Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-06-2016, 07:53 AM   #31
New Member




Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 9
I've been tempted by the Panasonic CM1 myself in the past but there'd be little point when I have an RX100 to use when the k-50 is too big. In most conditions the N8 gave similar photos to the RX100, but crucially suffered when it was dark and the flash wasn't an option.

08-06-2016, 11:12 PM   #32
Pentaxian
wildman's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Flyover America
Posts: 4,313
Put a 1" sensor in the body of my Olympus OM-D E-M10 and I would be a happy camper for my purposes.
If you are thinking small, at the present state of tech, a 1" sensor is the sweet spot.
Otherwise, speaking only for myself, a "small ILC" sounds like a contradiction in terms. The way most folks, apparently use their Q, I would much prefer my Panasonic ZS50.

Take a look at this old post of mine -

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/299366-look...ml#post3309360

Last edited by wildman; 08-06-2016 at 11:32 PM.
08-07-2016, 11:30 PM   #33
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,732
QuoteOriginally posted by wildman Quote
Put a 1" sensor in the body of my Olympus OM-D E-M10 and I would be a happy camper for my purposes.
If you are thinking small, at the present state of tech, a 1" sensor is the sweet spot.
Otherwise, speaking only for myself, a "small ILC" sounds like a contradiction in terms. The way most folks, apparently use their Q, I would much prefer my Panasonic
OK, so our preferences differ. I really like the "magnification" {yes, I know we can argue about proper terminology, but this is the wording normhead prefers - and now I see that you also use that term in the other thread} my reasonably inexpensive Sigma 70-300mm lens gives me via my Q-7 {these pictures were all taken from a seat on the back deck of our house}







Last edited by reh321; 08-07-2016 at 11:53 PM. Reason: expanded comment
08-26-2016, 03:05 AM   #34
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 43
New Q-sensor camera with Pixel Shift is just begging to be made. That would be enough of a reason to upgrade for me. Pentax needs to double-down on Pixel Shift technology, it really sets them apart, however little it gets used, it's a feature with direct impact on image quality. As good as I think the images coming out of my Q are, I dream of how much better they could be (for still life and such).

Phone cameras with similarly tiny sensors have such amazing image quality nowadays, sometimes I wonder what would it be like to have a lens on my phone other than 28mm focal length equivalent with fixed aperture. Then I know, that's what the Q is for. The race for bigger sensors isn't so terribly important anymore.

08-29-2016, 09:51 AM   #35
Site Supporter
rlg118's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Central New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 95
I just ordered a Q7 with the two zoomies. As much as I like the K-50, it does occasionally get a bit heavy, especially on hot, humid days when I'm walking the dog.

A question about sensor size:

The size is expressed as 1/1.7", which, according to my calculator, is about .588", or a hair less than 15mm. Why don't they just use that instead?
09-06-2016, 07:22 PM - 1 Like   #36
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,615
QuoteOriginally posted by rlg118 Quote
The size is expressed as 1/1.7", which, according to my calculator, is about .588", or a hair less than 15mm. Why don't they just use that instead?
The Q7 frame has a 9.5mm diagonal.

"Sizes are often expressed as a fraction of an inch, with a one in the numerator, and a decimal number in the denominator. For example, 1/2.5 converts to 2/5 as a simple fraction, or 0.4 as a decimal number. This "inch" system brings a result approximately 1.5 times the length of the diagonal of the sensor. This "optical format" measure goes back to the way image sizes of video cameras used until the late 1980s were expressed, referring to the outside diameter of the glass envelope of the video camera tube."

From: Image sensor format - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
02-22-2017, 04:15 PM   #37
New Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 14
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
OK, so our preferences differ. I really like the "magnification" {yes, I know we can argue about proper terminology, but this is the wording normhead prefers - and now I see that you also use that term in the other thread} my reasonably inexpensive Sigma 70-300mm lens gives me via my Q-7 {these pictures were all taken from a seat on the back deck of our house}





Hi reh321,
Your photos taken with the K to Q adapter look great what adapter did you use?
I just purchased the " Fotodiox Lens Mount Adapter with Aperture Dial, Pentax K Lens to Pentax Q Series Camera ".
I hope this hasn't been poorly spent money.
Cheers,
Peter.
02-22-2017, 08:14 PM   #38
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,732
QuoteOriginally posted by picpete Quote
Hi reh321,
Your photos taken with the K to Q adapter look great what adapter did you use?
I just purchased the " Fotodiox Lens Mount Adapter with Aperture Dial, Pentax K Lens to Pentax Q Series Camera ".
I hope this hasn't been poorly spent money.
Cheers,
Peter.
Those particular pictures were taken with the Pentax adapter.
I have several other adapters also, but I don't remember which ones.
My primary reason for getting the Pentax one was "an abundance of caution" - I was able to get a good price on a used Pentax one {with tripod foot} and I had been wondering whether the rolling shutter could cause little-noticed but real effects, basically slight imperfections that would add up to a noticeable reduction in IQ, so I got the Pentax adapter just to be sure I was doing the best I can {but a comparison is hard to come by, because each picture is unique, so I still cannot tell whether it is a good investment}.

02-23-2017, 10:16 AM   #39
New Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 14
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
Those particular pictures were taken with the Pentax adapter.
I have several other adapters also, but I don't remember which ones.
My primary reason for getting the Pentax one was "an abundance of caution" - I was able to get a good price on a used Pentax one {with tripod foot} and I had been wondering whether the rolling shutter could cause little-noticed but real effects, basically slight imperfections that would add up to a noticeable reduction in IQ, so I got the Pentax adapter just to be sure I was doing the best I can {but a comparison is hard to come by, because each picture is unique, so I still cannot tell whether it is a good investment}.
Thanks
reh321
for the reply
I cancelled the Fotodiox, and ordered the Pentax adapter.
It is hard to purchase in Canada. Found one at Henry's.
Cheers.
Peter.
03-01-2017, 10:39 PM - 1 Like   #40
Pentaxian
PiDicus Rex's Avatar

Join Date: May 2013
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,013
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
If anything along these lines were to happen, I think they should limit the Q line to Japan, since that's where it really sells. But I really do believe that a new model will be launched as resources allow.
I think there's better options, for a new new niche, if they're daring enough

Go with a radical departure, and use that Q-sensor in Pentax's First "Video Camera",.. Let me free-think and spin up the idea for a moment.

It's sensor is similar to 8mm film sized, has a resolution capable of a ''crop to UHD', add things like sensor shift and a decent add-on audio module, and you could have a bridge spec somewhere between Action Cameras and DSLRs, plus, with the existing lenses and lens adaptors, there's a massive range of options - an 'XL to Q' adaptor, or even better, 'B4 to Q' could turn that sort of size body in to the smallest. lightest 'ENG & Cinema' camera.

The current Q body should be a lighter load then a full DSLR body for a Drone, and a Video type body - say, looking like the Sony NEX-VG series - could fill a niche - bigger sensors then ENG, but smaller then M4/3 or APSc.
That would make then easier to focus for video, but still have shallow enough depth of field to match footage off larger sensor cameras.

Because the current sensor is smaller the the 2/3rds broadcast B4 mount cameras use, any Q could already be adapted to use ENG lenses.

For you guys doing Birding, imagine a properly Parfocal f1.8 zoom that goes from 8.6 to 172mm - and that's not even an exotic lens for ENG.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Fujinon-A20x8-6BRM-2-3-20-1-8-6-172mm-Internal-Focus-ENG-EFP-Lens-/222411837004?hash=item33c8c74e4c:g:lmMAAOSw-0xYUe6i


Some of the wide-angles for ENG go close to fish-eye, and the full tele zooms,.... Who wants to take photos of the ISS and watch the Dragon Modules docking ?


EDIT: Wholly Carp, I honestly didn't expect this to exist yet.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/B4-2-3-CANON-FUJINON-ENG-LENs-to-Pentax-Q-Q7-Q10-Q-S...sAAOSw-4BXY-YX

Last edited by PiDicus Rex; 03-01-2017 at 10:55 PM.
03-02-2017, 04:45 AM   #41
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 5,561
QuoteOriginally posted by PiDicus Rex Quote
Go with a radical departure, and use that Q-sensor in Pentax's First "Video Camera",.. Let me free-think and spin up the idea for a moment.

It's sensor is similar to 8mm film sized, has a resolution capable of a ''crop to UHD', add things like sensor shift and a decent add-on audio module, and you could have a bridge spec somewhere between Action Cameras and DSLRs, plus, with the existing lenses and lens adaptors, there's a massive range of options - an 'XL to Q' adaptor, or even better, 'B4 to Q' could turn that sort of size body in to the smallest. lightest 'ENG & Cinema' camera.

The current Q body should be a lighter load then a full DSLR body for a Drone, and a Video type body - say, looking like the Sony NEX-VG series - could fill a niche - bigger sensors then ENG, but smaller then M4/3 or APSc.
That would make then easier to focus for video, but still have shallow enough depth of field to match footage off larger sensor cameras.

Because the current sensor is smaller the the 2/3rds broadcast B4 mount cameras use, any Q could already be adapted to use ENG lenses.
I'm not normally all that interested in video, but even I find that idea appealing. Great ideas
03-02-2017, 08:26 AM   #42
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,007
QuoteOriginally posted by PiDicus Rex Quote
I think there's better options, for a new new niche, if they're daring enough

Go with a radical departure, and use that Q-sensor in Pentax's First "Video Camera",.. Let me free-think and spin up the idea for a moment.

It's sensor is similar to 8mm film sized, has a resolution capable of a ''crop to UHD', add things like sensor shift and a decent add-on audio module, and you could have a bridge spec somewhere between Action Cameras and DSLRs, plus, with the existing lenses and lens adaptors, there's a massive range of options - an 'XL to Q' adaptor, or even better, 'B4 to Q' could turn that sort of size body in to the smallest. lightest 'ENG & Cinema' camera.

The current Q body should be a lighter load then a full DSLR body for a Drone, and a Video type body - say, looking like the Sony NEX-VG series - could fill a niche - bigger sensors then ENG, but smaller then M4/3 or APSc.
Neat idea but unfortunately that drone has already sailed.

Zenmuse X5S ? Micro Four Thirds Aerial Camera - DJI

For drones, I'd love to see a Theta with great IQ from a 1/1.7" or 1" sensor and 4k and higher video
03-06-2017, 07:24 PM - 1 Like   #43
Pentaxian
ZombieArmy's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 743
I don't think the Q needs a bigger sensor it just needs more features. With such a small sensor there's almost no excuse to not have 4k video which would be a huge boon. Make the thing WR with a set of WR re-released lenses and you've got the ultimate "take literally anywhere" small camera system.

To me the allure of the Q system isn't bleeding edge IQ, but good enough IQ with incredible convenience and flexibility.
03-08-2017, 02:55 AM   #44
Pentaxian
PiDicus Rex's Avatar

Join Date: May 2013
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,013
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
Neat idea but unfortunately that drone has already sailed.
Nope, completely different - that's M4/3rds, which means it looses the 1:1 ratio possible between the Q's sensor readout and 4K footage without needing any pixel binning or skipping or what not.
That has appeal to me, and should be able to do 4K without needing the FPGU to do a whole heap of processing - just trim the frame to the right resolution and write it to the SD Card.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
digital camera, improvement, mirrorless, q7, samsung, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
First the Pentax Q, now the MX1, what's next? plsbecarepaul Welcomes and Introductions 5 01-13-2015 07:12 PM
I want the next Q fs999 Pentax Q 69 11-07-2014 12:13 AM
Pentax, please add in camera focus stacking to the next Q body. barondla Pentax Q 8 06-07-2014 03:00 AM
The next Q sensor? Urkeldaedalus Pentax Q 6 08-21-2012 01:31 PM
Who will make the next 645D Sensor? Winder Pentax News and Rumors 31 09-30-2011 01:34 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:13 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top