[turbosaturn]

I just had a thought that it might actually be a wonderful idea if Pentax and GoPro partnered up to produce an interchangeable lens helmet camera. To me it makes sense because Pentax appears to be trying to direct its development to be known as an outdoor rugged camera company. Pentax has had several generations of waterproof cameras, and they are the only manufacturer at this point in time who actually have a whole lens system dedicated to small sensors like the ones in the GoPro cameras. GoPro on the other hand is making a big name for itself for being the most well known wearable cameras out there. Perhaps if GoPro started licensing Pentax's Q mount to give access to its various lenses then together they can make one of the most versatile outdoor wearable cameras out there.

[jakeblues]

While that's not the worst idea I've ever heard, the advantages of the go pro is its built in ultrawide lens, which allows it to be mounted extremely close to the user and still capture the surroundings. I can't imagine using a gopro with, say, a 50mm equivalent or even a 35mm or 24mm equivalent lens. I think the go pro's lens is a 16mm equivalent.

[Chex]

Well action camera's are only usable because of their extremely wide field of view.. camera shake would be soooo noticeable if you had anything equivalent to say a 35mm or longer lens on it..your footage would be unusable.. and then if your hard mounting it on a tripod.. you don't need GoPro size anymore..

[fuent104]

Well action camera's are only usable because of their extremely wide field of view.. camera shake would be soooo noticeable if you had anything equivalent to say a 35mm or longer lens on it..your footage would be unusable.. and then if your hard mounting it on a tripod.. you don't need GoPro size anymore..

I have to disagree with this. I've had situations where I had to use a GoPro because there was no viable alternative available...but the fixed lens was a liability. I would buy an interchangeable lens compact video camera without hesitation, if the video quality was high enough. The SI2K sort of serves this purpose, but must be used with a tether. However, you could set lenses to hyperfocal distance, etc., to make up for the selective focus.

[Glen_S]

I send camera's up in RC planes and helicopters for HD video as well as still pictures, and many people in this hobby would love a Gopro with a smaller FOV and/or interchangeable lenses. Quite a few are replacing the stock gopro lens with a 3rd party lens that has a narrower FOV, hence less distortion. Having said that, the percentage of their (GoPro) user base that it interested in this is most likely minuscule, so it's not very likely to happen.

With Sony and JVC joining the fray, there should be more options in the wearable cam market soon, Already it has changed tenfold in the last year or so as far as options & camera choice go. Many in my hobby elect to send "regular" cameras aloft when they want a more traditional FOV picture, older Canon P&S cameras being popular because of the CHDK possibilities, and many using lighter mirrorless cameras like the NEX-5N or GH2 for aerial photos and video.

[fuent104]

CHDK possibilities

What does that mean?

[Chex]

What does that mean?

Canon Hack firmware.. basically unlocks EVERY feature imaginable for Canon point and shoot camera's and such.. quite amazing work actually.. I run it in old a540 and even older little crap camera's.. easy to get time lapse camera's this way!

[Glen_S]

CHDK - Canon Hackers Development Kit - or something like that. I picked up a couple of A495's for $60 each and loaded them with CHDK. The beauty is that it all resides on the SD card and nothing is really done to the camera. As Chex says, it enables a TON of features on many P&S cameras, but my main interest was the intervalometer feature. It helps to be a bit of a techie to use this, as it's very highly customizable. I have mine set up to take a pic every 2 seconds, and not start taking them for 2 minutes, this lets me start the program, take off with my aircraft and it doesn't start taking pics till I'm up in the air.

[johnmflores]

CamOne already has a POV cam with interchangeable lenses:

Review: CamOne Infinity POV Camera | RoadRUNNER Motorcycle Touring & Travel Magazine


Regarding the Q, the 03 Fish Eye is useful for rigged selfies:









But I've found it (and other POV cams with ultra-wide lenses) to be almost too wide - the epic scenery gets pushed too far away. When riding with others, I tell them that they have to be right on my tail in order to be more than a spec:




The 01 Prime, on the other hand, is great for subjects but the FOV is a bit long for epic scenery shots:



It can work though:



I've been hoping that Pentax releases a moderate wide for the Q as a compromise. In the meantime, I bought a Nikon 1 V1 with a 10mm F2.8 (28mm EQ) used, and the FL and lighting AF is very nice:





I haven't tried the newest GoPros yet, but I have used a fair many, and the Q trumps them all for IQ:



The only IQ issue I have is jello:



Engine vibration combined with the CMOS sensor is the culprit here I think. I never had an issue with the Ricoh GX100 with CCD sensor, but video was shite on that.


Overall, the Q is already a really good POV cam for my uses. I just need a 28mm EQ and I'll be happy

[Chex]

My Hero 3 Black Edition should be in any day now, I will post some shots ASAP. I've now seen people swapping out the lens on Hero 2's to normal wide angles and even short telephoto lenses.. but the waterproof casing does not fit after modifying. Still would be nice for a little time lapse rig.

[Glen_S]

Pretty good comparison of the Q with the Drift HD, one downfall I notice with all of my POV cams (Drift Stealth, Contour 1080HD and GoPro1) was light transitions. I have done side by side comparisons of the Drift and Contour compared to GoPro1, the Contour seemed to handle light transition better but I thought the image quality was inferior, while some thought the Contour had more realistic color rendering. Drift and GoPro were closer to parity I thought, but Gopro has the edge in IQ.

The IQ on the Q is impressive, but the lack of 60fps is a deal breaker for me because with many aerial videos I like to be able to go to 1/2 speed and keep it smooth. I looked at a Q a couple of weeks ago and was impressed with its size & form, but for my application the NEX-5n is a lot more bang for the buck.

I'll probably be picking up a GP3 black edition at some point too, from what I have seen their IQ is very good, they are small and I'm a lot more comfortable hovering or flying over water with something waterproof than I am with my NEX-5n.

First three videos are mine, 4th is from someone much better at this than me

Vimeo

You Tube

You Tube

You Tube

You Tube

Vimeo

[fisheye freak]

If you cannot have direct viewing of the viewfinder, a less wide angle lens has only 1 advantage-less cropping. At least the GoPro gets pretty well everything to give the latitude to crop. If you have a smaller object to shoot that requires something more telephoto, you should have the opportunity to hold the appropriate camera to your eye.
Thus, the notion of an interchangeable lens GoPro style camera is most likely going to be a fail.
It seems that GoPro have this section of the market fairly well covered. Their continuing to innovate and improve as well as adding new accessories will mean their systems will find their way in to even the most loyal brand follower's kit.

[Chex]

FINALLY got my Hero 3 Black Edition.. quite an amazing little setup! I'll be putting it through the paces very soon! Love the ability to have the GoPro App on my phone to preview my shot since I'd rather have the battery bacpac than the LCD bacpac.

[fuent104]

At least the GoPro gets pretty well everything to give the latitude to crop. If you have a smaller object to shoot that requires something more telephoto, you should have the opportunity to hold the appropriate camera to your eye.

Shooting small objects isn't the only reason to want to use something other than an extremely wide lens. I've done car mount shots in which I simply didn't want to use an extremely wide lens. I'm sure there's a market for it.

[msmoore]

CamOne already has a POV cam with interchangeable lenses:

[ur://www.roadrunner.travel/2012/12/11/review-camone-infinity-pov-camera/]Review: CamOne Infinity POV Camera | RoadRUNNER Motorcycle Touring & Travel Magazine[/url]


Regarding the Q, the 03 Fish Eye is useful for rigged selfies:
[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/7741818646/][/url]
[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/7741818646/]...and this is why I bought the Pentax Q...[/url] by [ur://www.flickr.com/people/johnmflores/]john m flores[/url], on Flickr

[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/7997819186/][/url]
[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/7997819186/]Riding in Acadia National Park, Schoodic Peninsula, ME[/url] by [ur://www.flickr.com/people/johnmflores/]john m flores[/url], on Flickr

[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/7746563142/][/url]
[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/7746563142/]This motorcycle journalism gig isn't all sunshine and rainbows...[/url] by [ur://www.flickr.com/people/johnmflores/]john m flores[/url], on Flickr

But I've found it (and other POV cams with ultra-wide lenses) to be almost too wide - the epic scenery gets pushed too far away. When riding with others, I tell them that they have to be right on my tail in order to be more than a spec:

[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/7932784388/][/url]
[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/7932784388/]On the Million Dollar Highway with a Victory Cory Ness Cross Country Tour[/url] by [ur://www.flickr.com/people/johnmflores/]john m flores[/url], on Flickr

The 01 Prime, on the other hand, is great for subjects but the FOV is a bit long for epic scenery shots:
[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/7932785696/][/url]
[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/7932785696/]On the Million Dollar Highway with a Victory Cory Ness Cross Country Tour[/url] by [ur://www.flickr.com/people/johnmflores/]john m flores[/url], on Flickr

It can work though:
[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/8129176547/][/url]
[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/8129176547/]L'Uccello Arrabbiato on the Mount Washington Auto Road, NH[/url] by [ur://www.flickr.com/people/johnmflores/]john m flores[/url], on Flickr

I've been hoping that Pentax releases a moderate wide for the Q as a compromise. In the meantime, I bought a Nikon 1 V1 with a 10mm F2.8 (28mm EQ) used, and the FL and lighting AF is very nice:

[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/7997777892/][/url]
[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/7997777892/]Riding up Cadillac Mountain with the 2012 BMW R 1200 RT[/url] by [ur://www.flickr.com/people/johnmflores/]john m flores[/url], on Flickr


I haven't tried the newest GoPros yet, but I have used a fair many, and the Q trumps them all for IQ:



The only IQ issue I have is jello:
[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/8021929085/][/url]
[ur://www.flickr.com/photos/johnmflores/8021929085/]Visions of Jello[/url] by [ur://www.flickr.com/people/johnmflores/]john m flores[/url], on Flickr

Engine vibration combined with the CMOS sensor is the culprit here I think. I never had an issue with the Ricoh GX100 with CCD sensor, but video was shite on that.


Overall, the Q is already a really good POV cam for my uses. I just need a 28mm EQ and I'll be happy

Wow, great video comparison! Looks like NJ, but anyway,

I wanted to know what kind of mount you are using for your bike and the Q? I was looking at the Q for exactly what you are doing (looking to get a bike this summer) but the lack of mounts/shock proof cases was kind of a downfall for me.

Thanks,