[LaurenOE]

It starts with disappointment and then let-down.
Why?
As a loyal Pentaxian (since 1981), I have watched Pentax claw it's way up the digital mountain. I have watched Pentax go through tough times, always appearing to "just make it" through to the next body or model. The struggle with the 645 getting to market, the failed relationship with Samsung, the buyout with Hoya.

Each time I wonder about the R&D and if Pentax has the resources to make it to the next thing.

I wonder where all the new accessories are?
I wonder when there will be a new flash?
I wonder when all the little gadgets will come?
What about new lenses?

I say to myself, "Pentax is making sure they have the cash for things that really matter".

So I hoard my Pentax collection.

I look fondly at my AF 1.7 autofocus adapter.
I glance at my 1000mm reflex lens.
I play with my K telescope converter.
I use my Refconverter A to compose my pictures.
I collect F5P sync cords.

See my point?

Instead of creating something that we NEED, we are always searching eBay and selling things that haven't been made in YEARS!!!!

Ok, the GPS thingy coming is pretty cool, but what new accessories has Pentax given us lately?

Why spend money on something like the Q? Who thought that was a good idea?
It's cute, useless and expensive for what it is.

I want something small? I'll buy an Optio

I am so disappointed with Pentax over the Q.

[Northern Soul]

I think Pentax think it will make them money. That's what they want to do.

With the money they might start making some of the more esoteric items you mention again.

Lack of a TC is poor though, I'll give you that - especially given the lack of really long glass.

[LaurenOE]

I think Pentax think it will make them money. That's what they want to do.

With the money they might start making some of the more esoteric items you mention again.

Lack of a TC is poor though, I'll give you that - especially given the lack of really long glass.

A DA-TC, wow, that would be awesome!!!

I wonder if Pentax has any idea how much their used stuff continues to sell?
I wonder if Pentax has any clue the Pent - up demand as we wait patiently for things we need.

The Q. Did it take a new design team? Were additional offices set up at corporate to handle the new project? What part of manufacturing was used? Was an Optio production line taken down for the Q?

Any resources that went into the Q could have been used elsewhere.

Even if there *is* a market of the Q, what about all of us that wait for announcments that come ONCE A YEAR!?!

Does anyone at Pentax even read this forum?

[TAP]

It starts with disappointment and then let-down.
Why?
As a loyal Pentaxian (since 1981), I have watched Pentax claw it's way up the digital mountain. I have watched Pentax go through tough times, always appearing to "just make it" through to the next body or model. The struggle with the 645 getting to market, the failed relationship with Samsung, the buyout with Hoya.

Each time I wonder about the R&D and if Pentax has the resources to make it to the next thing.

I wonder where all the new accessories are?
I wonder when there will be a new flash?
I wonder when all the little gadgets will come?
What about new lenses?

I say to myself, "Pentax is making sure they have the cash for things that really matter".

So I hoard my Pentax collection.

I look fondly at my AF 1.7 autofocus adapter.
I glance at my 1000mm reflex lens.
I play with my K telescope converter.
I use my Refconverter A to compose my pictures.
I collect F5P sync cords.

See my point?

Instead of creating something that we NEED, we are always searching eBay and selling things that haven't been made in YEARS!!!!

Ok, the GPS thingy coming is pretty cool, but what new accessories has Pentax given us lately?

Why spend money on something like the Q? Who thought that was a good idea?
It's cute, useless and expensive for what it is.

I want something small? I'll buy an Optio

I am so disappointed with Pentax over the Q.

you are clearly not the target market for this camera. This camera is [for the most part] aimed at entry level enthusiasts, or perhaps photographers who are looking for something convenient and portable; those who want something more than a point and shoot but more compact than a typical SLR. Pentax is aiming to be at the forefront for this emerging trend.

I personally am not interested in the Q either, mainly because the sensor is not quite up to par with aps-c. but I'm sure this camera will appeal to many.. and hopefully give Pentax a fatter wallet to put out more of the cameras/lenses/accessories that we really want.

[wlachan]

It's cute, useless and expensive for what it is.

The Q is not cute at all, it's rather ugly, and I am the kind of person who likes boxy designs, but not this Q. I am not unhappy though because saving money is always good.

you are clearly not the target market for this camera. This camera is [for the most part] aimed at entry level enthusiasts

Then I guess it will have to be priced below the cheapest DSLRs. I would imagine they must be thinking smaller lenses, and therefore smaller sensor. To beat m4/3, they just went all the waaaay..... Would be interesting to see how well the system sells.

[Fontan]

you are clearly not the target market for this camera. This camera is [for the most part] aimed at entry level enthusiasts, or perhaps photographers who are looking for something convenient and portable; those who want something more than a point and shoot but more compact than a typical SLR. Pentax is aiming to be at the forefront for this emerging trend.

I personally am not interested in the Q either, mainly because the sensor is not quite up to par with aps-c. but I'm sure this camera will appeal to many.. and hopefully give Pentax a fatter wallet to put out more of the cameras/lenses/accessories that we really want.

How do you know that this sensor is not up to par with aps-c? I hear it is frighteningly close in terms of IQ. As long as not printed large, many here will fail the blind tests I bet.

[einstrigger]

I think Pentax is trying to access what they feel is an untapped market with the Q. But, I feel the pricing, not the camera, is the biggest blunder for something with this size & sensor. They simply don't have the cachet to market an $800 cutesy-mini-cam like say...Leica.

I too really wished Pentax would've spent R&D in other areas including:

1. New teleconverters
2. Ditching SDM for something faster and not prone to dying
3. New flash system with at least 1/250 sync
4. More support for tethered shooting
5. WR limiteds or more WR lenses (i.e. 12-24mm, 55-300mm, etc.)

[twitch]

How do you know that this sensor is not up to par with aps-c? I hear it is frighteningly close in terms of IQ. As long as not printed large, many here will fail the blind tests I bet.

Have you seen the samples? It is perhaps on par with the S95 (a P&S) although it has more aggressive noise reduction smoothing away details, but it is completely blown away by the NEX (an APS-C). This is exactly what was expected, it can't defy physics.

[ziggy7]

I hate cameras without view finders. I only one I have is a very small Samsung TL350 that I carry most of the time. It is the same width as the i-phone but about an inch shorter, and is about 1" thick. I see no need for another. I would love to have a Fuji X100 with its great OVF/EVF system, especially if they would make a version with a 24-120 equivalent zoom. Pentax could do something like that, only with a sensible menu system. Think of a Samsung NX11 with a fixed zoom. Interchangeable lenses? For that why not just buy the little Kr?

[LaurenOE]

So I went and did some research into the market that the Q is trying to break into. It appears that the Olympus Pen cameras and the Panasonic MFT (Micro 4/3rds) might be the target. Those cameras are in the same category in terms of price points and after reading around, all I can come away with is - what - a - mess. No one seems to be leading in the different formats that are around the Q's market and the Q's sensor is smaller and doesn't benefit from the MFT 20mm depth for after-market lens support. It doesn't appear that the Q will be able to use Pentax glass. Pentax has just entered into territory where they will get lost in the noise.

When I'm not using my DSLR, I take out my Optio W80. It's water proof, tough and does a pretty good job of taking up where my K7 (and soon K5 - today! yeah) leave off.

I suppose if Pentax is killing some Optios, I can understand that, as they have too many. Maybe the folks in the Q department also work in the Optio department and they are frantic to create something to combat cell phone cameras and GoPros and the like.

If they can pull it off, fine. If not, fold their divisions and create excess capacity for other Pentax lines as quickly as possible.

[LaurenOE]

On another note. I have an HTC EVO 4G and the convienience of having a camera always with me is great, however, my Optio is also in my purse/handbag as it's a *real* camera where I have technical control of what I am taking pictures of.

If Pentax was serious about breaking into some new territory, they would put Bluetooth in an Optio and integrate their camera with an iPhone or Android phone so the pictures could end up on Facebook or other social networking sites.

Getting my pictures up on Facebook are the reason why I use my cell phone camera mostly and of course having my phone with me.

The Q is the wrong solution.

[Clicker]

As a "Pentaxian" we want them to be around; to be "around" they need to be "profitable", profit=mass market=P&S segment.

As they become "profitable", they will have finances to fund other segments BUT WAIT A MINUTE what about the 645D, why did they put funds towards that before my expectations of them? Well, Pentax also needs to attract "Pro eye's" and let the market NOT FOGET Pentax has been and still can be a "Pro" supplier of photographic equipment so VOILA *645D*

Why are they running all over the map with little funds (supposed little funds)? Well, no they've "allocated" fundings towards each segement as necessary, all budgeted years in advance, well when they did their restructing most likely, there most likely was a lot of cussing ...lol but they finally settled on what we're seeing now.

Things don't happen overnight; planning through thoughtful planning needs to happen first, then the overnight decisions happen. If we all would relax sip a cola with whatever other beverage you might want as a mix, you know Pentax just might pull a few surprises coming your way.

One good thing in the forums; Pentax is being discussed, if that wasn't happening Pentax would surely fade away.

BTW Am i alone on seeing how well Pentax has improved their digital P&S offerings, i can safely say...i can now recommend to family, friends and strangers buy a Pentax point and shoot...no longer do i have to say buy a Canon.

[Nass]

Not sure if sustainable profit == mass market P&S?

• Pressure from below - cell phones with free P&S cameras
• Commoditization - lack of margin on stuff competing on price

Maybe this is why they branched off in a different direction with Q, with its USP (size) and "lots of profit/need to sell less/concentrate on quality rather than quantity" pricepoint precisely in order to assure medium-term profitability so that APS-C users will hopefully get the extras they want in the years ahead?

It's noticeable though that the APS-C segment of the camera divisions does seem to be the poorer cousin when it comes to new product development. I do wonder how the segments stack up in terms of profitability, growth etc. I would be very surprised if Pentax isn't massively aware of the fact that used Pentax stuff commands such a premium. I should imagine they curse it daily as they probably obtain much less lens revenue than they'd like? Maybe that's also why no TC, trying to maximise lens revenue?

[LaurenOE]

^Nass, I would agree that they *should* be aware of how used stuff is gobbled up.

What gets me, is there is low hanging fruit that can generate easy revenue based on incremental innovation.

Let me use an example from two other Japanese companies. Honda and Kawasaki.
Honda used to be incredibly innovative in their motorcycles. Honda then got into cars. Honda today is more of a car company than a motorcycle company. Honda motorcycles - today - tend to be expensive and attempts at redefining existing categories. Yes, Honda still makes great motorcycles, but more and more Honda motorcycle owners are feeling alienated as Honda motorcycles branch out and try and find new markets. Honda motorcycles are a casualty of the success of Honda the "company".

Kawasaki on the other hand (the only bikes I own) has kept the other divisions of Kawasaki away from the folks that make their motorcycles. Kawasaki motorcycles benefit from a method of incremental innovation where loyal customers can reasonably predict what is coming next from Kawasaki. Kawasaki introduces innovation after it proves other technologies and can spend incrementally more for something new.

Honda has tons of money to waste on crazy designs for motorcycles because of other parts of Honda. Kawasaki has only the money from their motorcycle division to innovate in their motorcycles.

I can't understand where Pentax falls in the corporate strategic vision, especially in light of other Japanese companies.

[TAP]

...No one seems to be leading in the different formats that are around the Q's market and the Q's sensor is smaller and doesn't benefit from the MFT 20mm depth for after-market lens support. It doesn't appear that the Q will be able to use Pentax glass. Pentax has just entered into territory where they will get lost in the noise.

I would have to agree with all that you have said, unless Pentax would advertise the camera at a more competitive price point. Perhaps many unsuspecting newbie photographers would consider the camera's aesthetic appeal over its tiny sensor and inflated price point. Unless Pentax can do with this sensor what they did with the IQ of the K5 [compared to other APSC], I am not entirely sure it will be very profitable/successful for them