Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax Q

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 23, 2013, 12:22 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Rodney9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yeronga, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3,518
Default

Quote:
Eccentric me has no need for his every camera to be capable of ne plus ultra IQ, the better to produce billboard-size prints or to pixel-peep all my image captures. I admit it's a weakness, but likability, design personality and fun potential can count for a lot.I like what I see in the Q7 so far. I'm anxious to see how it stacks up in reviews.
I like this quote from a posting at
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/06...SI-CMOS-sensor

I too like that black and silver one, Pentax Australia don't mention the Q7 on their website, Pentax America and B&H are both going to email me when stock is available.
__________________

My Flickr Photos

Pentax K-5 K20D K100D
Pentax DA 55-300mm 4-5.8 ED / Pentax M 200mm F4 / Pentax Tak K 135mm 2.5 / Pentax M 100mm F4 Macro / Tamron SP AF90mm 2.8 Di Macro / Pentax M 1.7 50mm / Pentax M 2.8 28mm

Last edited by Rodney9; Jun 23, 2013 at 12:58 AM.
Rodney9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 5:32 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Rodney9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yeronga, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3,518
Default

Now I'm looking at the Ricoh Gr at least it's a cousin of Pentax and it is truly pocketable
.
https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&r...48293060,d.aGc

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2013/0...or-gr-arrives/
__________________

My Flickr Photos

Pentax K-5 K20D K100D
Pentax DA 55-300mm 4-5.8 ED / Pentax M 200mm F4 / Pentax Tak K 135mm 2.5 / Pentax M 100mm F4 Macro / Tamron SP AF90mm 2.8 Di Macro / Pentax M 1.7 50mm / Pentax M 2.8 28mm

Last edited by Rodney9; Jun 23, 2013 at 3:34 PM.
Rodney9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 5:16 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Rodney9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yeronga, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3,518
Default

Oh it's hard to decide, I can get the original Q for $260 on Amazon now or wait a few months for the Q7 at $600
Or the GR5 at $800.
If I get the Q, I guess a small case on my belt might work.
__________________

My Flickr Photos

Pentax K-5 K20D K100D
Pentax DA 55-300mm 4-5.8 ED / Pentax M 200mm F4 / Pentax Tak K 135mm 2.5 / Pentax M 100mm F4 Macro / Tamron SP AF90mm 2.8 Di Macro / Pentax M 1.7 50mm / Pentax M 2.8 28mm
Rodney9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 7:23 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

Hi Rodney,

It's weird -- despite very little difference in IQ between the 1/2.3" BSI CMOS sensor of the Q and the 1/1.63" CCD sensor of the Panasonic LX5, both from sample images and DXOMark sensor scores, a whole lot of people still suggest that the Q produced "P&S" IQ, while the larger sensored compacts gave "enthusiast class compact" IQ, which just has to be much better because the sensor is a little over 50% larger.

In reality, this really doesn't seem to be true. IMO, the 1/1.7" BSI CMOS as well as the previously used 10MP 1/1.7" and 1/1.63" CCDs seem more like a sideways move in IQ than a significant upgrade. See the attached screen grabs comparing the scores from the Q, Q10 (essentially same sensor), MX1, LX7 (BSI CMOS 12MP), LX5, and G12 (CCD 10MP).

The differences basically range from "not noticeable" to "barely noticeable", and the Q actually beats some of the larger sensors in some categories.

Looking at some of the posted image comparisons from different sites and Ireally have to strain to see differences, and it's worth it to point out that a lot of people see what they expect to see, and they expect to see the larger sensor create better quality files. . .perception is reality. . .but it shouldn't be.

I find it strange that the far superior build quality of the Q is not usually mentioned when comparing it to other cameras, and is largely ignored when reviewers were complaining about price. I have no complaints about the Stainless Steel chassis and polycarbonate shell that Pentax uses for the Q10, Q7, andmost of their DSLRs, but there's really something about the magnesium body that shouts quality, and even though this doesn't show up in the images the camera will produce, I appreciate it. A magnesium body on a DSLR alone is worth (to me) at least a couple of hundred $$s. The message sent by the reviewers and the public was that clearly better build quality was not appreciated, and price point was obviously more important. . . too bad IMO.

As far as K2Q adapters goes, there are quite a few mfgs who have made them, but in OZ, I think that the KIWIPhoto is probably the easiest inexpensive one to get. I don't have one, so I cant attest to how good/bad they might be. I have a JR from "jinfinance" on ebay from China, and it's pretty good, but the anodized finish on the inside is prone to creating flare, so needs to be painted with flat black for best results -- this is true of all of the inexpensive 3rd party adapters I've heard of. I'm not sure if JR ships to OZ. If you have and DA or FA-J lenses, you need to get one with an aperture ring on the adapter.

The Pentax OEM K2Q adapter is easily the best quality and featured of all the adapters. It has a long throw aperture ring, is well flocked and stepped internally so flare will not be a problem, and includes a leaf shutter in the adapter. It is pricey though, but is on par in price with some adapters that don't have the features. . . like the Novoflex and Raquaal -- both of which are really nicely made, but very overpriced for a basic adapter.

The two disadvantages of the inexpensive adapters are: flimsy tripod mount if any, very little travel in the aperture ring if it has one, possible "jello" effect because they use the electronic shutter exclusively. This last problem is actually not too much of a problem, unless you shoot moving subjects. Straight lines can become skewed and distorted. look up "jello effect" or "rolling shutter effect" if you're curious. The electronic shutter also has another problem if you want to shoot with a flash (like handheld macro outdoors) The electronic shutter is liimited to 1/13 sec sync while the Pentax adapter with the leaf shutter will sync to 1/1000 sec with the popup and 1/250 with external flashes.

Scott

When comparing these scores, keep in mind DXOMark's own threshold levels as stated on their site:

Portrait (color depth): "differences below 1 bit are barely noticeable."
Landscape (DR): "differences below 0.5 EV usually not noticeable."
Sports (signal to noise ratio): difference in low-light ISO of 25% represents 1/3 EV and is only slightly noticeable.
Attached Images
   
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 9:14 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
penolta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California USA
Posts: 5,206
Default

One of the problems with reviews is that the reviewers, for the most part, do not spend enough time with cameras different from their own to really get familiar with them, especially when a new one is so different from what they are used to using. The experience Scott and Harriet have developed with the camera clearly shows that one has to really work with it to get the most out of it. Even though most of the reviews were pre-upgrades, the biases of those reviewers were evident in their writings, and I don't feel many of them gave the camera a fair shake. Even though I had hardly used mine when I first got one, I felt I was able to see its potential and went ahead and developed the system, since the cost was so relatively low, with a second body, four lenses and a few accessories. The whole thing cost less than many single non-entry level SLRs do, and stores in a light weight 10 X 13 X 5 1/2" hard case.
__________________
.
.
If life brings you lemons, you can make lemonade.
penolta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 10:25 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Rodney9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yeronga, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3,518
Default

Thanks everyone, I've ordered the original Q from B&H at $299, even with delivery and exchange that's a excellent price compared to here.

4 to 6 days I look forward to posting my first shots, if they are good enough. This forum , slight differences, the build quality (one of the comments said it was built like a tank) and of course the price finally decided me. Just have to find a small case to go on a belt and also the converter, which Lowe case did you get Harriet? .

Rodney
__________________

My Flickr Photos

Pentax K-5 K20D K100D
Pentax DA 55-300mm 4-5.8 ED / Pentax M 200mm F4 / Pentax Tak K 135mm 2.5 / Pentax M 100mm F4 Macro / Tamron SP AF90mm 2.8 Di Macro / Pentax M 1.7 50mm / Pentax M 2.8 28mm

Last edited by Rodney9; Jun 23, 2013 at 10:36 PM.
Rodney9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 11:49 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

I have the Lowepro Dashpoint 20. It will hold the Q with the 02 lens mounted on it. It's a bit of a tight fit, but I figured that was OK. The main disadvantage is that it only has one small "pocket" - just big enough for an extra SD card. I don't usually need to carry an extra card and a battery can fit into it sort-of, what I used. Having an extra battery is a very good idea, and they aren't very expensive compared to extra dSLR batteries (like under $10 US - I got a pack of 3 for $5.00 on Amazon, they seem to work all right though they are lower MaH than the OEM battery).

I hope you will enjoy your camera as much as I do (and that's a good price considering the shipping charges you probably paid). Post some photos!
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 1:03 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
Rodney9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yeronga, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3,518
Default

This the only convertor I can find -

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B006NQ...=AG1FKBNAQKSKJ

Also do you think one of those gorilapod's would suit.

Any opinions ?
__________________

My Flickr Photos

Pentax K-5 K20D K100D
Pentax DA 55-300mm 4-5.8 ED / Pentax M 200mm F4 / Pentax Tak K 135mm 2.5 / Pentax M 100mm F4 Macro / Tamron SP AF90mm 2.8 Di Macro / Pentax M 1.7 50mm / Pentax M 2.8 28mm

Last edited by Rodney9; Jun 24, 2013 at 3:34 AM.
Rodney9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 1:36 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
penolta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California USA
Posts: 5,206
Default

Fotodiox converters are well built and well regarded by users. There is (was?) a Fotodiox lens mount adapter PK P/Q and a PK(AF) P/Q which cost a few dollars more, but I don't see either one on Amazon at the moment and I couldn't find any Q adapters at all on the 20 pages of adapters on their web site; this one is PK(A) P/Q and appears to be new and a replacement for the older ones with less misleading labelling. These inexpensive "A" or "AF" adapters have an internal diaphragm linkage that allows you to either lock the diaphragm in an open position or unlock it so you can adjust the lens diaphragm manually, but there are no electrical contacts so they do not offer autofocus, and you have to use manual mode. I have read somewhere that if you have a motorized lens with internal autofocus and you turn off the cameras autofocus as you do with a dslr with direct mount that it might also work with a lens adapter, but I haven't tried that (or know anyone who has) with either a Sony or Pentax mount lens on either the Q or a Nex camera.
__________________
.
.
If life brings you lemons, you can make lemonade.

Last edited by penolta; Jun 24, 2013 at 1:39 PM.
penolta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 24, 2013, 10:46 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

My gorillapod works much better with the Q than it did with the K5, where I could use it wrapped around something but not as a table-top. It works fine with the Q, even with the Viv Series One 105 macro, which is quite heavy. I've already used it more than I have in the past year with the K5. I have an old Manfrotto tabletop tripod that Dan had bought for me when I got an FZ30. I've put the tripod head from it on the gorillapod - it works OK but is still a bit undersized (makes me remember all of the things one can hate about a poor or undersized ballhead). The Q has resurrected the gorillapod in my estimation.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:57 PM.