Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-01-2013, 01:38 PM   #31
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 12,493
QuoteOriginally posted by krebsy75 Quote
Pentax will have to ditch its proprietary OS in order for the Q to really catch on.
Bizarre.

What other compacts from other companies can you point to?

If you thought the Galaxy camera has caught on, think again.

10-01-2013, 02:05 PM   #32
Veteran Member
krebsy75's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chester County, Pa.
Posts: 804
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
Bizarre.

What other compacts from other companies can you point to?

If you thought the Galaxy camera has caught on, think again.
It doesn't matter what the other "companies" are doing. If Pentax wants to grow market share they are going to have to innovate and be first.

Forget about running Android on a Q. Perhaps I got ahead of myself with that one. Let's start with wi-fi capability to make it easy for users to share photos, etc. I'm thinking of functionality like the new Canon 70D and 6D.

I'm not a point and shoot expert by any means. Nor do I own a Q. I'm just trying to understand what Pentax intends to do with this product. It's taking resources away from products I really care about (APS-C and FF).
10-01-2013, 03:09 PM   #33
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 198
QuoteOriginally posted by dcshooter Quote
So I take it, if produced by Pentax, such a camera would have to be called the "R."
Behold, the RRRicoh GRRRRR!
10-01-2013, 03:52 PM   #34
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by dcshooter Quote
4K video for which that the chintzy tiny lens on the side of that phone is utterly unsuited, as is the tiny sensor behind it.

Camera phones are always compromises, even the Galaxy Camera, the camera components of which are standard low-end P+S gear. phones have become throw-away items that no one will hold onto long enough to make the purchase of an expensive attached camera seem reasonable. In such an environment, MP counts become even more meaningless than they did during the P+S wars.
Screen capture from a Samsung Galaxy Note 3 4K video shot through a dirty hotel window shows it has more detail than smartphone 1080p videos :
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3674/9690381510_ae27280abe_o.jpg

The 41MP Nokia smartphones take better images than many P&S cameras.
Flickr Search: Nokia 808

10-02-2013, 05:18 AM   #35
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by dcshooter Quote
The 4k "video" produced by the Galaxy Note 3 is a gelatinous, laggy mess. I've seen the video from which that capture comes. And it still loses out in detail to a dedicated camera system with decent lenses shooting 1080p. Another illustration that camera phones are a zero sum game. You can only shoe-horn so much into a phone running a general-purpose OS without cost getting ridiculously out of control. And zero DOF control goes without saying.



$750 at launch for a bulky phone running an already obsolete operating system and doesn't actually produce 41mp images but rather really nice looking 5mp ones. Still a nice option for someone who wants to minimize their number of devices, but filling a completely different niche from an interchangeable-lens camera system like the Q and in no way supporting the proposition that the Q should be more phone-like.
The bottom line is 4K video shows more detail than 1080p and in 2015 when 4K goes mainstream 4K video in smartphones will be much better. The 41MP Nokia 1020 smartphone with Windows Phone 8 is not so bulky and has the same quality as the 808.
Flickr Search: Nokia 1020
Fashion photography with the 41MP Nokia Lumia 1020: Digital Photography Review
I have the Q but never carry it every were I go like my Verizon HTC DNA smartphone that shoots stills and videos good enough for my use like the grand kids at the park etc. BTW the 808 and 1020 do shoot 41MP stills.
41MP 808 7152 x 5368 px image
41MP 1020 7672 x 4276 px image

Last edited by jogiba; 10-02-2013 at 04:56 PM.
10-02-2013, 01:29 PM - 1 Like   #36
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Vylen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,260
QuoteOriginally posted by krebsy75 Quote
It's taking resources away from products I really care about (APS-C and FF).
Statements like this really bug me. It's not like as if Pentax/Ricoh have so few employees that they can't work on multiple projects. It's also not realistic to throw as many people as you can on a single project. That's not how product/service companies work.

10-02-2013, 09:18 PM   #37
Pentaxian
MegaPower's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hong Kong / Irvine, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 587
QuoteOriginally posted by minahasa Quote
I remember when I had a very tiny Panasonic cellphone


This one??
I got this too.
One of the camera I like the most.

Last edited by MegaPower; 10-02-2013 at 09:35 PM.
10-03-2013, 08:42 AM   #38
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by dcshooter Quote
And the bottom line is that current 4k video on phones is an unusable mess. There is a reason that this "feature" is disabled in the US version of the phone.Neither the sensor nor the processor is up to the task, and phones probably still won't be up to the task four years from now. 4k video is a whopping 12mp, well within what P+S cameras have been doing for years. Transitioning already existing detail capabilities to an unusably kludged video system does nothing to speak for cell phones as opposed to dedicated camera systems. People still use DSLRs as opposed to P+S or camera phones because "more detailed" images of what a 3mm diameter lens can give you will never be as good as what a larger lens can providegive you. And As processing power improves, every camera will eventually have 4k video, just as pretty much every camera now has 1080, and larger-sensored cameras, specialized image processors, and superior lenses will offer better video. Wouldn't you rather be getting that 4k video through an excellent Q 01 Prime (or, for that matter, a beautiful vintage Kern 8mm lens - the Q after all can adapt just about any lens) than through a tiny cell phone lens?


$200, after cell plan subsidy, so really pushing $1k, and still laggy as hell (google "lag of death"). Also while the latter apparently has the ability to export 32MP (NOT 41MP) files, the default is still oversampled 5MP. The full size "raw" files are not pixel binned (the real interesting technology in the phone) and are nothing to write home about when pixel peeped.

In any case, I fail to see what bearing any of this has on the design of a subminiature Interchangeable lens camera system, which is a completely different animal. Even for the smallest system available, protruding lenses make the Q much less pocketable than a camera phone. It is clearly designed to minimize size, while retaining the advantages in quality and capability offered by interchangeable prime lenses and true zooms. Despite the colors, this system is targeted at buyers making a conscious decision to buy a serious camera, not a phone that happens to also be a capable point and shoot.

The Nokia and Samsung offerings are logically aimed at the casual user - the one who previously kept a small P+S in his or her purse or pocket to take snapshots when the need arose. For them, the elimination of a device is worth it because there is little to no tradeoff. But for those who want the abilities of an ILC, the equation is different: the addition of phone features takes away from the camera by adding expense, bloat, and lag, and artificially shortening the lifespan of the device (what would be the point of carrying around two phones when you want to upgrade your phone but keep your current camera?)
Whatever floats your boat, I have the Q but I never carry it with me because my Verizon HTC Droid DNA with 5" 1080p display has about the same quality and I always carry it with me. I use my Q with full frame lenses like my 105mm Macro because of the 5.5x crop factor for super close ups.

10-08-2013, 09:44 AM   #39
Veteran Member
minahasa's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Minahasa, North Celebes (Sulawesi)
Photos: Albums
Posts: 585
QuoteOriginally posted by MegaPower Quote

This one??
I got this too.
One of the camera I like the most.
Oh and I thought I'm the only one lovin' than camera
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!
gm1, ilc, october, panasonic, release, world
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
To Q today or not to Q, that is the Question nvarner Pentax Q 6 05-26-2013 04:37 AM
Is the Q system 06 lens design a first? barondla Pentax Q 2 12-20-2012 09:28 AM
pentax Q lens 1, not available anymore? pentaxinator Pentax Q 9 09-11-2012 05:51 AM
Smallest Tiltable Flash for Q Tonto Pentax Q 7 02-22-2012 06:18 PM
Nikon Q system using 1/2.3" sensor too = Pentax Q system? ogl Pentax News and Rumors 31 07-14-2011 07:47 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:38 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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