Philly!! <3Well done, lovely shot!
Awesome pic, congratulations!!!!!
DonSantos: Phase One - OMG!
OMG x 2!Now i want a sticker for the back of my camera that says: "When I grow up, I want to be a Phase One IQ180!"
I'd like to see the output with the Sigma SD1 or one of the Merryll DPs.
peevee1: If DPR were not politically correct, the conclusion should have been clear:
It is a compact system camera, closest competitors in terms of price, handling, size and looks being Nikon J1/2/3 and S1, Oly E-PM1/2 and Panasonic GF3/5, and even NEX-3n. Of course all of those destroy any Q in any possible way, image quality, lens choice, autofocus, shooting speed, even size with a kit zoom given how small Nikon 1 11-27.5 and Panasonic 14-42 X PZ are (even NEX 16-50 is shorter than Q 5-15).Q is only good if you want to buy the worst possible camera, with all the disadvantages of changing lenses and none of the advantages.
And since we're at it, the Q 02 zoom completely crushes the IQ of the Nikon 1 kit zoom...
Debankur Mukherjee: Sigma has hardly been able to produce any lens better then Nikkor.......so whats the big news......I don't think this lens will perform exceptional from any aspect.......
*cough* e.g. Sigma 50/1.4 *cough*
Yes!!! Thanks Sigma for the Pentax (and Sony) mount!
Flash synch at 1/2000sec, also with the popup, and you have a built-in ND filter too. It's great for those summer beach shots, it's all so easy!
Donnie G: The larger sensor and more reasonable pricing should make this camera competitive with Canon and Nikon's enthusiasts P&S offerings. The only problem I see is that the market for those cameras is shrinking, not growing. So unless Pentax can grab a substantial share of that market, I don't see how this camera will help their bottom line. Still, I hope it does well.
From a handling perspective, the Q has much more in common with a dslr than it does with a P&S. I have all 3 types of cameras, and the Q is a photographer's tool. I have not used a p&s that does not make me long for my dslr at the first hint of a "tricky" picture.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: I don't wanna bash Pentax. I really don't. It is a respectable, innovative and honest brand which makes DSLRs I wouldn't refuse to own and would certainly enjoy. But... that pink and gold colour scheme...? I don't know what's worse - Pentax offering it, or thinking someone will actually buy one.
(long pause in order to clean the vomit off the keyboard)
Just for the record, pink and glittery-silver would match 80% of my daughter's clothes. You get used to it, really, though gold is a bit much... And no, she can't borrow my silver limiteds.
I'm surprised by the low comparative scores the K5 received compared to the Nikon D7100 in certain areas. The "performance" score is particularly misleading as the D7100 can only shoot 5 or 6 RAWs, while the K5ii (like its predecessor) can fire 21. (I usually get 23 RAWs).
Barry Fitzgerald: Please stop the "no movie button" nonsense this is a stills camera. I have a movie button on my camera, and guess what I disable it in the menu because you set it by accident (now I have a useless button that does nothing in stills shooting). This movie button commenting on reviews is tiresome.
I would like a movie button, I'd use it while shooting/filming wildlife. The green button could be reassigned in a firmware upgrade, as HubertChen points out. But this would not be a deciding factor for me.
I'd rather have manual exposure for video, or at least a way to fix the exposure at the beginning of each clip. For example, a white bird spreading its wings will cause exposure to change, which is quite distracting...
rygold: Question for the DPreview team. I don't wish to start a flame war here but I'm comparing the D5200 to the Pentax. I understand that Nikon normally produces softer images out the box which is not a problem as you can incorporate it into your workflow, but there looks like a serious problem with the Nikon images, and I'd like some clarity on whether it's the lens distortion or not. There is a radical change in softness around the edges of the 5200 compared to the Pentax. You can clearly see it on the label of the Martini bottle - top left and top right above the colour chart. It's clearly not normal - did the tripod shift, or is the kit lens to blame?
You've got to try the 2 in a shop where you can handle them. Your mind will be made almost instantly!
Excellent! Gopro should have clear instructions not to touch the equipment right after eating a sandwitch, unless of course you're researching veterinary dentistry!
justmeMN: A Leica branded mobile phone. That way, people can conveniently spend all day showing off the brand name. :-)
Lol! I thought the Leica M case for the iPhone already existed:http://www.zazzle.com/leica+iphone+cases
And i thought that Sony would be the first to release a FF milk! (Not that the M is not one already).
On the other hand, i still think that Sony will be the first to produce an affordable one... :)
Or could this simply be an aps-c M?
The Q firmware 1.12 has the fast AF of the 1.11, maybe even faster!!! They've also found the bugs this time: my Q seems stable and responsive again. Thanks Pentax!
JJack: Sigma mount is supposed to be more-or-less compatible with Pentax K-mount, right?
So will this lens work with K-5 and K30?
The same question about 120-300mm F2.8 as well.
The mount is the same, mechanically, though a little rotated. The flange distance is different, so Pentax lens won't focus at infinity on Sigma cameras. The electronics and levers are different, the Pentax aperture lever in partucular prevents its mounting on Sigma cameras....
In summary, only the rear lens cap is interchangeable!
Sorry, nice try, i wish it wasn't like that: I'd get a Sigma body in a flash! :)
Martin Datzinger: So. This, on a D7100 set to ISO 100, would very much do the same as a 27-53/2.8 lens would do on a D600 set to ISO 240 (or thereabouts). Except that only very few people would buy such a lens for their D600 because of the very limited zoom range and there is no chance of getting the same DR on the D7100 as with the D600 set to ISO 100 (whilst noise just evens out at higher sensitivity settings). And the viewfinder is smaller with an even worse representation of DoF.
Then there is the question of pricing: D600 + AF-S Nikkor 24-70/2.8 = €1500 + €1540 = about €3000D7100 + Sigma = €1220 + (certainly) more than €1800 = (certainly) more than €3000
Let alone the worse resale value of the Sigma as compared to the Nikkor.
So I have to ask - why not make it a 16-50/2.0 lens in the first place? Close enough to equivalence, about the same weight and price, a lot more usable and still totally unique in APS-C land.
At ceaiu:At 2000$, it would be 3.5 times cheaper than both the most expensive aps-c lens (the Pentax 560mm f/5.6) and the most expensive m4/3 lens (the Olympus 300mm f/2.8). Both are priced at 7000 usd... Not that this means anything.
This obviously expensive lens would be especially attractive for systems that don't have FF cameras, namely Sigma and Pentax! In Canon and Nikon mount, I'd much rather get a FF body instead. But since i shoot Pentax, i'd be interested in this lens, if it were available in Pentax mount.
miles green: It's a pity the Sigma SD1 is not on the comparison tool. At base iso, it's phenomenal! Incredible clarity and no moire!
The Leica M9 still has a bayer matrix... Gotta see it to believe it! (just make sure you look at the center of the frame, where the lens can keep up!)