[RonHendriks1966]

Well I do remember that everyone was thinking that the sensor for Q was to small at start. At least, I did and everyone outside the bubble. There is little real future. But still some as long as it makes profit.

[reh321]

Well I do remember that everyone was thinking that the sensor for Q was to small at start. At least, I did and everyone outside the bubble. There is little real future. But still some as long as it makes profit.

The Q-7 / Q-S1 sensor is larger than sensor on Nikon P-900 and Canon SX-50; they were quite successful and remain successful.
People are too hung-up on sensor size.

[RonHendriks1966]

But for Q never a long zoom was delivered to combat with Super zooms like p900.

[Zygonyx]

For Q, i use :

- P110 70mm f/2,8

- Navitar 50mm f/0,95

as "long fls" with 110/Q and CCTV/Q adapters, and that's not so bad

[RonHendriks1966]

For conveniënce modern people with low skills like to use auto focus.

[CarlJF]

But for Q never a long zoom was delivered to combat with Super zooms like p900.

Not only this, but a few other lenses as well. A long telephoto, a wide angle prime and a macro lens would have made the Q a much more interesting system. They should have launched these instead of the cheap toy lenses. Two or three additional key lenses would have transformed the Q line.

I think Pentax have locked the Q in some kind of vicious circle. They didn't launched more lenses because the fear they would not sell enough, but people won't buy an ILC camera if they don't find lenses allowing them to do things they couldn't do with the latest compact camera. The Q had, and still has, the potential to cover much more than it covers right now. But unfortunately, Pentax never seemed interested in exploiting much of this potential.

[lytrytyr]

Not only this, but a few other lenses as well. A long telephoto, a wide angle prime and a macro lens would have made the Q a much more interesting system.

The 08 wide zoom is perfectly fine.
A good wide-angle prime would need to be so telecentric
that it would be as large as the zoom.

The 09 macro is on the roadmap.

For long telephoto, I use the adapter with top class 90mm and 180mm K-mount lenses.
The Q sensors are unforgiving of lesser lenses.
Of course, longer term, a 200-600mm equivalent with AF would have been nice.

Two or three additional key lenses would have transformed the Q line.

Unfortunately, many Q enthusiasts were too cheap to embrace the 08.
With its molded aspheric, it's at a higher level than hybrid aspherics like the FA*24.

I think Pentax have locked the Q in some kind of vicious circle. They didn't launched more lenses because the fear they would not sell enough, but people won't buy an ILC camera if they don't find lenses allowing them to do things they couldn't do with the latest compact camera.

The 03, 06, 08, and K2Q adapter all let you do things that a compact cannot do.

The Q had, and still has, the potential to cover much more than it covers right now.

Absolutely! Imagine it with pixel-shift, for example.

But unfortunately, Pentax never seemed interested in exploiting much of this potential.

I think that a lot of the problem lies in management being confused
about what the Q system is supposed to do.

There was never a clear separation in the marketing
between the fun toy-camera aspect
and the powerful photographic capabilities of the system.

In retrospect, it was also a mistake to label the 02 kit zoom as "high performance",
since that lens really isn't better than what you get on a fixed-lens compact.

---

Last edited by lytrytyr; 09-27-2016 at 08:29 AM. Reason: Reference to the 02 added.

[Kunzite]

Let's not forget - the Q system was the product of the 2011, when Hoya was preparing Pentax for sale - we saw not a single K-mount product that year.
They did well launching a new system in those conditions; but, Q is a low effort project (compared to, let's say, a fully-fledged large sensor mirrorless system). How much of it is done in-house?

[Zygonyx]

@lytrytyr : Well, the 02 zoom is not that bad, actually the 08 wide is optically worse (CAs, insufficient resolution in angles) but much more expensive.

The 06 tele is yeah excellent.

Finally, i have found the 3 toylenses to give quite high quality results, as soon as you get enough light. Their main weaknesses being flare and CAs too (+ heavy distorsion on 04 wide).

[monochrome]

Let's not forget - the Q system was the product of the 2011, when Hoya was preparing Pentax for sale - we saw not a single K-mount product that year.
They did well launching a new system in those conditions; but, Q is a low effort project (compared to, let's say, a fully-fledged large sensor mirrorless system). How much of it is done in-house?

This might be the most insightful observation. While Q was a premium camera and some of the lenses can be considered premium lenses, Q7 and Q-S1, good as they are, aren't up to the premium label.

If Ricoh really is driving Pentax in the direction of a premium brand Q will need to be repositioned in order to continue.

[Kunzite]

I don't think they can do a true "premium" Q, the sensor is simply too small. I think they did well by going for "fun"; and I was amazed to find out how well it did in Japan (is it still the case? I guess it slowed down a bit). But for "premium", it loses on the image quality area to any other ILC - despite doing well for its sensor size.

Sure, the first Q had a very nice build and it wasn't exactly cheap, but I'm not sure we can call it a "premium" product.

L.E. OTOH, Ricoh Imaging is calling the Q-S1 "Premium Small". What do I know...

[Zygonyx]

Can't phone's sensor give premium results ?
I doubt it...
So why wouldn't Q's sensor ?

[Kunzite]

Perhaps my idea of "premium" is incorrect.

[jimr-pdx]

The GM1 is now my 'premium Q'. Much though I prefer the Q matching the K-5 functionally, I cannot disregard sensor size as a factor.
The GM1 + Lumix 14-42ii (or 12-32) and 35-100 match up closely with the Q for kit size.

As to the OT vintage mirrorless is such a fad right now, everyone's trying it. I'd really prefer Pentax to select a less crowded niche..

[reh321]

I don't think they can do a true "premium" Q, the sensor is simply too small. I think they did well by going for "fun"; and I was amazed to find out how well it did in Japan (is it still the case? I guess it slowed down a bit). But for "premium", it loses on the image quality area to any other ILC - despite doing well for its sensor size.

Sure, the first Q had a very nice build and it wasn't exactly cheap, but I'm not sure we can call it a "premium" product.

L.E. OTOH, Ricoh Imaging is calling the Q-S1 "Premium Small". What do I know...

I believe it could reasonably be a "premium" product in its category, if they would provide
* EVF
* stronger processor
* additional, KAF4-like lenses