Originally posted by The Squirrel Mafia I wonder what plans Pentax has for the Q series. I think it has really good image quality given the size of that 1/1.7" sensor. My wife wants one 'cause she thinks her K-50 is a bit too big & bulky. She loves that the Q-S1 is really small & has the option of switching lenses, but having only 4 "real" lenses (01, 02, 06, 08) kinda sucks. Needs more "real" primes, not toy lenses.
It's still a bit pricey too. A Q-S1 with the 02 & 06 plus the 01 & 08 at Adorama is $1,133.85. An Olympus E-PL7 with the 14-42, 40-150, 17mm f/2.8, & 25mm f/1.8 lenses is about $1,200. My wife & I still prefer the Q over the E-PL7, but then the bang for the buck factor & lens option comes up once again.
Too add some more insult to injury, a K-50 with the 18-55 & 50-200 plus the 35mm f/2.4 & the 50mm f/1.8 is about $710 from B&H. The K-50 obviously has better image quality, but it's also much bigger. Problem is that I have 2 K-50's & those lenses already. Hahaha!
Pricing the Q system is where Pentax really needs to get aggressive.
Part of the issue is that if you get 5 of us talking about this subject, you'll get at least 7 different opinions {so if Ricoh were to eavesdrop here for ideas, they'd leave more confused than they came.}
My
personal opinion, which I state every time the issue comes up {like #17 above}, is that a modern camera needs a viewfinder if its going to compete with other cameras, let alone with cell phones. Pentax has shown no interest in EVFs {afterall, OVFs are their forte, even to the point of providing their name}, which basically dooooooms {there, I got that word in} Pentax MILC efforts. Yes, I do have a Q-7, and I do use it indoors with only the LCD, but I add a hoodman {or hoodman clone} to the bag if I expect to use it outdoors, and to me that is simply not a satisfactory solution. On several occasions I've said that normally I expect a camera to last at least five years, and I've had my Q-7 for only 17 months while I've had my K-30 for only 11 months, but I would feel compelled to get a Q-S3 with EVF within six months or so of its release and a K-03 {K-3 or similar packaged as MILC with EVF} within six months or so of its release. My budget might be in real trouble if Pentax released both a Q-S3 and a K-03 this year ... but I would be extremely surprised if they ever produced either of them.
As far as Q-mount lenses are concerned, the real issue in your comparison is the 08, which costs more than my Q-7 cost me {used like new via Amazon}. Wide angle is very hard to do at such a small mount, so I understand the pricing, but justifying that price is very hard none the less. I believe they would be much better off releasing a 00 {a ~4.2mm prime lens}, and it could be quite successful, and contribute to more "Q" sales as well, if they could get its price down to the neighborhood the 01 is in. Afterall, in the days of MF, we used very few zoom lenses other than telephoto lenses, so having 00 + 01 + 06 would be very similar to having 28mm + 50mm + 70-210mm in the days of film. I should probably add that my Q-7 came as a Q-7 + 02 + 06 kit, and I had to go all the way to a Japanese merchant to find any price, let alone a good price, on a 01 lens; apparently things are a little better in that area now, at least.