[Cynog Ap Brychan]

Is it useful a camera with interchangeable lenses but with the sensor size so small and no viewfinder?

Agreed the sensor is small, but the results are surprisingly good most of the time, especially for web use or smallish prints. I've not found the lack of a viewfinder to be a great problem for the types of situations I use it for - I have a loupe, but I rarely use it. Another fun factor is, with the adaptor, I can use all my Pentax lenses and can cover FoV equivalents of 18 mm to over 1200 mm. You either "get" the Q, as many on this forum do, or you don't (and nothing wrong with that, either). I just love using cameras of all shapes and sizes.

P.S. There is a viewfinder for the 01 standard lens, but it is rather expensive, if you can find it at all.

[grispie]

You either "get" the Q, as many on this forum do, or you don't

I think know what you mean. Personally i'd buy a compact like the rx100 e.g. or a ricoh GR.
But the Q looks stylish & fun to use. The latter being most important..

[reh321]

Is it useful a camera with interchangeable lenses but with the sensor size so small and no viewfinder?

OK, let's do a thought experiment:

You already have a Canon 300mm lens and you want to take pictures of birds sitting at your (relatively distant) bird-feeder.
(this is a description of my position last Thanksgiving)
You have two choices, each beginning with "Go to B&H".

(1) Buy a 50mp Canon 5Ds for $3699
Take a picture of the bird and then crop out the 1/4 x 1/4 sector containing the bird
(this is not a "strawman"; FF fans do advocate this as a way of taking this picture).
You now have a 3MP picture of the bird.

(2) Buy a 12MP Pentax for $229, and from China buy a EF-to-Q adapter for $30 and a hoodman clone for $15, making your total expenditure $274.
Take a picture of the bird
You now have a 12 MP picture of the bird.

[kadajawi]

OK, let's do a thought experiment:

You already have a Canon 300mm lens and you want to take pictures of birds sitting at your (relatively distant) bird-feeder.
(this is a description of my position last Thanksgiving)
You have two choices, each beginning with "Go to B&H".

(1) Buy a 50mp Canon 5Ds for $3699
Take a picture of the bird and then crop out the 1/4 x 1/4 sector containing the bird
(this is not a "strawman"; FF fans do advocate this as a way of taking this picture).
You now have a 3MP picture of the bird.

(2) Buy a 12MP Pentax for $229, and from China buy a EF-to-Q adapter for $30 and a hoodman clone for $15, making your total expenditure $274.
Take a picture of the bird
You now have a 12 MP picture of the bird.

Or buy this?
Nikon's New Coolpix P900 Has a Ridiculous 83x Zoom Range of 24-2000mm

[reh321]

comple

OK, let's do a thought experiment:

You already have a Canon 300mm lens and you want to take pictures of birds sitting at your (relatively distant) bird-feeder.
(this is a description of my position last Thanksgiving)
You have two choices, each beginning with "Go to B&H".

(1) Buy a 50mp Canon 5Ds for $3699
Take a picture of the bird and then crop out the 1/4 x 1/4 sector containing the bird
(this is not a "strawman"; FF fans do advocate this as a way of taking this picture).
You now have a 3MP picture of the bird.

(2) Buy a 12MP Pentax for $229, and from China buy a EF-to-Q adapter for $30 and a hoodman clone for $15, making your total expenditure $274.
Take a picture of the bird
You now have a 12 MP picture of the bird.

Or buy this?
Nikon's New Coolpix P900 Has a Ridiculous 83x Zoom Range of 24-2000mm

I had considered the Canon SX-50, which Nikon is just now catching up to, before I bought the Pentax Q-7. The problem was that any bridge camera basically has one purpose built into it (you'll notice that the P900 doesn't support an external flash, for example). In my case, I had a list of 7 different roles that I need my two cameras to cover. If one of those cameras is a bridge camera filling just one of the roles (Birds&Butterflies), I had a hard time filling the others with just one reasonably-priced camera.The benefit of an ILC is that it can fill various roles, depending on which lens I put on it, so I'm now using the Q-7 to fill both my B&B and pocket-able roles, at a base cost less than the Nikon P900 or the Canon SX-60.

[edri]

Thanks for the idea, but for now I do not want to buy something from Canon.
I think I'll wait a Q with 16MP, SR, WR and EVF.

OK, let's do a thought experiment:

You already have a Canon 300mm lens and you want to take pictures of birds sitting at your (relatively distant) bird-feeder.
(this is a description of my position last Thanksgiving)
You have two choices, each beginning with "Go to B&H".

(1) Buy a 50mp Canon 5Ds for $3699
Take a picture of the bird and then crop out the 1/4 x 1/4 sector containing the bird
(this is not a "strawman"; FF fans do advocate this as a way of taking this picture).
You now have a 3MP picture of the bird.

(2) Buy a 12MP Pentax for $229, and from China buy a EF-to-Q adapter for $30 and a hoodman clone for $15, making your total expenditure $274.
Take a picture of the bird
You now have a 12 MP picture of the bird.

[philbaum]

Thought experiments are fun:

A. Buy a used Nex 6 off ebay for $200. comes without cables but one can buy new 2 battery/charger kit for $24 from Amazon. 16mp aps sensor with tilt LCD and state of the art EVF. You can buy a fully electronic adapter for that Canon 300mm lens of yours for about $300 IIRC that will allow you to AF it. (not sure which model lens you have) But i have used my DA-300 lens with it and a $20 adapter, but without any AF of course. Works fine however for focusing and since the DA300 comes with a tripod mount - no problem with balance.

B. Buy a FF Sony A7 new for $1300, 24mp, current price on Amazon. Again, buy an electronic adapter for about $300 for Canon 300mm lens of yours - won't AF as fast as a native Canon body, but will work.

So thats what Pentax DSLRs are facing (and Canikon DSLRs as well). Really low prices for Sony FF. And Sony FF come in several varieties. Not to mention the new kid on the block - the backlit APS Samsung NX1.

Thats the mirrorless landscape that DSLRs are facing. They'll eat out the biggest part of the DSLR marketplace first and then chew towards the edges. And as far as i can see, Canikon and Pentax just want to pretend they don't exist. Thats why my recommendation to build a large sensor mirrorless Pentax model. Pentax cameras have a carefully thought out value to them, its why i have bought so many of them. But i don't think they can withstand the mirrorless tide.

Here's the DXO comparison if you want to see how the Q, K3 and A7 match up. Q works fine as long as one is outdoors in sunny weather. Sports ISO rating of 187 or some such.
Sony A7 versus Pentax K-3 versus Pentax Q - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark

[Kunzite]

Who cares about mirrorless. Who cares about cheap. I want the kind of products only Pentax is making.

[kadajawi]

And I want a mirrorless done properly by Pentax. One that is like a K-5, but with EVF and the lens closer to the sensor so I can adapt other lenses and save space. If the grip stands out more than the lens that's fine.

Though admittedly Samsung is getting very close, and exceed Pentax' technical abilities in some areas by several years. I do miss the in body SR. If it had that...

[Uluru]

I would like a 35 to 40 mm fixed lens, crop or FF camera. f 2.8 or even 3.2.
Something in between GR and Sony RX1. Why? Because I don't find either GR or RX1 appealing. When Pentax does it, it will be better than anyone's else. So in short, Contax T2 ot T3 resurrected. Neither Fujifilm nor Leica did a right job.



Now when small sensored compacts are passe, that new breed of cameras may be excellent device to get rid of smartphones once and for all and embark on real photography again. So far, only real photographic experience are provided by upper class DSLRs which are sometimes too clumsy to carry around. Everything else has become electronic junk.

[luftfluss]

Thought experiments are fun:

A. Buy a used Nex 6 off ebay for $200. comes without cables but one can buy new 2 battery/charger kit for $24 from Amazon. 16mp aps sensor with tilt LCD and state of the art EVF. You can buy a fully electronic adapter for that Canon 300mm lens of yours for about $300 IIRC that will allow you to AF it. (not sure which model lens you have) But i have used my DA-300 lens with it and a $20 adapter, but without any AF of course. Works fine however for focusing and since the DA300 comes with a tripod mount - no problem with balance.

B. Buy a FF Sony A7 new for $1300, 24mp, current price on Amazon. Again, buy an electronic adapter for about $300 for Canon 300mm lens of yours - won't AF as fast as a native Canon body, but will work.

So thats what Pentax DSLRs are facing (and Canikon DSLRs as well). Really low prices for Sony FF. And Sony FF come in several varieties. Not to mention the new kid on the block - the backlit APS Samsung NX1.

Thats the mirrorless landscape that DSLRs are facing. They'll eat out the biggest part of the DSLR marketplace first and then chew towards the edges. And as far as i can see, Canikon and Pentax just want to pretend they don't exist. Thats why my recommendation to build a large sensor mirrorless Pentax model. Pentax cameras have a carefully thought out value to them, its why i have bought so many of them. But i don't think they can withstand the mirrorless tide.

Here's the DXO comparison if you want to see how the Q, K3 and A7 match up. Q works fine as long as one is outdoors in sunny weather. Sports ISO rating of 187 or some such.
Sony A7 versus Pentax K-3 versus Pentax Q - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark

That's for the original Q with the 1/2.3" sensor. The Q7 and current Q-S1 has a 1/1.7" sensor, which has ~ 50% more surface area.

---------- Post added 03-04-15 at 06:27 PM ----------

I think know what you mean. Personally i'd buy a compact like the rx100 e.g. or a ricoh GR.
But the Q looks stylish & fun to use. The latter being most important..

Yes, the Q is more fun than a barrel full of monQeys. I've had my Q7 for a week, and have had a blast using K-mount, m42 mount, and Auto 110 lenses with it.

Of course, the m43 system and the Nikon 1 also support a whole bunch of non-native lenses, and you get better image quality.

I attached my DA70 to my Q, and the result is a 320mm (equivalent) lens that has a minimum focus distance of 2 feet.

Here's a pic of my cat taken with the DA70, wide open. I was about 4 ft away. ISO 800, then pushed 1/2 stop in PP:

[Bophoto]

Thought experiments are fun:

A. Buy a used Nex 6 off ebay for $200. comes without cables but one can buy new 2 battery/charger kit for $24 from Amazon. 16mp aps sensor with tilt LCD and state of the art EVF. You can buy a fully electronic adapter for that Canon 300mm lens of yours for about $300 IIRC that will allow you to AF it. (not sure which model lens you have) But i have used my DA-300 lens with it and a $20 adapter, but without any AF of course. Works fine however for focusing and since the DA300 comes with a tripod mount - no problem with balance.

B. Buy a FF Sony A7 new for $1300, 24mp, current price on Amazon. Again, buy an electronic adapter for about $300 for Canon 300mm lens of yours - won't AF as fast as a native Canon body, but will work.

So thats what Pentax DSLRs are facing (and Canikon DSLRs as well). Really low prices for Sony FF. And Sony FF come in several varieties. Not to mention the new kid on the block - the backlit APS Samsung NX1.

Thats the mirrorless landscape that DSLRs are facing. They'll eat out the biggest part of the DSLR marketplace first and then chew towards the edges. And as far as i can see, Canikon and Pentax just want to pretend they don't exist. Thats why my recommendation to build a large sensor mirrorless Pentax model. Pentax cameras have a carefully thought out value to them, its why i have bought so many of them. But i don't think they can withstand the mirrorless tide.

Here's the DXO comparison if you want to see how the Q, K3 and A7 match up. Q works fine as long as one is outdoors in sunny weather. Sports ISO rating of 187 or some such.
Sony A7 versus Pentax K-3 versus Pentax Q - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark

Q7 are the one now, but to compare Q7 with K3 and A7 are like compare a VW Polo with a expensive BMW. Q7 are a entry camera as K500.
I hope Pentax will come with a more advanced Q this year with WR, a faster processor, WiFi/Flucard and with support for the O-GPS unit.
Yes, mirrorless are growing and Sony, Samsung, Panasonic/Olympus and Fuji are taking their places at the market.
But Pentax are there and are alone with the Q format, it´s the smallest and most funny to use of the mirrorless, it has it´s place. So Pentax has now-how about mirrorless and can come with a entry APS mirrorless in 2 years. Perhaps it comes then they phase out K-S1. I guess people prefer entry level APS mirrorless instead of DSLRs.

---------- Post added 03-05-2015 at 03:42 PM ----------

I would like a 35 to 40 mm fixed lens, crop or FF camera. f 2.8 or even 3.2.
Something in between GR and Sony RX1. Why? Because I don't find either GR or RX1 appealing. When Pentax does it, it will be better than anyone's else. So in short, Contax T2 ot T3 resurrected. Neither Fujifilm nor Leica did a right job.



Now when small sensored compacts are passe, that new breed of cameras may be excellent device to get rid of smartphones once and for all and embark on real photography again. So far, only real photographic experience are provided by upper class DSLRs which are sometimes too clumsy to carry around. Everything else has become electronic junk.

I think a GR2 comes in summer and I hope it is a 24Mp sensor so (we) can do a crop as "35mm" with 15Mp. But also SR, better low light performance and perhaps a f2 lens. It can be two GR models "28" and "35"mm.

[reh321]

Or buy this?
Nikon's New Coolpix P900 Has a Ridiculous 83x Zoom Range of 24-2000mm

If you follow that link to the actual B&H listing, and then look at the specs, it turns out (*) that the new Nikon camera has a "1/2.3" sensor, so the advertised focal lengths describe behavior rather than the actual focal length of the actual lens. This illustrates another advantage of ILCs: suppose I had purchased a Canon SX-50 back around Halloween, or even spent $500 on a then-brand-new Canon SX-60 (35mm equivalent 21mm-1365mm); now, just a few months later, my investment has already been surpassed. With the Q7, if i really did care about such things, I could buy a lens that goes out to 450mm actual, and I would have an equivalence of a lens that goes out to over 2100mm (even more than the new Nikon).

(*) the smaller the sensor, the greater the crop-factor multiplier used to determine "35mm equivalence", so all "super zoom" cameras I've seen so far use a 1/2.3 sensor, and so they all have roughly the same DXO ratings.

[kadajawi]

If you follow that link to the actual B&H listing, and then look at the specs, it turns out (*) that the new Nikon camera has a "1/2.3" sensor, so the advertised focal lengths describe behavior rather than the actual focal length of the actual lens. This illustrates another advantage of ILCs: suppose I had purchased a Canon SX-50 back around Halloween, or even spent $500 on a then-brand-new Canon SX-60 (35mm equivalent 21mm-1365mm); now, just a few months later, my investment has already been surpassed. With the Q7, if i really did care about such things, I could buy a lens that goes out to 450mm actual, and I would have an equivalence of a lens that goes out to over 2100mm (even more than the new Nikon).

(*) the smaller the sensor, the greater the crop-factor multiplier used to determine "35mm equivalence", so all "super zoom" cameras I've seen so far use a 1/2.3 sensor, and so they all have roughly the same DXO ratings.

I am aware of that. But you get one camera that covers the equivalent of 24 to 2000mm. No need to change the lens. No need to carry huge lenses that cover a much larger image circle, and weren't meant for high resolutions (the sharpness required from a lens with a large image circle is pretty low, as the pixels are rather big, compared to the sharpness required from a lens for a small sensor). You also get a stabilized lens, which should enable you to get much longer exposure times... given that the sensor is small that's a really good thing (though useless for birding).

[reh321]

I think I'll wait a Q with 16MP, SR, WR and EVF.

I felt the same way last Halloween, when I first started thinking about getting a Q. But, three things happened between then and Black Friday:

(1) I invested $11 in a hoodman-clone shipped from China, and discovered, by experimenting on the Canon Elph I was using at the time, that it did do the job of giving me an effective viewfinder even in bright sunlight and without a silly head-covering

(2) after thinking about Pentax tendencies, I decided that the earliest I could reasonably expect a Q-S2 was next August, and I would end up waiting close to a year for the price to come down to what I was willing to pay

(3) although I had planned on getting a retro-looking silver-and-black one, a used like-new yellow-and-black Q7+02+06 was offered on Amazon for $281 (including shipping), and I snapped it up before someone else did.

---------- Post added 03-05-15 at 10:55 AM ----------

I am aware of that. But you get one camera that covers the equivalent of 24 to 2000mm. No need to change the lens. No need to carry huge lenses that cover a much larger image circle, and weren't meant for high resolutions (the sharpness required from a lens with a large image circle is pretty low, as the pixels are rather big, compared to the sharpness required from a lens for a small sensor). You also get a stabilized lens, which should enable you to get much longer exposure times... given that the sensor is small that's a really good thing (though useless for birding).

That lens is a power lens, and by experimenting with them, I've found that I'm much more comfortable with manual zoom, although I suppose I could eventually adjust to it. The Q7 body is stabilized, and I have yet to see it fail me, so I don't need a stabilized lens. And you forgot to talk about external flash ... that's right, the P900 doesn't do that trick.

But the bottom line is that this dreary winter has been much more fun for me using my existing Q7 to take pictures of birds visiting our backyard feeder, much more fun than sitting around wondering what the next bridge camera will be like.