[rawr]

Leica lover Steve Huff likes the Q very much:

The Pentax Q Digital Camera Review – A pocket full of pixels! | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

Usability: excellent!
Image quality: very good!

etc

[ripit]

Even though many don't seem to like these kinds of cameras, I think its the natural evolution for them. No more front mount teleconverters that will not work as well as a dedicated lens system. Still, good idea or not, with the high price tag on the body and zoom lens, and the horrible selection of lenses, are they going to be able to sell it? Unless I am missing something there is a prime, a 3x zoom and a couple of toy lenses? You would think an interchangeable lens camera would outdo fixed lens cameras. Of course they may have other lenses planned?

[calsan]

I can't think of any other compact digital cameras with a FISHEYE lens (not marked as toy lens, btw), or the ability to do high quality extreme telephoto.
At present, digiscoping is pretty poor quality with a compact camera, because you're just taking a photo against the eyepiece of your telescope with a cheap zoom lens. This will also get much better digiscoping results than using a dslr, because it's light weight and has no mirror slap.

[joe.penn]

Glowing Q review from Steve Huff

Awww, "Come On Man!" - the Q can't possibly be any good, are you kidding me, so many people here on this forum laughed about it, it's design, it's sensor and everything about it so it can't possibly be any good



---

[ripit]

I can't think of any other compact digital cameras with a FISHEYE lens (not marked as toy lens, btw), or the ability to do high quality extreme telephoto.
At present, digiscoping is pretty poor quality with a compact camera, because you're just taking a photo against the eyepiece of your telescope with a cheap zoom lens. This will also get much better digiscoping results than using a dslr, because it's light weight and has no mirror slap.

I did forget about the fisheye. Is still seems like a rather limited lineup of lenses though. Pentax's own compact cameras range from 4x to 16x but this one gets a 3x only? Having primes avalable for I assume better image quality seems like taking advantage of interchangeable lenses, but only 1 prime available? You see enough people complaining about holes in Pentax's lens lineup (not something that has effected me but I see a lot of posts about it), but it seems the lens lineup here is one big hole? For all I know they are planning other lenses. I was not familiar with this camera till I read this post and looked to see what it was, so I know very little about it. Having interchangeable lenses as a major selling feature would be better served with a decent lens lineup, don't you think? Just a first impression observation.

[rawr]

so many people here on this forum laughed about it

The nice thing about the Huff review is the photos. They look interesting and technically OK. That's the bottom line. Is it a useful tool for helping talented photogs produce interesting images. Yes, it is.

First New York Fashion Week, now Steve Huff... Fashionistas and hipsters will soon make the Q their own.

I just dread, however, the day Terry Richardson gets ahold of one.

[Tonto]

Wish he elaborated more of the focusing otherwise an intriguing review

[Smeggypants]

Awww, "Come On Man!" - the Q can't possibly be any good, are you kidding me, so many people here on this forum laughed about it, it's design, it's sensor and everything about it so it can't possibly be any good



---

Actually Mr Huff only confirms what a lot of Q realists like myself have lareayd said ....



1. Small sensor is limited in the IQ and ISO dept
2. High ISO can get noisy after 1000
3. Price seems a tad high for what it is

The photos on Steve Huff's blog site ( as linked to by the OP ) are lovely. But that's becuase of him and his Post Pro. Steve Huff could take the same quality pics on a 180 shekel camera

[Rondec]

Actually Mr Huff only confirms what a lot of Q realists like myself have lareayd said ....



1. Small sensor is limited in the IQ and ISO dept
2. High ISO can get noisy after 1000
3. Price seems a tad high for what it is

The photos on Steve Huff's blog site ( as linked to by the OP ) are lovely. But that's becuase of him and his Post Pro. Steve Huff could take the same quality pics on a 180 shekel camera

Well, I think you skip over the things he really liked: (1) control was very intuitive and lots of external controls (2) he felt like the small sensor was worth it in order to get a camera that he would "take anywhere." Clearly if you want great high iso shooting, you have to be willing to lug around a larger sensored camera (which not everyone is willing to do, even if it would give better image quality).

Clearly anyone who is willing to take a K5 and lenses, or even a Sony 5N everywhere is not the target of the Q. The price will come down over time, so we'll see where it ends up. I would guess somewhere around 500 dollars.

[jsherman999]

Clearly anyone who is willing to take a K5 and lenses, or even a Sony 5N everywhere is not the target of the Q. The price will come down over time, so we'll see where it ends up. I would guess somewhere around 500 dollars.

If the body was $450 or below and it had a few more really good lenses, not toy lenses, it would be much better.

.

[rawr]

and it had a few more really good lenses, not toy lenses, it would be much better.

What pentax really need to do asap is release a K mount to Q adapter. That would help solve that issue.

It will be interesting to see what the results are once Lenstip, photozone, slrgear etc do some Q lens tests. I suspect the standard non-Toy lenses are probably very good optically.

After all, I'm seeing those standard Q lenses (not the Toy lenses) in eBay stores now for AUD$400 or so ... If price is any guide, they can't be that bad.

[ripit]

Good point about it being new and the price will come down. Early adopters always pay a premium. I would also agree that with a few more good lenses and an official adapter to use k mount lenses, it would be a lot more desirable. Maybe more importantly, will after market companies come out with adapters for other brand lenses like you get with 4/3 or nex? It seems a strong selling point for smaller changeable lens cameras. There are at least some k mount etc. lenses that are pretty small and could be usable. It would allow people to use their existing lenses so it makes the whole package much less expensive. You are also going to get the more exotic crowd that get a kick out of mounting a 2 pound zoom lens to a tiny box. Seeing as its new, there is plenty of time to see how things will develop.

[jsherman999]

...You are also going to get the more exotic crowd that get a kick out of mounting a 2 pound zoom lens to a tiny box.

Or this (Clinton's cool new toy.)

[Blue]

Who is steve huff? Is he related to Rice Rockwell? j/k but I couldn't resist.

[ripit]

Or this (Clinton's cool new toy.)

That's one I'll never be able to afford.

Here is one of my longer lenses. It was in my more inexperienced days and I melted the keyboard trying to get enough light on it.
big lens Photo Gallery by Richard Homeyer at pbase.com