio. Its' a novelty for sure but I am having fun with it. Trying to get better at composing with the wide angle zoom but I still need a whole lot of practice.

[RobA_Oz]

do any of y'all think Pentax would ever consider offering up the next model in the "Q" series as some kind of newfangled smartphone with a lens?

i know, i know... like many things i say, perhaps it seems farfetched at first, but there is the old addage: the camera with you is the best camera.

compact cameras are nearing obsolescence on the sales reports, so i am with adam in that i don't think they will be rushing development on the Q series. typing this on a cellular phone with a 40 megapixel sensor of the exact same form factor as the q system... it occurred to me, then i thought about it a bit more and realized i would use an interchangeable lens cellphone (of course), if they managed to make it a pleasurable experience.

perhaps it is the worst idea i have ever had, but i am not quitting my day job to attend the industrial design program at the tokyo institute of technology, am i? we're just talking here.

what would happen if ricoh/pentax release the world's first interchangeable lens android device? would any of us pentaxian-types buy it? would it be impractical? would we all prefer to stick with apple?

I generally try to avoid becoming someone else’s product, but that gets harder all the time. I don’t know if the full functionality of a mobile operating system is necessary (or perhaps even a hindrance) in a digital camera.

We’ve discussed the ergonomics of having an interchangeable lens somewhere here, in the past, but I can’t lay my hand to it quickly. Anyway, the form factor becomes a problem, I think, where the necessary bulk of the lens and the mount detracts from the appeal of the slender contemporary phone. The multi-lens (or is that “multi-camera”?) mobile probably robs most of the potential market for an IL smartphone.

[punkrachmaninov]

I generally try to avoid becoming someone else’s product, but that gets harder all the time. I don’t know if the full functionality of a mobile operating system is necessary (or perhaps even a hindrance) in a digital camera.

We’ve discussed the ergonomics of having an interchangeable lens somewhere here, in the past, but I can’t lay my hand to it quickly. Anyway, the form factor becomes a problem, I think, where the necessary bulk of the lens and the mount detracts from the appeal of the slender contemporary phone. The multi-lens (or is that “multi-camera”?) mobile probably robs most of the potential market for an IL smartphone.

having owned the huawei p20 pro for three months now, i can safely assure you that the multi-camera phone doesn't exactly replace the interchangeable lens camera functionality. it feels more like i put a toy lens onto a smart phone than an actual optically sound experience. one person's opinion...

[RobA_Oz]

having owned the huawei p20 pro for three months now, i can safely assure you that the multi-camera phone doesn't exactly replace the interchangeable lens camera functionality. it feels more like i put a toy lens onto a smart phone than an actual optically sound experience. one person's opinion...

No doubt things will improve, as new models appear.

I picked up the K/Q adaptor as well and I used some pretty long glass in the beginning. Now I am using my FA 135/2.8 or my DA 100 Macro but not much else. Those two give me plenty of reach for what I do and I can still pretend that I can handhold them in good light.

Truer words never spoken. Nice to have that option available, though. I can't see hauling around a 460mm or 620mm lens, its doable, but barely.

[twilhelm]

My full Q wish list:

Better LCD, detachable viewfinder

And... battery grip with wood handle...

[punkrachmaninov]

No doubt things will improve, as new models appear.

that is not to say that the Huawei p20 pro's 28mm 40 megapixel or the 24 megapixel Leica monochrome lenses don't offer an experience better than most point and shoots - they certainly do - but the 3x tele lens is 10 megapixels of uselessness to me. that, and all of it would be much better with a manual lens attached.

the real interest for a company like pentax with regard to the q would be the open source android UI and a form factor that offered a true a true manual focus experience... yet you could flip it over on the table and watch a real video shot with a pentax prime. no smart phone or touch device will ever give the tactile function of a physical lens... if they had overstock of any of the wider q glass it would be a wise move.

[Lowell Goudge]

I picked up the K/Q adaptor as well and I used some pretty long glass in the beginning. Now I am using my FA 135/2.8 or my DA 100 Macro but not much else. Those two give me plenty of reach for what I do and I can still pretend that I can handhold them in good light. (Handholding with those two lenses usually turns out ok if I don't try and print too big; but I get a lot of failures as well.)

Truer words never spoken. Nice to have that option available, though. I can't see hauling around a 460mm or 620mm lens, its doable, but barely.

that's the beauty of the Q given the crop factor of the sensor, it is not just about hauling around the 460-620mm lens, but hauling around for example a 620mm F2.5 think about the K135/2.5 and what this means with the crop factor, a 400 gram lens in place of a 400 kilo lens