[Kunzite]

Finding a new owner could be a good thing. I think maybe another Chinese company if interested. There is a market for all products under the ricoh-imaging company, just not the way it is currently run.

Indeed, Ricoh makes some weird decisions - for example, refusing to cancel the K-1 project despite your advice

[mee]

I'm waiting for the Pentax Q polo lens...

[lytrytyr]

I do understand people's enthusiasm for a 1/1.7 sensor and a macro lens from a DoF perspective, however. But one has to wonder whether this is too slim a market for Ricoh

Macro as discussed here is just one of the reasons the Q makes a whole lot of sense.
The great potential for the system lies in the idea of a "miniature camera",
which is what 35mm FF was initially, back when the Leica was introduced.
Less IQ than the mainstream systems of the time (Speed Graphic, roll film, etc.),
but with lenses that max out at much wider apertures.
Comparing the Q with MFT now
is like comparing 35mm with roll film in 1930s technology.

[Simen1]

The macro makes sense, but IMO the Q cameras should be even smaller and have an EVF and Wifi + app.

[krazykat]

I will buy this lens (and any updated Q body) the minute it hits the stores, if it does. I love my Q7 & Q-S1.

I can help but think that a 20mp monochrome would be a hit, macro or not.

[Na Horuk]

Well that's interesting!
Especially if it means a new Q model, one with a newer sensor and maybe even better AF. CD AF is not perfect for macro lenses. Would really need a focus limiter.
Really cool news

[Uluru]

The Macro lens for Q has been constructed long ago, even Pentax managers talked about it, but the Q project was put on ice ~2 yrs ago, which is obvious from their changed strategy back then. Even 645 is put on ice after the 645Z release.

It is a fact now Ricoh Imaging cannot sit on so many eggs at the same time. Because Q is not hi-added value product, it is off the Ricoh's menu. It is better to focus on K-mount and the GR, which users demand, and wish to pay for.

To put "hi-added value product" it in everyday words, it means: it is all about hi-end imaging now, no joking around.

(They may give the Q to somebody else to continue playing with it.)

[adjutant]

I can imagine my Q-S1 with a tiny macro lens being a great complement to my DSLR.

If you haven't already, look at how this guy rigged his Q for macro, absolutely amazing. The MaQro Qlub! - Page 6 - PentaxForums.com

[edri]

As there are also significant advances for small smartphones sensors, the Q system can be "hi-added value product" if the cameras would have a viewfinder, in body stabilization, WR protection and obviously two or three WR lenses.

[lytrytyr]

Q is not hi-added value product

Really?

FYI, the 08 wide-angle lens for the Q system has a solid glass aspherical lens element,
where the FA*24 made do with a laminated hybrid.

[mike.hiran]

I do hope this lens makes it. I have been waiting for it for a long time.

It has to be easier than using my lens spacers for macro.

And I also hope they make more than just 1,000 pieces. I am not looking for collector prices!

No kidding about ease of use, but also have to think about the size of a apsc or bigger macro lens along with the adapter. Those two things are easily the size of my whole Q kit!

[Na Horuk]

As there are also significant advances for small smartphones sensors, the Q system can be "hi-added value product" if the cameras would have a viewfinder, in body stabilization, WR protection and obviously two or three WR lenses.

But at that point you are competing with Sony, Oly, Fuji cameras that are fairly compact and have great quality - and a high price tag. I think Q should be the size of a P&S, but for serious enthusiasts and professionals. For those times you don't want to lug around a DSLR, or as a tiny backup/auxiliary. For example, you can have K-1 and 24-75mm and 50mm f1.8, and then the Q with telephoto macro for those rare times you need that.
The Q can't replace a DSLR or even a m43 system and it is probably a bad idea to compete with those well-established systems directly.

Basically, the Q should be for People who have KP or K-1 and want to get a Fuji or Oly because its smaller, but don't really want to invest in a whole new, expensive system. Better get a Q, throw in a K adapter and you're set.

[reh321]

....
Because Q is not hi-added value product, it is off the Ricoh's menu. It is better to focus on K-mount and the GR, which users demand, and wish to pay for....

Depends on which users you are talking about.

Roughly ten years ago I used a {Canon} Compact Camera for nine months; at the end of that time, I gave it to my daughter, who had damaged her camera, because I needed an excuse, any excuse, to unload it. Within a couple of months I had learned my lesson that a compact camera is a lousy compromise for me.

I would not have purchased a GR last year.
I will not purchase a GR this year.
I cannot imagine myself purchasing a GR in any future year.

Last year I was committed to purchasing a Q-S2 {Q-S1 + EVF} within six months of its release.
If they released an updated "Q" with EVF, I would still expect to purchase it within six months
In any future year, I would still expect to purchase an updated "Q' with EVF.

I don't know what Pentax equipment you currently use nor whether you would buy Pentax equipment in the future.

---------- Post added 04-24-17 at 11:25 AM ----------

But at that point you are competing with Sony, Oly, Fuji cameras that are fairly compact and have great quality - and a high price tag. I think Q should be the size of a P&S, but for serious enthusiasts and professionals. For those times you don't want to lug around a DSLR, or as a tiny backup/auxiliary. For example, you can have K-1 and 24-75mm and 50mm f1.8, and then the Q with telephoto macro for those rare times you need that.
The Q can't replace a DSLR or even a m43 system and it is probably a bad idea to compete with those well-established systems directly.

Basically, the Q should be for People who have KP or K-1 and want to get a Fuji or Oly because its smaller, but don't really want to invest in a whole new, expensive system. Better get a Q, throw in a K adapter and you're set.

You are 100% correct. There are various "under served" niches around which an ILC with properly designed auxiliary equipment can serve. People need to stop thinking of the "Q" as competing with equipment that looks most like it.

[thibs]

Then do not ever try a GR, you risk imminent conversion