[BNBPhoto]

Hi everybody,

since apparently Ricoh did not abandon, the idea at least, of a future upgrade to the Q system I was wondering what would you like to see implemented in such a camera.

I have made a handy poll to see which technologies you would like to see implemented.

Personally here goes my 2 cents:

Personally I would split the Q into 2 segments, 1 consumer (i.e. smartphone nerd) and one prosumer.

The consumer model would essentially focus on features like wifi implementation (NFC, etc...), filters, in camera editing, colorful bodies, etc... and the prosumer would focus on features such as weather sealing, video, slightly higher resolution, etc...

Features I really would like to see in the future iteration regardless (and it wouldn't cost Pentax much to implement it) are in no particular order:

- Tilty screen like in the K-1 to keep it snug
- Pop-up (pop-out) EFV
- Touch screen

- Weather sealing
- Pixel shift (is a must)

- Astrotracer
- GPS
- On sensor phase-detect


Most of the tech Pentax already possesses so there is not much R&D involved to get this working.


Thanks for keeping the conversation going ....

---

Last edited by BNBPhoto; 01-31-2019 at 02:36 PM.

[ramseybuckeye]

bigger sensor

[BigMackCam]

I chose only a pop-out EVF and weather resistance. And I could live without the EVF if I had to... actually, the weather resistance too, come to that. Give me a 2019-standard sensor of the same size with the existing lenses and a macro option, and I'd be delirious

[twilhelm]

The Q is the Q. I would like some kind of viewfinder, but that isn't a deal breaker. Weather resistance and pixel shift would be awesome inclusions.

But I'm with @BigMackCam I'd love to see the lenses finished, especially a macro.

[TwoUptons]

I have this silly daydream where Pentax is only keeping the Q around long enough to license it to Samsung and some of the Chinese manufacturers who want to dabble in cameras.

A ready-made architecture and some of the fancy new phone sensors could be really interesting. Especially if some of the Chinese lens folks started playing with the format.

Pentax would be able to support additional development through licensing while differentiating their own offerings with pixel-shift and astrotracer.

It could be fun...

-Eric

I have this silly daydream where Pentax is only keeping the Q around long enough to license it to Samsung and some of the Chinese manufacturers who want to dabble in cameras.

If not the camera, certainly the mount.

I'd love to have a mini-503 Hasselblad in the Q mount, the folding hood would enable it to have a “EVF”…

[dms]

1. [Most important] Add 35mm equivalent lens small/similar to No. 01
2. [Secondly] Keep original Q configuration.
3. [Of Course] Update sensor

[reh321]

1. must keep 1/1.7" sensor - larger would make no sense, because couldn't use current lenses

2. incorporate 'accelerator' - would alleviate some issues resulting from small sensor

3. EVF - I have yet to see an MILC succeed without one

4. full function KAF4 adapter - would allows lenses like 55-300 to AF

[Abbazz]

bigger sensor

I beg to disagree. The whole purpose of the Q series is the small sensor. There are other options for people looking for bigger sensors, although the cameras with 1" sensor and interchangeable lenses have been discontinued (Samsung NX Mini, Nikon 1). The 1/1.7"sensor is the "native" format of the Q series, as the 1/2.3" was only a temporary solution while waiting for the release of the 1/1.7" back-illuminated sensor from Sony.

I don't think Sony has upgraded the 1/1.7" 12MPix sensor, and this might be the biggest issue preventing Ricoh from releasing a new Q series camera. Personally, I don't need more pixels. In fact, I would prefer to trade pixels for dynamic range. I would love a Q-S2 with an 8MPix sensor with 14.5EV of dynamic range. And an electronic viewfinder, even an external one.

Cheers!

Abbazz

[Tony Belding]

The things I want most are not on the poll: Better quality LCD. More prime lenses. A "Super Q" with EVF and mini-SLR form factor. A variant with a monochrome sensor.

[derekkite]

Make a cracking vlog camera.

[dms]

I beg to disagree. The whole purpose of the Q series is the small sensor. There are other options for people looking for bigger sensors, although the cameras with 1" sensor and interchangeable lenses have been discontinued (Samsung NX Mini, Nikon 1). The 1/1.7"sensor is the "native" format of the Q series, as the 1/2.3" was only a temporary solution while waiting for the release of the 1/1.7" back-illuminated sensor from Sony.

I don't think Sony has upgraded the 1/1.7" 12MPix sensor, and this might be the biggest issue preventing Ricoh from releasing a new Q series camera. Personally, I don't need more pixels. In fact, I would prefer to trade pixels for dynamic range. I would love a Q-S2 with an 8MPix sensor with 14.5EV of dynamic range. And an electronic viewfinder, even an external one.

Cheers!

Abbazz

I basically agree with this, and when I earlier said I wanted 35mm (FF equivalent) small like 01 lens, same configuration as original Q (although I did have in mind the later Q7 size sensor), and updated sensor, my major thought was,
**** don't make the camera larger ****
In fact this would also likely mitigate an electronic viewfinder--unless it is an external one (I use/like optical viewfinders).

None of the poll questions address the size aspect, and I think the important thing is it should continue to be no larger than the original Q and have reasonable choices for 01 size lenses (for me this is the 01, 03, and 04--except replace the 04 with a 35 mm equivalent 01 size/type lens).

[EFats]

Consumer model does not make sense. Smartphones will trounce it, not a fair fight.
I like my Q, it's proven to be very fun to shoot.
- Touch screen, basically for selecting the focus point, that's pretty much it
- No EVF! Look, I have big digital files, I can afford to crop a little. Give me the option of OVF so I can save a bit of battery, even if framing is approximate.
- LCD screen needs higher resolution.
- Sensor size should be same or similar. I'm tempted to ask for more pixels...
- Some more tiny primes...

[Abbazz]

**** don't make the camera larger ****

Agreed.

In fact this would also likely mitigate an electronic viewfinder--unless it is an external one (I use/like optical viewfinders).

It should be possible to include a built-in electronic viewfinder without increasing the size of the camera. Look at the Panasonic GM5, which is hardly bigger than the Pentax Q (and much thinner), but manages to cram in an electronic viewfinder, despite having a much bigger 4/3 sensor:




.

None of the poll questions address the size aspect, and I think the important thing is it should continue to be no larger than the original Q and have reasonable choices for 01 size lenses (for me this is the 01, 03, and 04--except replace the 04 with a 35 mm equivalent 01 size/type lens).

On the 1/1.7" sensor, the 01 lens has the same field of view of 58°, same as a 39mm lens on a 24x36 sensor, and not far from a 35mm (63°). Having a short-normal prime is the main reason I prefer shooting with the cameras equipped with the bigger sensor rather than with the original Q's smaller sensor.

If we could only have one new prime, I would rather opt for a 90mm equivalent (a close focusing one would be even better).

Cheers!

Abbazz

[kwb]

I selected EVF, pixel shift and other.

Though I suppose that this is about the body, for now my top wish is more native lenses, e.g. 09 Macro, updated 02 lens that is sharper and much smaller, long prime (like 100 or 150mm). As for 02, I know that it could be done just by looking at some small sensor P&S.


As far as the body is concerned,


1. Better SR

Since I sometimes do stupid long telephoto just for the fun of it, there's no such thing as SR that is good enough.

2. EVF.

I simply cannot hold the camera really stably at arm's length, though SR helps. And needless to mention the bright sun light problem.

I use LCD magnifier type thing and that helps too, but it would be much better if Q has a real EVF.


3. Better LCD
Even with an EVF, I want an LCD that has higher resolution.

4. Pixel Shift
This is like a nice to have feature. Why not?