Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-04-2011, 11:01 PM   #271
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by abacus07 Quote
So are you saying that the market for the Q is not only experienced dSLR users but experienced prime users?
No. Why would you need experience with a DSLR or a prime lens? Let's not forget that all phone camera users are prime lens users. People figure out how to handle a prime lens if that's all they have.

What Q offers is the following unique set of features (the combination is unique, not each one):

1 - pocketable size, easy to carry everywhere
2 - real lenses that can be manually focused (no telescopic designs)
3 - quality build

4 - interchangeable lenses
5 - advanced flash system

1-3 is what I've been looking for for the past year or so. I kept waiting for someone to provide a compact camera with good manual focusing capability. I'd be happy with just a fixed prime lens of good quality that has close focusing capability. I see 4-5 as bonus features in the Q.

QuoteOriginally posted by abacus07 Quote
Because I see the more typical potential customer frustrated by using a prime only camera despite its compactness. Adding the zoom not only limits the portability but it's also substantially more expensive.
The Q is a niche product - that means it is designed to frustrate and vex the typical potential customer.

QuoteOriginally posted by abacus07 Quote
Do the Fuji/Sigma models sell well? Because I see them struggling for the same reasons that I mention.
The Fuji sells well - I am happy it is out of stock, otherwise I might end up getting one. For me, the weakness of the Fuji is that for its size and price I would also want interchangeable lenses. But it is a one of a kind camera and easy to like.

The Sigmas are less hot, but they have their market - there are a good number of people interested in the Foveon sensor - if their bodies would have been more stylish, I would have been interested in one too, but they look like run of the mill P&Ss and I gather that their usability is rather painful.

Actually, the fact that there is a market for quirky cameras like the Sigma DP should encourage one to look positively at the Q. I think the Q has a lot more going for it than the Sigma DP series.

Let's see what happens under Ricoh now. The Q product is less worrying than the direction that Ricoh will decide on for the Pentax brand overall.

07-05-2011, 01:54 AM   #272
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,609
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
No one has managed to produce a compact zoom lens yet, so for portability we need to use primes. Which isn't so limiting considering other cameras ship only with a fixed lens, like the Sigma DP series and the Fuji X100. At least, with the Q you get to choose between the standard prime or the other toy lenses which seem to be equally small.

Why the Q and not the NEX? Size, weight, SR/DR, and flash are some of the reasons that come to my mind. Frankly, if you can give me an even smaller compact with interchangeable lenses (or even with a good fixed prime lens), I will consider it - brand is irrelevant to me once a new mount is introduced (or none at all).

The Q compares well against the S95 at ISO 3200 - how well it compares at lower ISO I don't know, but the S95 is supposed to be the best high ISO compact, so I take that as a good sign.
I beg to differ. The NEX should be vastly superior to the Q in terms of dynamic range (my ancient Pentax DSLR with APS-C sensor ist vastly superior to a modern 1/2.3" sensor p&s, which is again vastly superior to that 1/4" or so sensor in my smartphone. Sensor size matters.

And I thought the S95 looked better, though the difference was surprisingly small. But it looked like the S95 did a better job maintaining details, the Q seemed to work harder to remove noise (I suppose the Q sensor just creates more noise than the S95). But even if it's better than the S95 (and we have only seen one photo of a prototype Q), the NEX is still in an entirely different league, and that for half the price. All you have to give up is size... the NEX is a bit bigger, but not by far.
07-05-2011, 06:59 PM   #273
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by kadajawi Quote
I beg to differ.
When you say something like that, you are expected to follow up with an explanation of what you are disagreeing about, but I don't see which part of my message you are disagreeing with. Just curious of what you meant to say with this introduction.
07-06-2011, 01:41 AM   #274
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,609
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
When you say something like that, you are expected to follow up with an explanation of what you are disagreeing about, but I don't see which part of my message you are disagreeing with. Just curious of what you meant to say with this introduction.
Oh, sorry. When I started typing I wanted to reply to your opinion that the Q compares well to the S95 (as in at least equal, though on second thought that might not have been what you were saying), and I don't think so. The S95 is better. Anyway, I guess I should have read everything before I clicked submit reply, should have started with what I said about the S95.

07-06-2011, 01:52 PM   #275
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by kadajawi Quote
Oh, sorry. When I started typing I wanted to reply to your opinion that the Q compares well to the S95 (as in at least equal, though on second thought that might not have been what you were saying), and I don't think so. The S95 is better. Anyway, I guess I should have read everything before I clicked submit reply, should have started with what I said about the S95.
Thanks for the clarification. Got it now.

On Q vs. S95, I meant that I don't see a groundbreaking difference between them and I take that as a good sign for the Q. Compared to the differences vs something like the NEX, the differences between the S95 and the Q are insignificant. There is also not much to go on for a comparison - the images we were discussing were based on Q shots that imaging-resource later pulled out at the request of Pentax, who did not want to make public sample images from a pre-production camera model.
07-06-2011, 10:08 PM   #276
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
Thanks for the clarification. Got it now.

On Q vs. S95, I meant that I don't see a groundbreaking difference between them and I take that as a good sign for the Q. Compared to the differences vs something like the NEX, the differences between the S95 and the Q are insignificant. There is also not much to go on for a comparison - the images we were discussing were based on Q shots that imaging-resource later pulled out at the request of Pentax, who did not want to make public sample images from a pre-production camera model.
And you have concluded all this "Q vs S95" story from the images of just one subject, taken at different ISO settings, which were downscaled and immediately removed from the IR website?
Good you don't work for justice department, for under the authority of your "proofs" innocent people would be sentenced to a lifetime of imprisonment.
07-06-2011, 10:14 PM   #277
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
QuoteOriginally posted by kadajawi Quote

And I thought the S95 looked better, though the difference was surprisingly small. But it looked like the S95 did a better job maintaining details, the Q seemed to work harder to remove noise (I suppose the Q sensor just creates more noise than the S95).
And you as well; where on Earth you pull out from these wild speculations from? From just one set of images which were scaled down and removed?
07-06-2011, 10:22 PM   #278
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
And you as well; where on Earth you pull out from these wild speculations from? From just one set of images which were scaled down and removed?
The phrase "I thought" clearly marks an opinion, not a clinical statement of fact, nor wild speculations. They're talking about those images, yes, but not making any hard assertions; one says "it's not much to go on" and the other says "i thought"... There are brands with the same flavor but less caffeine, you know.

07-07-2011, 01:03 AM   #279
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,609
Yup. It gives a first indication of the high ISO peformance, that's all. Surely the Pentax will improve before it reaches the market, but only the software. The sensor will stay the same I guess. And of course there are more things to a camera, such as dynamic range, white balance, colour rendition, etc., which we can't judge from these few photos. But the main problem I believe people have with the Q is the sensor size, and that mostly has an influence on the low light performance (and dynamic range).

The noise filter looked impressive for such a small camera (my Canon SX130 IS does a really bad job compared to the Q), but even without a noise filter my ancient *istDs does a better job, just because the sensor is larger (no backlit sensor, CCD, etc., but still it performs better!). Had they used a APS-C sensor, you could have K-r or K5 performance in a package that is just slightly larger. That would have been amazing. And I doubt Pentax can support 4 lens mounts at the same time.

@Laurentiu: Agreed. However the S95 has been on the market for a while now, thus probably using an older sensor. Canon will release a newer S95 one day, with a newer sensor, so it will use the same technology the Q uses. But with a larger sensor. That should give them the edge again. I don't think a 1/2.33" sensor can compete with a 1/1.6" sensor of the same generation.
07-07-2011, 08:11 AM   #280
Pentaxian
Designosophy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Northeast Philadelphia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,094
Forgive me if someone else has commented on this before, but I wonder if the third-party lens manufacturers will get on board.
07-07-2011, 10:28 AM   #281
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by kadajawi Quote
@Laurentiu: Agreed. However the S95 has been on the market for a while now, thus probably using an older sensor. Canon will release a newer S95 one day, with a newer sensor, so it will use the same technology the Q uses. But with a larger sensor. That should give them the edge again. I don't think a 1/2.33" sensor can compete with a 1/1.6" sensor of the same generation.
The S95 is still the best ranked compact sensor on dxomark. And new camera models don't always outperform old ones, so we'll have to see what happens.

I don't need the Q to have the best compact sensor out there. If it is comparable to the S95, it is good enough for me. How well its features are implemented will be more important to me - I hope they don't have QC problems with its production.
07-08-2011, 07:29 AM   #282
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 337
Who needs a camera to use SLR lenses anyway?



iPhone SLR Mount
07-08-2011, 07:42 AM   #283
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,166
QuoteOriginally posted by PhilippeG Quote
Who needs a camera to use SLR lenses anyway?



iPhone SLR Mount

I saw that a while back (peta pixel maybe)
has to be one of the most ludicrous things i've seen (not to mention you could just free lens the shot)
07-08-2011, 12:54 PM   #284
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
I saw that a while back (peta pixel maybe)
has to be one of the most ludicrous things i've seen (not to mention you could just free lens the shot)
Still, it would be fun to play with... see my 100mm f2.8 supertelephoto? The iPhone sensor is tiny; crop factor must be like, 10x or something. LOL!!!
07-11-2011, 04:05 PM   #285
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,354
If Pentax makes a set of extension tubes for the Q, it could be an amazing tool for macrophotography. Imagine the depth of field you could get shooting at f16 with extension tubes and an off -camera flash. It could be some of the most stunning macro imagery we've ever seen.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, database, digital camera, lens, pentax, pentax cameras, pentax-q, point and shoot, primes, q-mount, reviews, toy
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Come up with a mirrorless lens kit kevinschoenmakers Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 21 06-27-2011 03:22 PM
Pentax Japan full K-5 Specifications jogiba Pentax News and Rumors 2 09-21-2010 08:08 PM
Pentax K-5 and KR Specifications Adam Pentax News and Rumors 52 09-14-2010 04:46 PM
Suggestion How about adding Focus Throw to lens details in the Lens database? brecklundin Site Suggestions and Help 2 12-08-2009 05:49 PM
Looking for vintage Pentax lens Specifications pentaxographer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 08-26-2008 06:07 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:07 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top