Pentax Q.... hmmmm...

imajypsee · 06-23-2011

ttp://www.pentaxforums.com/Pentax-Q-...le-Lens-System

dcsang · 06-23-2011

I'm going to have a closer look at this.. interesting offering.. good to see Pentax still thinking outside the proverbial box:
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/pentaxQ/

Dave

shadowfox · 06-23-2011

" This is around 1/8th the size of the sensor used in Micro Four Thirds cameras"

My, my, they haven't been paying attention to what people think about smaller sensor even *without* trying it out.

jarski · 06-23-2011

looks like p&s with changeable lenses.

dcsang · 06-23-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadowfox

" This is around 1/8th the size of the sensor used in Micro Four Thirds cameras"

My, my, they haven't been paying attention to what people think about smaller sensor even *without* trying it out.

Maybe the smaller sensor "could" work if they just reduced it from 12.4 to 6MP

Anyway, looks interesting but that's about it for me

Dave

jsrockit · 06-23-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by jarski

looks like p&s with changeable lenses.

From the few small images I've seen at 6400, it appears not to have much noise. It also doesn't have an anti-aliasing filter.

While I'm not big on small sensors, if a camera that uses one can make sharp and relatively noiseless image at high ISO while maintaining a decent amount of detail...while allowing you to pick out lenses matched to that sensor, I could care less that the sensor is small.

This is an intriguing camera to me because I love small digital devices and it would not be my only camera. Looks like it could come in handy at times. But I just can't do it at $800.

Stravinsky · 06-23-2011

I am with Tom about this Pentax... I don't see a point in having a P&S sensor in a 800$ camera... design?

jsrockit · 06-23-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stravinsky

I am with Tom about this Pentax... I don't see a point in having a P&S sensor in a 800$ camera... design?

The Leica D-Lux 5 sells for $800 as well...though it has a slightly larger sensor.

segedi · 06-23-2011

Too small for prints (of the size I would want to print anyway) but perhaps the video will be OK.

RayPA · 06-23-2011

It looks like a fun camera, but I agree that it's ill conceived, especially in light of recent trends. I think the Dpreview.com comparison to the Auto 110 SLR is right on. The Auto 110 looked like a lot of fun, too, but it didn't appeal to me back when it was released for the exact same reasons this one isn't appealing to me. You would have thought that Pentax would have learned something from that venture. It doesn't take a genius to see the 110 film and small sensor analogy. Maybe they are trying to mimic Olympus' efforts.

/

CK Dexter Haven · 06-23-2011

Looks like the marketing department was driven to create the "Worlds Something-est Something," and they went for 'smallest with interchangeable lenses.' I'd rather they aimed for "World's Best Something Practical."

I can't see a huge audience for this. The kinds of people who would most value interchangeable lenses in a micro-compact camera are also the ones who know most about how a larger sensor enables more variety and control over imagemaking. I've tried the Canon S90 and the Panny LX3, and sold each quite quickly because i don't like OneSizeFitsAll DOF. They were both great cameras, for what they do. I suppose if i went to a lot of parties and needed to 'preserve' those types of memories, a little snapshooter would be more useful. But, again - why the lens mount?

What does interest me is the 'bokeh filter.' I can't believe it will actually be something i'd want to use, but i'm curious to know how it's designed and implemented. I'm imagining the effect will be something like vaseline smeared on an optical filter. A clear center spot and then maybe some gradual blurring out to the edges? Maybe as cute as a Holga effect. But, then, it only works in JPEG mode, so...another miss.

Someone said it on TheOnlinePhotographer: Why isn't someone designing a full-frame camera the size of an Olympus OM or Nikon FE2? With an equally impressive optical viewfinder? I'm shocked, with Leica's M8/9 demonstrating that there's a market for a pro-build, very small but still completely capable camera, that Nikon and Canon haven't done it. An "EOS 2" — same sensor and specs as a 5DMkII, maybe.... That's the useful sort of 'miniaturization.' Not smallness just for the sake of smallness. Okay, Pentax. You own the market on this thing. Nice.

jsrockit · 06-23-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayPA

It doesn't take a genius to see the 110 film and small sensor analogy.

IMO, small sensors outperform 110 film big time generally speaking. However, it could just be that I've never used 110 on a camera with manual controls or a nice lens.

jsrockit · 06-23-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by CK Dexter Haven

I suppose if i went to a lot of parties and needed to 'preserve' those types of memories, a little snapshooter would be more useful. But, again - why the lens mount?

Well, the intended target is most likely the toy camera types (but too expensive for them) or the type that likes small / cute electronic gadgets. Honestly, I'm sure this will be capable of very good photo quality for what it is...

RayPA · 06-23-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit

IMO, small sensors outperform 110 film big time generally speaking. However, it could just be that I've never used 110 on a camera with manual controls or a nice lens.

The comparison isn't 110 film to 1/2.3 sensors. That's a given: the sensor wins out. I was thinking more like:

110 film is to 35mm film as 1/2.3" sensor is to APS-C or MFT sensors.

/

matthewm · 06-23-2011

Ugly little thing, isn't it? Almost cute...
I just can't see the benefit of such a tiny camera when you could get something just slightly larger and have far better image quality (m4/3, NEX, etc.). And as someone else pointed out, there's always the option of the LX-5, DLUX-5.

Judging from the photo of the person holding the camera, it looks incredibly uncomfortable and cramped. Why wouldn't Pentax create something with the sensor from their K-X that is comparable in size to the NEX or GF series?

This is definitely interesting, but I'm guessing it will flop...

jsrockit · 06-23-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayPA

The comparison isn't 110 film to 1/2.3 sensors. That's a given: the sensor wins out. I was thinking more like:

110 film is to 35mm film as 1/2.3" sensor is to APS-C or MFT sensors.

/

I understand, but to me a 1/2.3" sensor is closer IQ wise to a APS-C / m4/3 sensor than 110 film was to 35mm ... in every day use. 110 was just a mess. Even a cell phone is more capable.

jsrockit · 06-23-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double Negative

Sorry, but I couldn't help laughing at the ridiculous sensor in this thing. Seriously?

The photo of the body without the lens shouldn't have been released...

They should have just shown this:

douglasf13 · 06-23-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit

The photo of the body without the lens shouldn't have been released...

They should have just shown this:

What a riot! That thing is tiny. I'd love one of those little guys...for a couple of hundred bucks.

Paddy C · 06-23-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit

Well, the intended target is most likely the toy camera types (but too expensive for them) or the type that likes small / cute electronic gadgets. Honestly, I'm sure this will be capable of very good photo quality for what it is...

That's what I was thinking. Basically, for the most part, if you participate in a photo forum like this one, the Q is not for you.

Wes Medlin · 06-23-2011

Hmm. If there's a K-mount adapter it could be fun. Let's see, normal lens is 8.5mm, and I have a 500mm K-mount mirror lens somewhere. Perfect match.

gavinlg · 06-23-2011

What I want to know is how they came up with the $800 price for this thing? Yes it's an interesting looking little camera, yes I'd love to have a play with one, yes it's so ugly it's almost cute, and yes it's tiny.

BUT,
- The sensor is seriously tiny - around 50% smaller than the sensor in the current canon g12/s95 and olympuz zx1. I'd love to know how that 50mm f1.9 equiv lens will shoot - will it have any DOF control at all?
- The price is $800. You can pre-order it right now at adorama for that. When I can buy an e-pl1 with 14-42mm kit lens AND a 20mm f1.7 pancake for the same price as that pentax, why on earth would I even consider it?

ully · 06-23-2011

My understanding is that backlit sensors have all the area for photocells because all the circuitry is on the opposite side. This leaves a lot of area for the light collectors.

Leigh Youdale · 06-23-2011

This camera is not designed for you guys.
It is designed for the young, hip, Japanese market where such an item is a desirable fashion accessory and the price and technical spec is secondary.

Zarkon · 06-23-2011

$800 is the MSRP, actual street prices will be somewhat lower. Didn't the Ricoh GXR have a $900 price for just the body module alone. That camera now sells with a lens for $600.
Lugging around a full dslr combo on a hiking trip is no fun at all. Lets see the image quality from the cam before we pass judgement on it.

gavinlg · 06-23-2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarkon

$800 is the MSRP, actual street prices will be somewhat lower. Didn't the Ricoh GXR have a $900 price for just the body module alone. That camera now sells with a lens for $600.
Lugging around a full dslr combo on a hiking trip is no fun at all. Lets see the image quality from the cam before we pass judgement on it.

Pre-orders are currently at 800