Rumour: New Q with larger sensor

ElvisQ · 06-09-2013, 11:06 PM

Originally posted by arnold

Can someone explain these measurements to me please? They can't possibly be in inches given the size of the sensor is around a quarter inch. Is there no figure of Xmm by Ymm?

Kunzite · 06-09-2013, 11:10 PM

Those figures are not sensor sizes, even though they're related. Just Google search for "sensor sizes" and you'll get plenty of results, relevant charts and explanations.
For example, 1/2.7" is ~5.37x4.04mm with a 6.72mm diagonal, and 1/1.8" is 7.20x5.35mm with a 9mm diagonal.

m8o · 06-09-2013, 11:15 PM

Originally posted by Fogel70

.... The difference between 1/2.3" and 1/1.7" is even smaller than I first thought.

26% larger is something ; better than nothing.

p.s. I hope the body is very square, like the 1st Q. Rounded corners let alone something ordinary and typical compact looking would be a deal breaker.

m8o · 06-09-2013, 11:23 PM

Originally posted by barondla

I always thought it strange that the Q fisheye only covered approx 165 degrees. Most fisheyes do 180. ...

Off topic but my 7mm Vivitar fish-eye is around that range and I love it. I'm not constantly ruining every picture by getting my feet in the frame this way.

Uluru · 06-09-2013, 11:39 PM - **2 Likes**

Jokes aside: I'd love new Q body to be super-serious compact. Make it a Nikon D4 equivalent in small sensor size:

• First, much better battery. 450-500 shots per charge a minimum.
• battery grip option
• No shutter lag please.
• 12MP, 12-bit RAW.
• 10-12 fps, large buffer.
• EVF option (it can be external).
• superior LCD anti-glare coating.
• magnesium alloy body

So far the Q was an experiment. Now make it into a serious system. Sell it along with Q10, and start seriously building a lineup. At any time, there should be 2-3 Q cameras available, same as for the K-mount.

RonHendriks1966 · 06-10-2013, 02:01 AM

Well that brings it to the level off the MX-1, but wasn't the difference in image quality very small?

NeilGratton · 06-10-2013, 02:15 AM

My girlfriend has an MX-1, I have a Q10, and my impression having used both cameras is that the MX-1's 1/1.7" sensor+processor is significantly better than the Q10's 1/2.3". I see better dynamic range and less noise at ISO 400-800. In which case, I would very readily welcome a Q with that sensor.

Fogel70 · 06-10-2013, 02:22 AM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

Well that brings it to the level off the MX-1, but wasn't the difference in image quality very small?

I would expect something like 1/3 of a stop improvement. But with the small difference in size between 1/2.3" and 1/1.7" sensors, it's probably more difference in IQ between generations on the sensor, than the difference in size make.

On DxOmark Q10 and MX-1 scored the same overall score.
DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

ihasa · 06-10-2013, 03:43 AM

Originally posted by Fogel70

I would expect something like 1/3 of a stop improvement. But with the small difference in size between 1/2.3" and 1/1.7" sensors, it's probably more difference in IQ between generations on the sensor, than the difference in size make.

On DxOmark Q10 and MX-1 scored the same overall score.
DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

Well the sensor will probably have moved on a generation, AND be larger. So it's double-bubble - the new sensor should be quite a bit better and Q system fans really ought to be quite pleased.

Philippos · 06-10-2013, 04:38 AM

Originally posted by Uluru

Jokes aside: I'd love new Q body to be super-serious compact. Make it a Nikon D4 equivalent in small sensor size:

• First, much better battery. 450-500 shots per charge a minimum.
• battery grip option
• No shutter lag please.
• 12MP, 12-bit RAW.
• 10-12 fps, large buffer.
• EVF option (it can be external).
• superior LCD anti-glare coating.
• magnesium alloy body

So far the Q was an experiment. Now make it into a serious system. Sell it along with Q10, and start seriously building a lineup. At any time, there should be 2-3 Q cameras available, same as for the K-mount.

I agree, but most probably the sensor will be 16Mpx.

Mistral75 · 06-10-2013, 05:12 AM

Originally posted by Philippos

I agree, but most probably the sensor will be 16Mpx.

Or even less. The MX-1 has a 12 Mpix. 1/1.7" sensor.

konraDarnok · 06-10-2013, 05:12 AM

Mistral75 · 06-10-2013, 05:36 AM

The pictures above are from Digital Camera Info ??????Q7??????????????? - ????info

Additional details from them:

- Announced shortly (I maintain on or around Thursday)
- Three colours: black, silver and yellow. Six grip colours and 20 additional body colours on order
- Sold in kit with 02 zoom, in double kit with the two zooms and together with the seven lenses
- New petal flower hood for using 02 zoom on Q7
- A "variation" of 01 Standard Prime is to be released at the same time
- Release date: July 5th in Japan

bluefoam · 06-10-2013, 06:00 AM

jogiba · 06-10-2013, 06:08 AM

How about an APS-C sensor in the new Q the size of the Sony NEX-3N ?

06-09-2013, 11:15 PM	#33
m8o Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI] Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,092	Originally posted by Fogel70 .... The difference between 1/2.3" and 1/1.7" is even smaller than I first thought. 26% larger is something ; better than nothing. p.s. I hope the body is very square, like the 1st Q. Rounded corners let alone something ordinary and typical compact looking would be a deal breaker. Last edited by m8o; 06-09-2013 at 11:20 PM.

06-09-2013, 11:39 PM - 2 Likes	#35
Uluru Banned Join Date: May 2010 Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,535	Jokes aside: I'd love new Q body to be super-serious compact. Make it a Nikon D4 equivalent in small sensor size: • First, much better battery. 450-500 shots per charge a minimum. • battery grip option • No shutter lag please. • 12MP, 12-bit RAW. • 10-12 fps, large buffer. • EVF option (it can be external). • superior LCD anti-glare coating. • magnesium alloy body So far the Q was an experiment. Now make it into a serious system. Sell it along with Q10, and start seriously building a lineup. At any time, there should be 2-3 Q cameras available, same as for the K-mount. Last edited by Uluru; 06-10-2013 at 02:17 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
If there is a new Q with new chip...	barondla	Pentax Q	16	09-12-2012 10:57 AM
New Sony Sensor with phase detection AF pixels on sensor!	Docrwm	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	8	08-22-2012 04:28 AM
New K3 rumour?	slip	Pentax News and Rumors	2	06-25-2012 06:10 PM
Nikon Q system using 1/2.3" sensor too = Pentax Q system?	ogl	Pentax News and Rumors	31	07-14-2011 07:47 PM
Rumour: K3D, 22 Mp, square sensor	cateto	Pentax News and Rumors	134	02-27-2009 11:45 AM

06-09-2013, 11:06 PM	#31
ElvisQ Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 74	Originally posted by arnold Can someone explain these measurements to me please? They can't possibly be in inches given the size of the sensor is around a quarter inch. Is there no figure of Xmm by Ymm?

06-09-2013, 11:10 PM	#32
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Those figures are not sensor sizes, even though they're related. Just Google search for "sensor sizes" and you'll get plenty of results, relevant charts and explanations. For example, 1/2.7" is ~5.37x4.04mm with a 6.72mm diagonal, and 1/1.8" is 7.20x5.35mm with a 9mm diagonal.

06-09-2013, 11:23 PM	#34
m8o Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI] Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,092	Originally posted by barondla I always thought it strange that the Q fisheye only covered approx 165 degrees. Most fisheyes do 180. ... Off topic but my 7mm Vivitar fish-eye is around that range and I love it. I'm not constantly ruining every picture by getting my feet in the frame this way.

06-10-2013, 02:01 AM	#36
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Well that brings it to the level off the MX-1, but wasn't the difference in image quality very small?

06-10-2013, 02:15 AM	#37
NeilGratton Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Exeter, Devon Posts: 137	My girlfriend has an MX-1, I have a Q10, and my impression having used both cameras is that the MX-1's 1/1.7" sensor+processor is significantly better than the Q10's 1/2.3". I see better dynamic range and less noise at ISO 400-800. In which case, I would very readily welcome a Q with that sensor.

06-10-2013, 02:22 AM	#38
Fogel70 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Photos: Albums Posts: 3,062	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 Well that brings it to the level off the MX-1, but wasn't the difference in image quality very small? I would expect something like 1/3 of a stop improvement. But with the small difference in size between 1/2.3" and 1/1.7" sensors, it's probably more difference in IQ between generations on the sensor, than the difference in size make. On DxOmark Q10 and MX-1 scored the same overall score. DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

06-10-2013, 03:43 AM	#39
ihasa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: West Midlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,066	Originally posted by Fogel70 I would expect something like 1/3 of a stop improvement. But with the small difference in size between 1/2.3" and 1/1.7" sensors, it's probably more difference in IQ between generations on the sensor, than the difference in size make. On DxOmark Q10 and MX-1 scored the same overall score. DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side Well the sensor will probably have moved on a generation, AND be larger. So it's double-bubble - the new sensor should be quite a bit better and Q system fans really ought to be quite pleased.

06-10-2013, 04:38 AM	#40
Philippos Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Volos - Greece Posts: 178	Originally posted by Uluru Jokes aside: I'd love new Q body to be super-serious compact. Make it a Nikon D4 equivalent in small sensor size: • First, much better battery. 450-500 shots per charge a minimum. • battery grip option • No shutter lag please. • 12MP, 12-bit RAW. • 10-12 fps, large buffer. • EVF option (it can be external). • superior LCD anti-glare coating. • magnesium alloy body So far the Q was an experiment. Now make it into a serious system. Sell it along with Q10, and start seriously building a lineup. At any time, there should be 2-3 Q cameras available, same as for the K-mount. I agree, but most probably the sensor will be 16Mpx.

06-10-2013, 05:12 AM	#41
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,526	Originally posted by Philippos I agree, but most probably the sensor will be 16Mpx. Or even less. The MX-1 has a 12 Mpix. 1/1.7" sensor.

06-10-2013, 05:12 AM	#42
konraDarnok Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Photos: Albums Posts: 969

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-10-2013, 05:36 AM	#43
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,526	The pictures above are from Digital Camera Info ??????Q7??????????????? - ????info Additional details from them: - Announced shortly (I maintain on or around Thursday) - Three colours: black, silver and yellow. Six grip colours and 20 additional body colours on order - Sold in kit with 02 zoom, in double kit with the two zooms and together with the seven lenses - New petal flower hood for using 02 zoom on Q7 - A "variation" of 01 Standard Prime is to be released at the same time - Release date: July 5th in Japan

06-10-2013, 06:00 AM	#44
bluefoam Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 115

06-10-2013, 06:08 AM	#45
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	How about an APS-C sensor in the new Q the size of the Sony NEX-3N ?