Pentax Q system

http://dpreview.com …1062311pentaxqp​review.asp

A new mirrorless system from Pentax. It has a small digicam sized sensor and with a 50mm equivalent lens is priced at $800.

I don't get it.

Seems to be a terrible idea and just trying to cash in the Pentax name. An APS-C sensor is promised for the system later however.

This?

http://gizmodo.com …tures-in-a-little-package

Imaging-resource has some samples and it really does kick some butt for a 1/2.3" sensor. But you still are going to have deep DOF at f1.9, so kinda boring. You'd think they could have at least done a big PnS sensor like a 1/1.6" or 2/3". We have 1/1.7" sensor compacts with f1.8 zooms, so how is a f1.9 prime on 1/2.3" cool at all.

golemite wrote in post #12642898
Seems to be a terrible idea and just trying to cash in the Pentax name. An APS-C sensor is promised for the system later however.

The lenses are all tiny and designed around a tiny sensor. The "normal" prime is an 8.5mm. How are you going to put that on a sensor 4x as wide?

This model is the successor of the old Pentax auto 110th
The dimensions are very similar ..

Pentax Auto 110: with 24mm f2.8 lens 99mm x 58mm x 46mm

Pentax Q: 98 x 57 x 31 mm

Count me as one of the people that don't see the point.

The DOF on the standard lens is equivalent to a 47mm lens @ f/11 on a 35mm camera. Yeah, great "bokeh control" as Pentax puts it. What a joke. Oh, and the O-VF1 viewfinder (shoe-mounted chunk of glass, nothing more) costs US$250. Yes, you read that right. Two hundred and fifty bucks for a shoe-mounted finder. I like how Imaging-Resource agreed to post quarter-resolution photos. Reducing to 25% removes a lot of flaws.

Time to go back to school...Pentax defies logic and proves that you can't spell "FAIL" without a "Q"!

AngryCorgi wrote in post #12643802
Time to go back to school...Pentax defies logic and proves that you can't spell "FAIL" without a "Q"!

Maybe we can nickname it the Q-AIL?

ZoranR wrote in post #12643470
This model is the successor of the old Pentax auto 110th
The dimensions are very similar ..

Pentax Auto 110: with 24mm f2.8 lens 99mm x 58mm x 46mm

Pentax Q: 98 x 57 x 31 mm
D

THe difference is that 110 film was near Canon 1.6x size. This is a 5.8x crop sensor.

That thing is freaking tiny! DOA imho!

After the awesomeness that was the Pentax K-5 I was hoping this was going to be a winner. But nope, I'm extremely underwhelmed. The ergonomics look terrible. I thought that about my old Pentax K200D too, the menu system and buttons were not well laid out. Way too expensive for what you are getting.

I would encourage everyone to check out the imaging resource samples. They are very sharp and have amazing detail still at ISO 1600. They are only 3MP, but they absolutely destroy the ELPH 300/500 samples resized to the same resolution. There is still the problem of lack of DOF control and flat images that a small sensor creates, so I still can't see it taking off unless it is like $300 for the body.

Seems like they should have just taken that sensor and used it in a normal premium compact at compact prices and it would have been much more well received. Maybe something like a Nikon P300 clone with better image quality and RAW for $350.

tkbslc wrote in post #12644994
I would encourage everyone to check out the imaging resource samples. They are very sharp and have amazing detail still at ISO 1600. They are only 3MP, but they absolutely destroy the ELPH 300/500 samples resized to the same resolution.

I disagree.

tkbslc wrote in post #12644994
Maybe something like a Nikon P300 clone with better image quality and RAW for $350.

I agree.

They have brought down the hideous smudgy image samples made by the Q. Is this at Pentax's request?? Who knows.