1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. REMINDER

    Any content, information, or advice found on social media platforms and the wider Internet, including forums such as AP, should NOT be acted upon unless checked against a reliable, authoritative source, and re-checked, particularly where personal health is at stake. Seek professional advice/confirmation before acting on such at all times.

Pentax Q

Discussion in 'Pentax Chat' started by Roy5051, Oct 6, 2011.

  1. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    Hi R_J,

    I think the camera is aimed at people/photographers with a background in
    (D)SLR photography who are looking for something small(er), albeit really
    small:D, but that has a solid body and gives you the same capabilities as
    the current selection of (Pentax) DSLR's. I have a K-r and the menu layout
    is the same so, for me, it was an easy transition. The Prime/Kit lens is
    a remarkable lens and extremely sharp. As for the Toy lenses, I have
    only played with (and purchased) the FishEye lens which I have enjoyed
    tremendously. But, it is not perfect and my biggest mistake
    was forgetting (initially and at times) that it is only Manual Focus and, ironically,
    forgetting to focus and simply thinking that DOF would take care of focus .....
    which it didn't :(. I have played with the zoom and it is (relatively) fast
    for a kit (ish) lens: 27-81/2.8-4.5 as opposed to most kit lenses which are
    the same range but are slower at 3.5-5.6 :).

    I have lots more to say but, sadly, it's time to head off to work and try flog
    some camera gear (Canon, Fuji, Nikon and Pentax) :D

    Cheers and, BTW, I want the price lowered as well ... but not the quality ;)

    Jack
     
  2. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    Hi,

    It is interesting to see images from this camera taken in a real world situation. Shame it was the fish eye, because I would like to see more with the quality lens.

    But it looks as if it is better than I had expected considering the sensor size. I am getting a bit fed up with lugging my K-5 and grip around all day, but the image quality that I get from it really takes some beating.

    There is a lot of speculation about a FF Pentax, but that may be some way off. it would be great though to have a 24Mp FF with all of the high ISO qualities of the K-5, a large optical VF and shallow depth of field with true wide angle from a 28mm.

    But that is another story and would not solve the weight/bulk issue.

    I am starting to get interested in bird photography, as I have a friend with a Nikon D3s and all that jazz.....his bird photos are just wonderful images. Would the Q cope, I think not.

    Confused of Hingham again.....:)
     
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2011
  3. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    The Q with a Q>K adaptor and FA*600 would be an epicly ridiculous piece of kit to pull out at a hide. :D No IS could cope with that I expect (3420mm equivalent!)

    On a similar theme a V1 with F mount adaptor and a decent f2.8 70-200 could be a pretty decent set up for birds.
     
  4. johnriley1uk

    johnriley1uk Well-Known Member

    It looks like there is about to be a £100 cashback deal on the Q from tomorrow till the end of the year.
     
  5. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    That's a step in the right direction. I had a quick play with it in the newly done-up Jessops in Edinburgh on Friday, and I do like it - it's actually a bit bigger than I expected, but it really does feel like a decent bit of kit. I can't say I'm totally convinced - still not sure the image quality is worth the revised price, but it is a nice camera at a size I would be more than happy with.
     
  6. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    Hi David,

    No confusion at all ..... this camera definitely ain't for birding ... unless
    your birding is done downtown on the High street :D

    The Q and Prime/Fisheye are great for walking around shooting stuff. Although,
    I will admit it requires a different mindset than with my Tamron 18-250 :) ... that
    and I have to remember to focus my FishEye :roll eyes:

    Two(2) pics from Halloween 2011, one with the Prime - Mime on a Mobile (sadly not that sharp ... didn't use my flash) and a cropped Fisheye Shot w/ flash -- FaceBook Costume.

    CLICK HERE for the Link

    Cheers and I try post some more :)

    Jack
     
  7. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    Hi everyone,

    The options open to us now are mindblowing. There must be a camera for every concievable requirement. The Q would be just great for doing what I do now with the Canon G10, but with better results it seems and much more flexibility. The G10 dynamic range is pretty disappointing TBH. OK in average light, but.....

    My K-5 is back with JP Photographic again, having the electronic horizon recalibrated, I hope. This is the third time it has been returned for one reason or another. Getting a bit fed up with the reliability issues, so reluctant to buy into Pentax again until the Q shows its colours in that respect. I hope it does.

    Don't get me wrong though, the K-5 is by far the best camera I have ever owned and the resuts and handling are superb. I just wish it would stay working properly. :)
     
  8. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    Hi David,

    1) there is but, unfortunately and IMO, you have to go back to the MM (manual mechanical) cameras (K1000/MX/Spotmatic - F, FM - FTB - OM1, M series) when
    the person taking the picture was in charge of everything :) and, if the only thing you weren't in charge of went pear shaped, the meter you either used your knowledge to sus it out or (like me) kept one of those bits on the film box that told you the shutter speed for a particular film and the appropriate aperture
    for a particular lighting scenario :) Oh and I suppose their were those people who used separate meters -- again mostly battery dependent. Then we had the film to take the brunt of our grumblings.

    2) now this response is "just my way of thinking", I really like good
    ergomonics ie: handling, but when it comes down to crunch time (be that what it may and it's different for everyone) which is the results -- The Image. But, this is where it gets personal and we all differ and where the above line: "just my way of thinking" comes into play: First, and foremost, is content and if that's there (in my view), I'm ecstatic (and relieved) and, if it's (relatively) sharp, the composition is (relatively) decent ... I am a happy camper. I'd like perfection and so would have my parents ... but they got me and I got the pics I make :eek:

    Also, David, being in the retail side of things, I have seen/heard the same/similar compliments/complaints made about all the other manufacturers, including Leica and Hassleblad -- of which I have only sold one(1) kit of each :p. So, no matter where you go .... whilst the grass may appear a more luxourious shade of green, it has been my experience, that it's still a similar shade perhaps with more fertiliser and ya still gotta mow it :)

    So, David, it's up to you read through the above 'fertiliser', sus out my point and let us (everyone who dares read it) know what my point is?

    Cheers and it's off to (try) flog some Q's, K-r's, 60D's, D7000's, SX130's, key chains, fridge magnets and Hello Kitty maple syrup :roll eyes:


    Jack
     
  9. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    Hello jack,

    Nice to be talking to you again after so long. Yes, you are quite correct of course. It is the content and the emotion that makes an image not the hardware. I probably have just got a bit down in the mouth having spent a bomb on the K-5 to see it falling over. First one wentt back for a refund because of the 'oily sensor' and the replacement I bought next has gone back with a faulty pop up flash that died (new main motherboard replaced). It had a badly ailigned artificial horizon from new, so I asked JP to fix it when they did the flash, but they forgot, so it is back with them again.

    Hopefully, this will be the end of it and I will be a happy bunny again. I'm off to the Lake District for a week soon, so may get some winter landscapes of Windermere and Conniston Water with a bit of luck, if it doesn't rain for the week. :D:D

    Wish me luck. Please do post some more images from the Q, it is a very tempting camera.
     
  10. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    Hi David,

    I really do hope you get (or now have) your K-5 issues settled :) and then you
    can check out the Q ;). I remember traversing The Lake District when visiting
    rellies in Maryport. Sadly, this was years before my introduction to Photography
    I think I took two (2) pics in that foray and that was off relatives .... nary a pic
    of the scenery:(.

    Cheers,

    Jack
     
  11. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    The Lake District can be very dramatic in challenging weather. Windermere even in Autumn is a bit touristy. There is some truth in the old cliché "There no such thing as bad weather; there's just the wrong clothes." I am envying you already.
     
  12. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    The K-5 is still away, must chase them up tomorrow. Off to the LD in about two weeks!
    Would be a shame if I only had the K-7 with me, even though it is still a good camera.

    If I get any half worthy shots I'll post them on Flickr.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2011
  13. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    Like, Learning, I'm envious (really, actually) and, Learning, I love that cliche,
    albeit a new one to me :eek: and definitely applicable ... everywhere :D.

    Cheers,

    Jack
     
  14. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    Hi David,

    Most definitely, get on their a$$ and get your camera back for your
    trip. Mind you, at least, you've still got a good camera to take along
    should the worst occur:(.

    Due to the Q, my poor K-r, I fear, is getting the same treatment as my
    film gear got when I got my first digital camera (Canon G2) way back in
    the fall of 2002 :eek:.

    Good luck with the K-5 and Happy shooting in the LD, regardless of the gear,
    and look forward to seeing lots o' pics on Flickr :)

    Cheers,

    jack
     
  15. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    Re: K-5

    Hi,

    Got a phone call yesterday from Johnsons Photographic to say my K-5 is ready and low and behold it arrived this afternoon.

    Finally retrieved it from all of the packing and foam and put it all back together. They have updated the firmware to 1.11 and the electronic horizon is now spot on. I'm not sure if that alone fixed it or what, as the repair document just says re-calibrated and tested.

    I think I now have a definitive K-5 with all guns blazing, can't wait to give it a go. Funny how rapidly depression turns to excitement when something goes right for a change! :)

    Only slight downside is I had to restore all of my custon settings, even the date and time were zero. Funny too how that makes one think of what one really does with all the wheels and buttons when in the field.

    Glad to hear you are getting along well with the Q. It is an intriguing camera, because it does more than one would expect from such a small sensor. Perhaps Merlin is secretely working for Pentax! :D
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2011
  16. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    Re: K-5

    Hi David,

    Wooooooooooooooooooo Hooooooooooooooooooooooo :cool:. Back and running and
    ready for all the Lake District has to offer (throw at) you ;). Hope the weather is
    great and you come back tens of thousands of pics and no slanted horizons in
    the bunch :)

    Cheers,

    Jack
     
  17. DonRak

    DonRak Member

    When I saw an image of the Q I thought, 'mmm, thats looks a pretty wee thing'.
    Then I tried it out in a local camera shop and I thought, 'mmm, thats a horribly wee thing'.

    Sad to say that it is just way too small for me, but thats my own view and I'm sure there are others who think its the right size.
    I'm also not chuffed with the sensor size or price. I know the price will drop but I doubt the sensor will grow!

    My wife wants to progress from her G12 and we were out looking for models she might be interested in;I was thinking 'small' and immediately thought of the Q. She took one look at it and said it looked like a toy, was too small and "HOW MUCH?"
     
  18. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    As the actress said to the bishop. ;)

    As you'll probably have gathered I rather like the Q, but cannot see myself ever getting one. If it had the Canon S100 sensor instead, perhaps. What surprised me the most was how well built it felt - better than many other CSCs and better too than low-end DSLRs to my mind. So much potential had the sensor been a wee bit bigger...
     
  19. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    Hi Don,

    Initially, I thrashed/vilified the Pentax Q because of the small sensor and
    cost/price didn't even come into play mainly because it hadn't been made
    public as yet. Then the pricing came out and I, like you, your missus and
    hundreds, thousands, millions of others, thought "Holy Cr@p" what are they
    (Pentax) thinking? :eek:..:confused:..:( Then I got to see it and, well, it looked nice
    and felt, surprisingly, pretty good but, still, it's got that stupid, ultra tiny sensor,
    albeit CMOS. Then I got to put a memory card into the (pre-production
    demo) camera and shooting was quick and responsive and the results looked nice.
    Then when I checked out the image quality (sharpness, noise, exposure, etc...)
    was WOW.:eek: I was very impressed and impressed enough to
    put in an order one for myself and, even more suprisingly, my boss (of the camera
    store where I work) ordered one for himself (and the last camera he "purchased" was
    in late 70's (an Minolta XG-1) :eek:.

    So, my point ...if you're still awake ... is that whilst the size (sensor and/or camera) maybe small and the price maybe (a tad) high, the camera results IMO make up the
    preceding size and price.

    But, hey, that's just me ... I was quick to judge and dismiss but, I guess, I'm also
    lucky in that I got to check it out and realised my initial judgement and dismissal
    were incorrect.

    Cheers and hope you and Mrs. Don find a camera to your liking.

    Jack
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2011
  20. DonRak

    DonRak Member

    Zou - I agree, if the sensor was bigger then I think it would be a boon, but then the camera would probably be a lot bigger too.

    Jack - After trying it in the shop, albeit without sticking a card in, it seemed fast but the sensor size and body size are too small and the price is too big!
    As for a camera, I hope she finds something very soon as she's eyeing my X100 a bit too often for my liking!!!
     

Share This Page