[MossyRocks]

And here I am considering getting a Q and a the K->Q adapter because I want to do some planetary imaging and running at an equivalent of about 1800mm to 3600mm is what one really should be using for that. The 1200mm FF equivalent on APS C just really doesn't cut it even with a big planet like Jupiter.

[csa]

Mike, I completely agree with what you said!

[Painter]

I have the original Q which is more of a display item and the Q7 which has become my fancy spot meter for when I shoot 4x5 film. I use the telephoto zoom to take light readings the only problem is that the apertures end around where the large format begins so it always involves some math. I also have the Pixel 6 pro which is a good phone but not as versatile as a Q7. I should qualify that the Pixel 6 pro is great at its prime optical settings. Any digital zoom and your in the artificial intelligence zone.

If I had unlimited resources and time I'm sure I'd have a Fuji system, a full frame system with a bunch of weird old swirly lenses, who knows what else. But I still don't know if I'd have a Q because it's 10+ year old tech with a cell phone sized sensor. If I wanted a separate, small ILC system with lenses that aren't compatible with anything I have now I'd probably go M4/3rds.Even at $300 plus lenses there are a lot of other photography tools I'd rather put those resources towards.

The Q system is still unique: its small size, its depth of field, the small size and versatility of its lenses, and its adaptability. Its sensor is pretty much at the limit of the resolution of its lenses which are also close to theoretical limits. A M4/3 body may be as small but the equivalent lenses aren't. $300 buys a Q7 body with two (or even three) lenses—good luck finding any M4/3 set up for that price. The 1" Sony sensors in the RX series are fantastic, but are not available in an interchangeable lens camera outside of the Nikon 1. The Nikon1 system was the Q's main rival, although it wasn't as versatile.


Phones can definitely get excellent results, but they are odd beasts and not for everyone or every application.

Fujifilm doesn't make a FF camera, only APS-C and Medium format.

[ThorSanchez]

Fujifilm doesn't make a FF camera, only APS-C and Medium format.

I know. I was just saying without any limits I'd have a Fuji system and a full frame system and a bunch of other random stuff that don't make a lot of sense when you have a budget and limited time to use all of it.

[reh321]

I know. I was just saying without any limits I'd have a Fuji system and a full frame system and a bunch of other random stuff that don't make a lot of sense when you have a budget and limited time to use all of it.

but in the real world - where most of us work under limits - I do have Pentax “Q” {which is light and therefore useful for walking} and KP camera bodies, a few Q-mount lenses, and K-mount lenses that I can use with either.

[ThorSanchez]

but in the real world - where most of us work under limits - I do have Pentax “Q” {which is light and therefore useful for walking} and KP camera bodies, a few Q-mount lenses, and K-mount lenses that I can use with either.

And I have a K-3 Mark III, a few older bodies, some Canon point and shoots older than my kids, and a Google Pixel 6. The only ones I really use are the Mark III and the Pixel, and I don't find myself wanting for more to fill any niches.

[reh321]

And I have a K-3 Mark III, a few older bodies, some Canon point and shoots older than my kids, and a Google Pixel 6. The only ones I really use are the Mark III and the Pixel, and I don't find myself wanting for more to fill any niches.

In Nov 2014, my wife and I took my Mother to the Madrigal Dinner produced by the college my wife worked at. As usual back then, I carried my Canon Elph in my pocket and took some photos - in this case by ambient light. Midway through the event, my wife leaned over and whispered "Those aren't right". Further whispered conversation established that the Elph's WB had undone all the set designer's work in turning a student lounge into a medieval candle-lit dining hall ..... the photos looked like they had been taken at noon on a bright sunny day {without casting any shadows}. A few weeks after that, I purchased my Q-7. I figured I could always work with the 'raw' files, but the next year I managed to come up with settings that we both agreed matched the colors we were actually seeing. The next year, we sat in the second row, and I spent the entire evening shooting around a lady who was using the built-in flash on her Nikon DSLR. As we were leaving, I explained why that would wash out the set designer's work. Her reply was, "Perhaps that is true, but my camera can't get good pictures any other way" - then she explained that her daughter was a senior and one of the soloists. I showed her one of my photos - and she was very excited; it turned out that my picture was of her daughter, and looked better on the screen than any of her efforts did, so I emailed several to her. My wife and I went to the dinner until she retired in 2019, but this was the highlight for me.

I don't now how your Pixel would do in a similar situation, but I am very happy with how my Q-7 has performed - and I definitely feel that it is still relevant.

[cmohr]

My only regret with the Q system, is, I didn't get one sooner. Given the current offering from all manufacturers, It's a Classic, and a definitely a relevant piece of kit. Q system, was sadly discontinued when I bought in.

[Abbazz]

The 1" Sony sensors in the RX series are fantastic, but are not available in an interchangeable lens camera outside of the Nikon 1. The Nikon1 system was the Q's main rival, although it wasn't as versatile.

I have a few Samsung NX Mini cameras. The NX Mini is a very small camera with a great 20.5MPix 1 inch sensor. It features an interchangeable lens (two great primes available with angle of view comparable to 24 and 45mm lenses on a 35mm camera and a great standard zoom). There is also an adapter allowing the use of lenses in Samsung NX mount or almost any other mount (lots of adapters available on eBay). Unfortunately Samsung decided to kill these cameras quite a while ago (same fate as the Pentax Q with no official announcement of discontinuation) but they are still avalaible used. I bought a "new old stock" Samsung NX Mini with the standard zoom two months ago for $250.

Here's a Samsung NX Mini next to a Pentax Q-S1:


Four of them with 45mm f/1.8, 9mm f/3.5, 17mm f/1.8 prime lenses and 9-27mm zoom:


With the Fuji 2.7mm f/1.8 C-mount fisheye (almost circular 200° image):


With the Tamron 75mm f/3.3 C-mount telephoto (comparable to a 202.5mm lens on a 35mm camera):


The large touch screen flips up to 180°:


So I guess we can say there is an advanced system camera with a 1" sensor which is even more versatile than the Pentax Q. And I love my Pentax Q, which are irreplaceable for certain tasks.

Cheers!

Abbazz

[reh321]

I have a few Samsung NX Mini cameras. The NX Mini is a very small camera with a great 20.5MPix 1 inch sensor. It features an interchangeable lens (two great primes available with angle of view comparable to 24 and 45mm lenses on a 35mm camera and a great standard zoom). There is also an adapter allowing the use of lenses in Samsung NX mount or almost any other mount (lots of adapters available on eBay). Unfortunately Samsung decided to kill these cameras quite a while ago (same fate as the Pentax Q with no official announcement of discontinuation) but they are still avalaible used. I bought a "new old stock" Samsung NX Mini with the standard zoom two months ago for $250.

Here's a Samsung NX Mini next to a Pentax Q-S1:


Four of them with 45mm f/1.8, 9mm f/3.5, 17mm f/1.8 prime lenses and 9-27mm zoom:


With the Fuji 2.7mm f/1.8 C-mount fisheye (almost circular 200° image):


With the Tamron 75mm f/3.3 C-mount telephoto (comparable to a 202.5mm lens on a 35mm camera):


The large touch screen flips up to 180°:


So I guess we can say there is an advanced system camera with a 1" sensor which is even more versatile than the Pentax Q. And I love my Pentax Q, which are irreplaceable for certain tasks.

Cheers!

Abbazz

I suppose I would have considered the “Samsung Mini” back in 2014 - the controls look comparable to Pentax’s
,and I also have a warm spot in my heart for Samsung {my Great Aunt lived in Korea before WW Ii} - but now both companies have gone on to other things.

[bigted]

I have an original Q. When I bought it, it was for days when I didn’t want to carry a bigger camera but I still wanted to take photos with something other than my phone. Honestly I don’t use it much but my best friend who knows almost nothing about photography loves to use it when I’m not using it. I taught her how to change the lenses and what they all did and I give her the bag with the Q when we are out and about together. She sees the world differently from how I do so it compliments the images I take and we get a fuller picture of our travels together. If I were to do things all over again I probably wouldn’t pick one up just for me but I am pleased that we use it together and for that reason while it is getting old it is still very relevant.

I have a few Samsung NX Mini cameras. The NX Mini is a very small camera with a great 20.5MPix 1 inch sensor. It features an interchangeable lens (two great primes available with angle of view comparable to 24 and 45mm lenses on a 35mm camera and a great standard zoom). There is also an adapter allowing the use of lenses in Samsung NX mount or almost any other mount (lots of adapters available on eBay). Unfortunately Samsung decided to kill these cameras quite a while ago (same fate as the Pentax Q with no official announcement of discontinuation) but they are still avalaible used. I bought a "new old stock" Samsung NX Mini with the standard zoom two months ago for $250.

Wow! I had forgotten completely about these, they didn't make much of a splash in my world. I had a couple of Samsung point and shoots (TL-500, NV 10) and they had great lenses but less than great sensors. Well-made but quirky. The NX minis must have come out just before Samsung left the camera biz.

Looking back again at the NX mini system I remember why I wasn't interested. The lenses were slow, no IBIS, and the sensor was big enough that it didn't have the depth of field advantages of the Q. The Pixel pitch of the Q-7 and the Sony 1" 20mp sensor is the same, so no real advantage on telephoto either. Samsung's camera division was always a bit "odd" in its offerings and marketing.