Nice understanding of the definition of "macro."
Better start selling off the kids so I can afford one of these!
Zeisschen: Pentax is the only DSLR maker that manages to pack it's technology in a modern looking industrial design body. Canon is 10 years back, Nikon around 15-20 years...
If I went with a DSLR, for sure i'd be a Pentax
jpino79, Zesschen obviously prefers modern looking industrial design AND image quality AND reliability.
David Hurt: Who would want a camera that color????
yesman12: I go to the Consumer Electronics show every year. This year I ran into someone from the Photography industry and he claimed that DP's Affiliation with Amazon does skew its responsiveness to reviews towards brands that are most popular on Amazon. to be clear he was not claiming that DP's reviews are biased but that they have a brand filter wrt what and when they decided to review.
DP should have reviewed the 645Z. Nearly all the other web sites have.
DPR is becoming less and less relevant when compared to other photo news & review sites. It's very clear what drives traffic here: the forums and the comments. Why is DPR is generally several days behind sites like Petapixel when it comes to reporting news?
Prognathous: Hopefully for the K-3 replacement they adopt a centered articulated screen, and not the selfie-oriented side-hinge design. There's a good reason all* >$1500 cameras that offer an articulated screens keep it centered.
* By "all" I'm referring to Pentax 645Z, Nikon D750, Sony A99, and the new $1500 Samsung NX1. I'm not aware of any camera of this caliber that uses the side-hinge design.
Prognathous, you are totally overthinking this.
timo: There's some more constructive and informed coverage at Imaging Resource.
No kidding! Head on over there for a good solid preview minus the usual DPR snottiness.
Too bad about the hdr.
Were Greg a typical dpreview forum member, he'd be complaining about his image quality, Fuji's business practices, the weather on the day of his mishap, his hospital care and Germany in general.
Nukunukoo: Novelty, unless they started with a 2/3" from the start.
Yet another know-nothing post by someone who's never seen, much less used, this camera.
Michael Piziak: Yep, it's pretty bad when the comments are about the video not working right - taking away from the entire story.
What else can you expect from the dpreview readership? The complainiest bunch on the entire internets!
ThatCamFan: It looks lovely but I would NEVER pay more than 200$ for this camera, the sensor is TIIIIINY & virtually useless in anything but bright sunlight and MAYBE when it is cloudy.
You have no idea what you're talking about, camfan.
samfan: Endless artistic expression... Turd. If they make a Q with an EVF, I'll buy one. My artistic expression does not involve holding a camera like a stupid cellphone.
That said, I love Pentax handling and controls, and the size of the Q, so I actually would like this system even instead of m43/N1, not to mention the large APS-C monsters, but an EVF is a strict requirement.
The Q is the only camera I have without a viewfinder. I actually find composing with the LCD at odd angles liberating. I have taken many ground-level shots that I simply wouldn't have done with a viewfinder. I never thought I'd adapt well to the lack of a viewfinder, but I have.
iae aa eia: I... I... I don't know what to say.
Why? You don't seem to know anything about this camera. I have the original Q and I like it very much. It's terrific fun. This seems like a nice refresh.
peevee1: There is exactly one 1/1.7" sensor produced, so Pentax is stuck with it on this joke of a system. At least they could try to make it half-useful by producing native supertele and macro lenses instead of essentially renaming Q7 into Q-S1.
That sensor is actually quite capable. It was also used on the MX-1. On the Q, with the 01 Standard Prime, the image quality is very good. I do wish Pentax would focus on prime lenses for the Q system, especially a wide-angle.
It's Frank Sinatra!
David J B.: I've taken better photos through my car window.
Why, of course you have! I'm sure you've done lots of other great things too, in your mind.
Don Kiyoti: Too many DPReview people with their noses glued to their screens, staring at pixels, or fretting about what the other brand is doing, or worrying if their new camera might have "shutter shock" or some other trivial defect. When confronted with actual photography, they know not what to do and respond with fear and derision!
Ok. Derision and ignorance then.
Too many DPReview people with their noses glued to their screens, staring at pixels, or fretting about what the other brand is doing, or worrying if their new camera might have "shutter shock" or some other trivial defect. When confronted with actual photography, they know not what to do and respond with fear and derision!
Spectro: #10 Cinque Terre, Italy is a big time photoshop, the only one here heavily manipulated and altered. So heavily editing is ok for the Smithsonian?
The category is ALTERED IMAGES. Duh.