[Aristophanes]

Photography as a noun is about light. That's what you build your product around.

Photography as a verb may be about life, or it may be about work. That's subjective and that's where marketing comes in.

Don't confuse the two. If you want an over-priced P&S sensor system camera knock yourself out. The competition obliterate the Q on both product and marketing, so the Q mount is a dead end unless the price screams down to P&S, sub-$250 kit land. Which still leaves Pentax with no viable mirror less option. The Q as a product at tiny market share is missing the vast bulk of this market. Better choices with resources could have been made.

[RonHendriks1966]

The Q is a seller. Close to 6% marketshare in Japan for one model only is a success in anyones book. Possibly Pentax biggest success in 30 years.
The idea that sensor size only, meaning larger is better, is a selling point is misguided. The Q is compelling because it is that small sensorwise. A camera with a biggers ensor is not a much better option because it ain't the same thing. It is a different option; not a better one. The output quality is good enough for A3+ prints; well beyond most peoples needs.

Actually the K-x allready did that marketshare before in the dslr-market. But in my idea the Q has a good sellingpoint in Pentax's biggest market.

[mecrox]

Photography as a noun is about light. That's what you build your product around.

Photography as a verb may be about life, or it may be about work. That's subjective and that's where marketing comes in.

Don't confuse the two. If you want an over-priced P&S sensor system camera knock yourself out. The competition obliterate the Q on both product and marketing, so the Q mount is a dead end unless the price screams down to P&S, sub-$250 kit land. Which still leaves Pentax with no viable mirror less option. The Q as a product at tiny market share is missing the vast bulk of this market. Better choices with resources could have been made.

Lol, I tend to agree. Is this a marvellous example of mind over matter? I guess we do not know how well the Q is selling worldwide, not only in Japan - I mean in terms of its worth to Pentax and its continuation in the line. This list from a couple of local dealers here does suggest that for what it is, the Q is keeping some pretty racy company:

Pentax Q Black Camera Body - £79.00
Pentax Q Black with 8.5mm Lens - £179.00
Pentax K-01 Silver with 18-55mm DAL Lens - £299.00
Nikon 1 J2 + 10-30mm Kit Black - £299
Sony NEX-3N + E PZ 16-50mm OSS - £339.00
Panasonic Lumix GF5 Black with 14-42mm Lens - £349.00
Panasonic Lumix G3 White 14-42mm OIS Lens - £349.00
Panasonic Lumix GX1 14-42mm Lens - £369.00
Olympus PEN E-PL3 Silver with 14-42mm & 40-150mm R Lenses - £369.00
Pentax Q10 Silver 5-15mm Lens - £379.00
Olympus E-PM2 Silver with 14-42mm II R Lens - £389.00
Canon EOS M Black + EF-M 18-55mm - £399
Sony NEX-5R White 18-55mm OSS Lens - £419.00
Panasonic Lumix G5 with 14-42mm Lens - £449.00

Figures are in pounds sterling. Anything you like, including full-on APS-C cameras here. By comparison, the local price of an iPhone 4S is £449.

I guess what this may say is that there are overstocks galore in this market segment. Shop around, no need to pay full price for anything these days.

[RonHendriks1966]

Pentax Q Black Camera Body - £79.00
Pentax Q Black with 8.5mm Lens - £179.00
Pentax K-01 Silver with 18-55mm DAL Lens - £299.00
Nikon 1 J2 + 10-30mm Kit Black - £299
Sony NEX-3N + E PZ 16-50mm OSS - £339.00
Panasonic Lumix GF5 Black with 14-42mm Lens - £349.00
Panasonic Lumix G3 White 14-42mm OIS Lens - £349.00
Panasonic Lumix GX1 14-42mm Lens - £369.00
Olympus PEN E-PL3 Silver with 14-42mm & 40-150mm R Lenses - £369.00
Pentax Q10 Silver 5-15mm Lens - £379.00
Olympus E-PM2 Silver with 14-42mm II R Lens - £389.00
Canon EOS M Black + EF-M 18-55mm - £399
Sony NEX-5R White 18-55mm OSS Lens - £419.00
Panasonic Lumix G5 with 14-42mm Lens - £449.00

Figures are in pounds sterling. Anything you like, including full-on APS-C cameras here. By comparison, the local price of an iPhone 4S is £449.

I guess what this may say is that there are overstocks galore in this market segment. Shop around, no need to pay full price for anything these days.

You can still buy Olympus PEN E-PL1 overhere.


And this shop has the Original PEN in stock:
http://maxict.nl/product/1814750/olympus-e-p1-body?btwview=in&rs=kelkoo&utm_...gn=kelkooclick

It's from 2009!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[anthony mazzeri]

If a larger sensor fits in the Q and the lenses can cope with it why didn't they put one in there in the first place.

I would surmise that the 1/1.7" sensors at the time the Q was designed/released simply weren't good enough, most especially being CCD wouldn't allow HD video. The GRD IV for example can still only do VGA video, which would have been a death-knell spec on a consumer camera like the Q. So they probably made a conscious decision to sacrifice the sensor size to launch the Q and just wait for the next generation 1/1.7".

Which is here now. It's really only this newer CMOS sensor from Sony now (as per in the latest Nikon P7700) which can do the job expected of a consumer camera in 2013.

[GXRUser]

I hope the 07 comes free since it's the body cap lol.

Also... I hope it goes back to a mag alloy body... (though would that really push prices way way up again?)

I would really like an EVF...

[VisualDarkness]

The main reason the Q is down in market share is due to Marketing Budget... Plain and simple. The Nikon is a nightmare to use, its more like an iPod than a camera, but Nikon have a massive marketing budget and most people are aware of the J1 (camera enthusiasts or not). Very few have heard of the Q.

I think the Nikon 1 series barely sold here in Sweden until their huge marketing run recently. I never saw anyone try them in stores, almost never saw any posts about them and the boxes in the stores were really dusty. The old models are till around despite pricing but Pentax cameras like the K-01 and the original Q are sold out at least.

[kenafein]

I think the Nikon 1 series barely sold here in Sweden until their huge marketing run recently. I never saw anyone try them in stores, almost never saw any posts about them and the boxes in the stores were really dusty. The old models are till around despite pricing but Pentax cameras like the K-01 and the original Q are sold out at least.

The Nikon 1 system is very over priced, in my opinion. The V1 didn't really sell here until the fire sale. It's bigger than, and more expensive than, a Sony NEX. It's a nice caera, and overall the lenses are smaller, but we have many small options. They can't charge a huge premium for small(and theirs isnt that small). Their price for their new portrait lens is a joke. I think it's a very tough segment. As far as fun goes, the V1 is a fun camera to use, just like the Q, but different. The results are very satisfying.

[monochrome]

I don't agree with a lot of the stuff you say on these boards, but that line got me thinking.

I don't really expect most people to agree with much of what I say - and I intentionally stay away from General and Politics, too (for the most part).

I think the question (and Aristophanes's whole line of argument) is whether we want Pentax to compete with and win against Canon and Nikon (which requires they be fundamentally the same as Canon and Nikon to attract their customers) or whether we want Pentax to be different from Canon and Nikon (and thus try to attract different customers).

I don't believe Pentax can be different, priced the same and attract the same customers as Canon and Nikon. Aristophanes seems not to believe Pentax can be successful (defined as growing, or having a larger presence) unless they compete head-to-head with Canon and Nikon on their terms.

I (and my Olympus XA) have a different opinion.

I DO believe Pentax lacks a focused business plan and a tight business model. I don't think they really even know who they are. I believe if they can decide who they are they can spend some marketing money telling the world who they are, and if the products are aligned with the story then they will gain market share and maybe even some momentum.

[Aristophanes]

I think the question (and Aristophanes's whole line of argument)

Q = great design, too small sensor at that price point. It's a $250 system camera going in with a P&S/smartphone sensor. It needs P&S pricing. That's its niche. It's the P&S system camera and needs P&S prices.

Nikon, Sony, NEX, m43 = larger sensors placed well above P&S and smartphones at competing price points (now, look at the latest NEX products and Panny's). They can go $100-$300 above the Q because they have IQ separation in the product itself. all the reviews says so definitively.

If the Q had a 1" sensor (and modestly larger lenses) at the $500 price point it would kill the Nikons because it is much better designed as a camera. but the market data (all from Japan so far) shows that the awkward Nikons are killing the Pentax, and they launched after the Q.

If it's a P&S shooter then brand, market, and price as such. It's Pentax going head-to-head on pricing with larger sensors that is...embarassing. It's like a K-5 going at the same price as a D600.

Olympus XA = cool.

[VisualDarkness]

Well, at least here the original Q it's at P&S prices so I don't know why that is an argument against it.

Nikon S1 is priced about 25% over Q10
Nikon J3 is priced about 35% over Q10
Nikon V2 is double the price of the Q10

Where is that crazy marketing compared to the Nikon 1 series then?

[RonHendriks1966]

Still what do you expect from the bigger sensor? If it is the same sensor as in MX-1 I don't see it making a big step in IQ, or did I miss something?

[ElvisQ]

Blah Blah Blah Pentax Blah Blah Blah Nikon
Is there any new information about the Pentax Q7?

[VisualDarkness]

Blah Blah Blah Pentax Blah Blah Blah Nikon
Is there any new information about the Pentax Q7?

I love this comment so much I want to marry it!
Maybe they will give info of either the macro or the wide angle with the announcement of the camera, it makes sense. A body cap lens is not a system seller.

[IchabodCrane]

I don't really expect most people to agree with much of what I say - and I intentionally stay away from General and Politics, too (for the most part).

I think the question (and Aristophanes's whole line of argument) is whether we want Pentax to compete with and win against Canon and Nikon (which requires they be fundamentally the same as Canon and Nikon to attract their customers) or whether we want Pentax to be different from Canon and Nikon (and thus try to attract different customers).

I don't believe Pentax can be different, priced the same and attract the same customers as Canon and Nikon. Aristophanes seems not to believe Pentax can be successful (defined as growing, or having a larger presence) unless they compete head-to-head with Canon and Nikon on their terms.

I (and my Olympus XA) have a different opinion.

I DO believe Pentax lacks a focused business plan and a tight business model. I don't think they really even know who they are. I believe if they can decide who they are they can spend some marketing money telling the world who they are, and if the products are aligned with the story then they will gain market share and maybe even some momentum.

I think I understand your line of reasoning but I look at the question from a different angle. Did Nikon (and maybe Canon, not sure) identify what customers wanted and came to the conclusion that something like a 1" MILC would meet that desire? If that's how they arrived at the Nikon 1 concept then Pentax should pay close attention. They don't have to make the same cameras as Nikon and I sure hope they don't. The whole "V" thing is a bit of a disaster, IMHO. What could have been a great offering turned out to be an overpriced eyesore, especially the 2nd iteration. (Aside: how many times does a company produce a sequel product that looks awful compared to the first?)

The apparent forces that seem to be driving toward larger sensors in the DSLR arena are likely at play in the smaller sizes, too. I don't think any of us want to see Pentax spending good money to chase yesterday's product.