Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-25-2011, 09:44 AM   #1
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
DxO test for Q

Not to bad score for the Q.

Sitting nice in this group:
DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

Waiting to see how that Fuji 2/3th snesor will score in future.

11-25-2011, 10:09 AM   #2
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,512
Wow. That's actually quite impressive! Slightly better than the Olympus xz-1 which is highly regarded and has a larger sensor!
11-25-2011, 11:20 AM   #3
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Berlin, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 151
Wow, the Q has more DR than my K20D. Quite impressive for a sensor of that size.
11-25-2011, 11:24 AM   #4
Pentaxian
Raffwal's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: 64°57' North
Posts: 806
Well, on the other hand the results are almost identical to the years old Canon S90 P&S camera that I have and don't much use anymore...

EDIT: BTW, the S90 also has a bigger sensor it seems. A system camera with a sensor smaller than an OK P&S camera??? Oh boy.

11-25-2011, 12:40 PM   #5
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
Original Poster
But for the best results it is wise to use the Q only at iso125.
11-25-2011, 01:28 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Prague
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,198
QuoteOriginally posted by Raffwal Quote
Well, on the other hand the results are almost identical to the years old Canon S90 P&S camera that I have and don't much use anymore...
Would you use it if it has interchangeable lenses and flash hot shoe? This makes a camera a lot more useful and fun.
11-25-2011, 07:23 PM   #7
Pentaxian
Raffwal's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: 64°57' North
Posts: 806
QuoteOriginally posted by elho_cid Quote
Would you use it if it has interchangeable lenses and flash hot shoe?
Nope. I may be an archnemesis of the Q, but I hate even the concept. More or less combining the worst aspects of P&S cameras and DSLRs/system cameras. But that's just me, for some it may be an option (although I have a difficult time understanding it...).
11-26-2011, 01:53 AM   #8
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,254




11-26-2011, 02:07 AM   #9
Veteran Member
Northern Soul's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: The North of England
Photos: Albums
Posts: 491
QuoteOriginally posted by Raffwal Quote
Well, on the other hand the results are almost identical to the years old Canon S90 P&S camera that I have and don't much use anymore...

EDIT: BTW, the S90 also has a bigger sensor it seems. A system camera with a sensor smaller than an OK P&S camera??? Oh boy.
The size per se doesn't matter though, does it - the point is that in terms of picture quality, it's as good. Who cares what size the sensor is? If I had a camera that gave images as good as a K-5 but had a sensor the size you could only see with a magnifying glass, it's still be good. (Although you might struggle to get much subject isolation given it'd have a massive DoF - the only argument in favour of size per se)

I love the idea of the Q for use as a pocketable everyday camera, or as a second body to turn long lenses into (effectively) very long lenses and macro lenses into extreme macro lenses. When it's cheaper, obviously
11-26-2011, 02:21 AM   #10
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,254
My idea was that Pentax Q became new Pentax high-end version of P&S cameras - instead of A or S, and old Optio serie with 1/1.8" sensor.
It seems to me - good job.
11-26-2011, 02:44 AM   #11
Veteran Member
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
I must honesty admit, as an avid DSLR user with a K-5 and lots of superb primes: at first I thought that the Q was a joke. But I got one nonetheless because of the fun factor. When I received it, I was honestly surprised by the quality of the little camera. In my feeling it is like a little K-5 in build quality, so to speak. And when I reviewed my results (shot in RAW) I can honestly say it outperforms the K10D. Way nicer (and less) noise, no banding. I can easily shoot at ISO 800 with the Q, with the K10D I wouldn't even think about it.

Yes, I also think it's a good job by Pentax. The Q may be a bit underappreciated, but that will change very soon I think.
11-27-2011, 06:29 PM   #12
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
The Q of course has a result which cannot hide it's class (P&S sensor). It has a low iso score of 189 where the K-5 has 1162.

Nevertheless, by sensor size alone, the Q should have scored only 90. This shows that the low iso score of a dSLR can be doubled when using sensor technology as applied in the Q. The Q beats the LX5 too.

Considering the relatively good DR, then the Q is much closer to µFT than µFT is to APSC. Side note: DR isn't limited by sensor size but by production technology / cost / depth of die.

That's all really nice. But I rather like to have a Q mount socket at the back of my iPhone
11-27-2011, 06:43 PM   #13
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,620
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Not to bad score for the Q.

Sitting nice in this group:
DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

Waiting to see how that Fuji 2/3th snesor will score in future.
I'm confused... is the Nikon 1 J1 depicted in the orange graph or am I seeing this wrong?
11-28-2011, 03:08 AM   #14
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
I'm confused... is the Nikon 1 J1 depicted in the orange graph or am I seeing this wrong?
yes and they are about the same at base iso, but the Q is going down the hill very fast after iso200.
11-28-2011, 04:14 AM   #15
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,267
Still, it proves small sensors *can* actually provide very good quality.
Then, well, of course quality drops fast but then that's hardly surprising and IMO that's not the point of the whole concept.
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!
pentax news, pentax rumors, score
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Test of DXO 6.5 Corros Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 5 01-15-2012 07:18 AM
DxO Optics hardware preferencies/requirements (public test?) Siegfried Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 10 02-22-2011 03:38 PM
DXO are giving 30% off DXO Optics Pro until Dec 25 rawr Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 13 11-11-2010 01:22 PM
K-r RAW Sensor Test From DxO Biro Pentax K-r 7 11-04-2010 01:09 AM
Test: DxO K20D - full size comparisons falconeye Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 6 11-03-2009 03:42 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:00 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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