I am also heavily considering the Q. Love small cameras. Have a Minox submini film, two Pentax A110, Pana LX2, and an Olympus EPL1. The Olympus is a nice camera but not as small as hoped for. The Pana is a beautiful camera but the controls are nowhere as easy to work as an slr.
Many say they will buy the Pana, Canon, etc highend P&S instead of the Q. I much prefer the ergonomics of a dslr type camera. Real focus rings, etc. If it costs more so be it. The Q has to have as good of image quality as the Pentax A110! If its close to the Pana I will be happy. For high ISO will pick another camera. Being able to shoot raw is a plus, along with the fast flash sync speed, and of course interchangeable lenses.
A few questions about the Q.
1. Why is the mount so big? There isn't near this extra room around our aps-c or even the 4/3 cameras. Looks like Pentax could have shrunk the lenses and camera even further.
2. Why does the fisheye only cover ~160"? Most do 180. Is there the possibility of a larger sensor later?
3. Why didn't they add connections for an external EVF (like the Pen)?
4. Will the lack of a true shutter in the body hamper our adapting other lenses too the camera? The 4/3 cameras have a shutter in the body.
5. Is the sensor size the same as the new Pentax WG-1? Playing with one of those now.
Hate it when people bash cameras based on specs! The original Kodak DSLR was $30,000 and 1mp. Pros bought it. Bet the Q can take it in a contest of image quality!
thanks
barondla