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.
I win last! Great Success!
Frank_BR: 1550g body only?! I bet only prism and mirror mechanism weigh half that.If Ricoh wanted to launch a new camera, it should be a MF mirrorless, as Sony will do in the coming months.
The only justification for the 645Z is it will help to reduce a bit the inferiority complex of many fans of the Pentax brand, which never had a FF DSLR on the market. Now, Pentax fanboys can say to Nikon and Canon fanboys:
- "Mine" is bigger than yours.
What, are your arms atrophied or something? Can't lift three or four pounds? Don't have a tripod to use with a camera designed for studio and landscape work? (Only 200g more than the D4S.)
Your second paragraph is just too stupid for a proper response.
Robert Newman: While touring the LBJ Space Center in Houston several years ago with my young children, I perched my 10-year old son up on a ledge to get a better view of the Moon Rover on display including a NASA modified Hasselblad like the one mentioned on a short hinged arm. When we got ready to move on to another exhibit, I started to pick my son up and put him at floor level. I did not notice that he had braced himself with a foot on the metal arm holding the Hasselblad. A little push from his leg sent the camera crashing into the Moon Rover with a loud thud. We quickly moved on before some NASA employee could detain us. I don't think anything was broken, but we could have easily destroyed a very expensive artifact of the lunar missions.
Way to take responsibility for your actions, Robert.
Luke Kaven: I have to put aside 'herd spirit' here. With so much good or just plain enjoyable work out in the world, I'm at a total loss to understand why the editors picked this series. It's neither very creative, nor very funny. It isn't even good 'lite' fare.
With all the audience strength you have, you could be an editorial powerhouse. Consider the possibility of being one, seriously.
Consider a laxative, Luke.
Consumer grade camera, consumer grade lens, consumer grade photos - then why bother with a professional grade review? As pointed out by Richard Butler below, most folks who buy this camera will never buy another lens. My guess is they'll walk out of Best Buy with it after hearing "Nikons are good."
Given how glacially slow DPReview is at reviewing cameras, and given that there are other cameras waiting for a review that actually merit such a detailed review <cough-K-3-cough> I just don't understand spending so much time and effort on this kind of camera.
(Not that there's anything wrong with consumer grade by the way.)
BrianSA: This was pretty awful. I stood about half a minute of the rubbish presentation. The video is disjointed, stopping after about 5 seconds and waiting for the download to catch up. This happened every 5 seconds, so made it almost impossible to watch. Pausing it, unlike professionally run video sites, did not allow the whole video to down load in order that I could watch it seamlessly.
Completely pointless. Even the little I was able to see seemed to be aimed at 9 year olds.
Brian, invest in a better internet connection, and maybe some laxatives too.
kadardr: I buy second hand...
Sucks to be you.