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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 19, 2013, 3:42 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default Still A Happy Camper

In spite of the fact I struggle with the Q-DA200 combination, I'm still having a blast with the camera. I've been shooting almost every day since I got the it (them). Here's some of my pictures from the past 2 weeks:

A recent event I attended was held in a new building that was just occupied. I thought this lounge looked like a wonderful place to hang out in (a two frame stitched panorama taken with the 01 lens):



A friend of mine looked at my previous pictures of the Q and thought it looked like a big camera. I couldn't let that pass, so I took this picture (both the cutting board and the ruler are in inches).



I guess I'm into looking for Q-sized things. I thought this pizza delivery "truck" fit into that category:



I've really struggled with getting the focus right using the DA200. I spent a bit of time both with and without a tripod, trying to get the focus right using the Hoodman Loupe. I had more success than I had in the past, but the "keeper" ratio was still lower than I'm used to. Here's a couple that I thought were pretty good:





My front porch has a grape vine growing along it. It's a subject I use quite often.





I still need to practice more, but I wasn't as disappointed as I had been before.

As I was coming walking into the house Monday I realized I hadn't taken any pictures. So I put the 06 lens on the camera and took yet another picture of the grapevine. I think this is one of my better new leaf pictures, there's almost a 3D feel to it.



Yesterday found me shooting a very humble subject - dandelions. I haven't processed the seed head photos yet, but here's a couple of the flower.

06 lens:



Then with the Pentax K to Q adapter and the Vivitar Series One 105 macro. I was also using a gorillapod for a tripod - that works much better with the Q than with the K5, when the legs would collapse. The Viv is a heavy lens and I think it's as heavy as the 'pod would handle when used as a tabletop, instead of wrapped around something. I also discovered what I didn't like about the small, undersized ballheads - it sags under the weight of the Viv, very hard to adjust.





I have no trouble focusing the Q using the Hoodman and the 105 macro lens, perhaps all the practice with the 200 is paying off with the macro, too.

I still think that the Q is a very nice, probably under-rated camera, and so much fun. It won't replace the K5 for everything, but I'm finding that it is far more capable than I had expected when I first got it.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 20, 2013, 5:07 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

Hi Harriet,

Great series illustrating the versatility of the Q system from super tele through normal to macro!

Have you tried your DA 35 Macro (if you still have it) with the Q yet? It should give you a very lightweight macro setup even though the working distance will be very short at MFD. Luckily, the crop advantage of the Q would allow greater working distances for comparable shots to a DSLR at MFD when it comes to subject relative to image frame, so you'd still have some flexibility for lighting options.

I picked up an inexpensive A 50 f2.8 Macro (1:2) to get a lighter weight macro alternative with the Q, but haven't used it much yet. I have been using a K-5 with a Sigma EX 180 f3.5 Macro with an AFA, and the weight difference is staggering.

Using a loupe makes a huge difference for manual focusing with the Q for me. I don't mind the added bulk as a comparable DSLR kit would always be bulkier -- and a lot heavier, and I always carry the loupe for chimping anyway. Many can't see the point since it makes the camera that much larger, but with adapted lenses, the versatility of the crop factor is the point, not considerations for compactness, IMO.

MF with the Q is more art than science as the low resolution LCD is the greatest handicap, IMO. I was disappointed that they did not upgrade the LCD on the Q7, and would have passed over the lower crop factor with the larger sensor for greater ease in MF if it would have had the 960,000 dot LCD.

In any case. I'm very happy that you're "getting" the advantages of the Q system, as I thought that a photographer of your caliber might. The amount of fun that can be had in the discovery of the system's capabilities when you add some good DSLR lenses and the adapter is hard to describe to those who haven't really given it a chance.

Scott
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2013, 11:10 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

Thanks for reminding me of the DA35. I somehow never think about it, when I think macro I usually grab the Viv, and if I'm thinking normal lens I grab the FA 31. But I do still have and use the 35 macro, must try that next. I wonder what it would be like to use the 35 macro with the 1.7 AFA? That would give you more working distance for the magnification than what you would otherwise get with it (or get you greater magnification). The combination would probably still be lighter than the Viv. I'll have to try it.

I've been having such fun taking pictures (just posted some in the bi-weekly challenge of some signs, taken with the 06 lens). I might even learn how to take a reasonable street shot (not one of the areas I'm very good at). For some reason, I find its easier to experiment and I feel more creative with it. Don't ask me to explain it, I can't. But I don't think I would have looked at my desk this afternoon, covered with Chicago screws, and grabbed the K5 like I did the Q. The pictures are probably funny only to me, but I enjoyed them.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2013, 1:08 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Rodney9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yeronga, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3,518
Default

I have been researching a walk about camera for a while as we all know the weight and size of your dslr means it quite often gets left a home. The Q would help me stay loyal to Pentax and use my lenses, however it doesn't get the best reviews so I shall look forward to seeing more of your shots and your thoughts on the camera.
__________________

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 21, 2013, 6:05 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

Hi Rodney,

When considering Q reviews online, I think that it's important to note the dates of the reviews posted. Firmware was updated first on Nov 2, 2011 for both the body and AF lenses, and there was a noticeable difference in AF speed and accuracy. Further updates came for the body in Oct '12 and April '13, and each brought another noticeable upgrade in AF speed. With Q system AF lenses, after the FW updates, it's actually like shooting a different camera from a performance standpoint.

Early opinions were also somewhat skewed because of the high introductory price, so that needs to be considered -- some reviewers seemed to almost be insulted by the original price, and their reviews reflected this, IMO. This is obviously not a problem at this point, and that should be taken into account.

The last point I'll make is that adapted lenses are barely mentioned in most reviews, and the way the Q changes the character of SLR lenses so totally with its 5.6x crop factor needs to be experienced to be believed. The most common place to go with adapted lenses is to jump right to the longest lens, but it's fascinating to try fast lenses of any FL with the Q. A 50mm f1.4 gives you the FOV Equivalence of a 280mm f1.4 on a 35mm body, or a 180mm f1.4 lens on an APS-C body. (edit) Oh yeah -- and it focuses to 1.5 feet! If you don't own one -- you can pick up an A or M 50 f2 for @ $20. . . and still have a super compact, super fast long tele.

I prefer using the APS-C crop factor of 3.6x since I've been shooting this format for the past 8 years, and I haven't really related to 35mm FOV for quite a long time. Please note that I'm not referring to Image Equivalence here because I think this is a flawed concept, especially when comparing format sizes that are so different.

It's not a camera for everyone, and shooting super tele with adapted lenses is challenging, but I'm a fan of the concept and the execution with the original Q.

Here are links to some reviews that you might not have seen.

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/0...ull-of-pixels/

http://wouter28mm.wordpress.com/2011...q-impressions/

This last one was cut and pasted into PF by the author. This is the only one I know of that was written after the first FW update, and also includes using a 3rd party K to Q adapter.

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/p...er-review.html

Kerrick James, a pro nature photographer who shoots Pentax, also wrote up his impressions, but I can't find the link.

Scott

Last edited by snostorm; Jun 21, 2013 at 7:51 PM.
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2013, 10:46 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

Rodney, I do think that the Q got short-changed when it came to reviews, for the reasons that Scott mentioned. I think that too many people expected it to be more dSLR-like in performance and it's not that good (I'm not going to get rid of the K5 anytime soon). I was on the brink of buying a point and shoot to carry in my purse, and would have spent about the same on one of them as I did for the Q. The performance of the Q, especially with either the 01 or 06 lens is better than a compact, so I'm delighted.

Many people would bemoan the huge dof that you get with a small sensor, but that's one of the things I was looking for in a compact/quick snapshot type of camera. Too often I don't seem to have as much as I wanted, or make a very minor mistake in focusing that I didn't notice when I took the shot. So that was an attribute I was LOOKING for, not bemoaning.

I also agree with Scott that it's not a camera for everyone. Scott uses his to extend his reach (and it does that!), I use it for the small carry-around size and good native lenses (the 02 lens is OK but not the equal of the other two). I have found it very useful for macro, but it's lousy for surfing (too much shutter lag). After thinking about Scott's mention of the speed of the old fast-50mm lenses, I'd like to try both of my 50s, to see how they would fare on it. There could be lots of occasions I might want a long lens that's faster than 2.8 - nice thought that!

I definitely think the Q is worth every bit of what I paid for it (under $250 US for each of the two I have). With all of the low prices on the kits as they sell of excess inventory, getting one (if you have a need for one) is a great buy.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2013, 12:31 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Rodney9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yeronga, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3,518
Default

Thank you Harriet and Scott, as I said I want a walk- about camera and had been looking at a sony RX100, however it's 600 plus dollars and obviously not Pentax, the Q I can get for $478 at camera store.com.au and I find Pentax users so much more friendly.

Those shots on Wouter's site are wonderful. This YouTube is terrific - http:// http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHhlyKhAjxk&feature=youtube_gdata

check out more q10 videos here - http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...review/videos/ and see the full review as well.

The Pentax Q10 is now out with a better sensor and I believe it's physically the same size and it's only $499au, so maybe that's the one to go for ??? Also a Q7 has been announced ???

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 22, 2013 at 5:11 AM.
Rodney9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2013, 10:27 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Rodney9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yeronga, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3,518
Default

Thinking more about which camera to get the Sony may give better photos but the Q would be more fun and I'll be more likely to shoot more.

I walk each day along the river and nearly every day see something, a sunrise or set, dogs and horses, even saw Dr Who's Tardis once, and I always wish I had more than just a camera phone, but still something that fits in your pocket.

Plus I have already invested in Pentax and I wish to post here, as I have said this forum is much more friendly and more about the photos.

The Q10 doesn't seem as well made as the original, more plastic, but does have a larger better? sensor, less lag and is only $22 more.

I do appreciate your opinions and your help.

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 22, 2013 at 10:33 PM.
Rodney9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2013, 11:13 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Rodney9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yeronga, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3,518
Default

Another couple of questions, if I may please, where do you get the lens convertor to be able to use full size lenses, also what size loupe do they take.
__________________

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 22, 2013 at 11:46 PM.
Rodney9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 23, 2013, 12:02 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

If you are going to pay close to full price for one, I'd wait for the Q7, that is if image quality is your primary concern. It does have a larger sensor, which should mean it has less noise. The first few sample pictures look like there's an incremental decrease in noise, but I haven't looked at any direct comparison shots yet to really decide if the better quality is enough for me to part with more money, since I already have two Q cameras.

On the other hand, the larger sensor means that you wouldn't have as great a multiplier as you would with the smaller sensor. So someone like Scott would lose something he values to the larger sensor.

I haven't seen or handled the Q10 so I don't know how much difference the body makes as far as feel. I will say that the picture I saw of the Q7 in silver and black looked really classy, and I'm having a tough time resisting it, if for the looks alone.

The Q with either the 01 or 02 lens mounted on it would fit in a jacket pocket, but not a shirt pocket. I had trouble finding what I wanted for a little case because most of the bags are either too small to allow the lens to be mounted or too big. What I ended up getting was a Lowepro pouch-like case that I can put on my belt and while bigger than my cell phone case, isn't all that much bigger. It's fine for walks in the woods and city.
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 5:50 PM.