Previous page Next page

Pentax Q specifications

Price (with 49mm equiv. kit lens) • US: $800
Body material Magnesium alloy
Sensor • 1/2.3" CMOS Sensor
• 12.4 million effective pixels
• 12.7 million total pixels
Image sizes 4:3
• 12 MP - 4000 x 3000
• 9 MP - 3456 x 2592
• 5 MP - 2688 x 2016
• 3 MP - 1920 x 1440

• 10 MP - 4000 x 2664
• 8 MP - 3456 x 2304
• 5 MP - 2688 x 1792
• 2 MP - 1920 x 1280

• 9 MP - 4000 x 2248
• 6 MP - 3456 x 1944
• 4 MP - 2688 x 1512
• 2 MP - 1920 x 1080

• 9 MP - 2992 x 2992
• 6 MP - 2592 x 2592
• 4 MP - 2016 x 2016
• 2 MP - 1440 x 1440
Image sizes (Video) • MPEG-4 AVC/H.264:
• 1920 x 1080, 30fps
• 1280 x 720, 30fps
• 640 x 480, 30fps
Aspect ratios • 4:3
File formats • RAW (DNG)
• RAW + JPEG Fine
• JPEG (EXIF 2.2) - Best
• JPEG (EXIF 2.2) - Better
• JPEG (EXIF 2.2) - Good
File formats (Movie) • MPEG-4 AVC/H.264
Lenses • Pentax Q-mount
Focus modes • Auto Focus (25-point contrast-detection AF system)
• Manual focus
• Face Detection
• AF Tracking
• AF Select
• Spot AF
AF assist lamp Yes, dedicated LED lamp
Image stabilization Sensor shift Shake Reduction
Extended optical zoom N/A
Digital zoom N/A
Exposure modes • Program AE
• Aperture priority AE
• Shutter priority AE
• Manual
• Auto (Standard)
• Bulb
• Blur control (JPEG only)
Auto Picture modes • Standard
• Portrait
• Landscape
• Macro
• Night scene portraits
• Night scene
• Forest
Scene modes • Portrait
• Landscape
• Macro
• Moving object
• Night scene portrait
• Sunset
• Blue sky
• Night scene
• Night scene HDR
• Night snap
• Food
• Quick macro
• Pet
• Kids
• Forest
• Surf & snow
• Backlight silhouette
• Candlelight
• Stage lighting
• Museum
Custom image • Bright
• Natural
• Portrait
• Landscape
• Vibrant
• Radiant
• Muted
• Bleach bypass
• Reversal film
• Monochrome
• Cross processing
Digital filter • Toy camera
• High-contrast
• Shading
• Slim
• Invert color
• Extract color
• Color
• Watercolor
• Posterization
• Fish-eye
Smart effect • Brilliant color
• Unicolor bold
• Vintage color
• Cross processing
• Warm fade
• Tone expansion
• Bold monochrome
• Water color
• Vibrant color enhance
• USER 1, 2, 3
Sensitivity • Auto
• ISO 125
• ISO 160
• ISO 200
• ISO 250
• ISO 320
• ISO 400
• ISO 500
• ISO 640
• ISO 800
• ISO 1000
• ISO 1250
• ISO 1600
• ISO 2000
• ISO 2500
• ISO 3200
• ISO 4000
• ISO 5000
• ISO 6400
ISO steps 1/3 EV
Metering range 1.3 to 17 EV
Metering modes • TTL image sensor metering
• Segment metering
• Centre-weighted metering
• Spot metering
AE Lock • Can be assigned to the green/delete button
• With shutter release half-press
AE Bracketing • 3 frames
Exposure compensation • -3 to +3 EV
• 1/3 EV steps
Shutter speed • 30 -1/2000 sec.
• Bulb
White balance • Auto
• Daylight
• Shade
• Cloudy
• Fluorescent (D: Daylight color, N: Daylight white, W: cool white, L: warm white)
• Tungsten
• Flash
• Manual
WB fine tuning Yes (amber/blue or magenta/green bias)
WB Bracketing No
Color space • sRGB
• Adobe RGB
Drive modes • Single
• Continuous Hi (5 fps)
• Continuous Lo (1.5 fps)
Self-timer • 2 sec
• 12sec
Flash • Manual pop-up
• TTL auto
• Guide no. 5.6 (ISO 125)
• Sync modes: P-TTL, Red-eye reduction, Slow-sped sync, Trailing-curtain sync
• Flash exposure compensation: -2 - +1EV
Flash X-sync speed • 1/2000 sec (electronic shutter: 1/13 sec)
External flash • Hot shoe
Orientation sensor No
LCD monitor • 3.0in TFT color LCD monitor
• 460,000 pixels
• Approx 100% frame coverage
• Auto / Manual brightness adjustment
Playback functions • Grid display (4x4, Golden section, Scale display)
• Highlight/shadow warning
• Histogram
• Magnified review mode (1.2x - 16x in 16 steps)
Connectivity • USB 2.0 (High Speed) / AV
• HDMI type D
Power • D-LI68 Lithium-Ion rechargeable battery (supplied)
• Battery charger included
• Optional AC adapter
Battery life (CIPA standard) • 230 shots
Dimensions 98 x 57 x 31 mm (3.8 x 2.2 x 1.2in)
Weight (camera body) Approx180g (6.3oz)
Weight (camera w/battery and card) Approx 200g (7.1oz)
Previous page Next page
I own it
I want it
I had it
Discuss in the forums


Total comments: 279

I have used this camera for about a month and I am very impressed. Prior to this, in the last few months, I purchased a Nikon J1 and then a V1 because I wanted a viewfinder.

This little thing (original Pentax Q) has made me forget about the lack of viewfinder. It is truly small and what I really like about it is:

1. Changing settings takes second, instead of 20 seconds with the J1/V1's multiple menus - this thing has dials and buttons!
1a. Intuitive menu system - unlike the Nikon
2. Size - this "thing" is truly portable, I carry it everywhere
3. It is so complete - I do not have to pay another $160 for a flash! (V1)
3a. Great Flash - powerful - the one on the V1 is so underpowered in comparison leaving anything outside of 3m looking dull
4. Great image color
5. Great video
6. The V1 feels like a brick when I pick it up - unusable - I am spoiled
7. The prime lens is great.
8. I have taken more (great) pictures in the last month than I have in the last year!

Lenses: #'s 01, 02, 06


Why on earth would anyone want this thing? It has a 1/2.3 inch sensor. Thats like...a compact camera!
What is the point of an interchangable lens camera if the image quality sucks?

You can get a normal compact camera with pretty good aperature and decent zoom, with a bigger 1/1.7inch sensor for quite a bit cheaper. Look at the XZ2 and LX7 and so on. Its just as pocketable, way more versatile, and cheaper, while retaining all the advanced features due to them being 'enthusiast compacts'.


I would've liked to have seen a review myself... but the melodrama of the people commenting here. "Shame on you, DPR!" I can't help but LOL.

1 upvote

I have just picked one of these up mint second hand with the 47mm f/1.9 fixed lens and have to say I love it.
Its ergonomics and build quality are frankly amazing
I shoot mostly in Aperture mode and I have direct access to A/E Lock and Aperture, one button press to ISO and Exposure Compensation my most used buttons.
At launch RRP it was clearly overpriced and with the small sensor seemed like there was better value elsewhere but with prices coming down it makes more and more sense as a fun but serious photographic tool
Very addictive, its hard to go back to bigger cameras regardless of ultimate image quality .
If you are not fixated on resolution and IQ that goes beyond what is discernible in real life uses, the image quality is good enough and you can get on with focus on important things like what it is exactly you are shooting and composition, exposure and light which is what its supposed to be all about isnt it?


Why haven't you completed this review?


I guess DPR will at least PREview the new Q10.

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting

Still waiting and now the Q7 is out!!


I agree with the others here.

The fact is the Pentax Q marks the beginning of a new range or cameras, the camera has a brand new mount, it's a totally new concept and you've failed to review it.

In years to come when the format has evolved and people look back at this site they're going to wonder what your problem is. Why on earth you haven't reviewed the first ever compact interchangeable lens camera with a whole new mount. You have to admit that looks pretty bad for DPReview, and that's a shame, because DPReview is usually a good site.

Please review the Pentax Q, I think you owe it as much to your own credibility as you do to everyone who has waited all this time for one, and got nothing.

Failing to review the first in a line of cameras that has a new mount, is quite a failing.


To: DPReview

Well, here we are, Pentax Q10 announced, most likely replacing the original Q and no DPR review still. Well done, not. Consistency in your reviews is rather important, if you want people to use you as a reference site, don't you think?



At least has reviewed the Q system lenses...


Shame on you, Digital Photo Review.
Pentax Q at US399 (even less) could be an unique photo tool for every who want to explore new experience in photography, and you insist on rererereview the same kind of equipment time after time. Just bored. I will get this camera based on other more reliable site´s reviews.


ATTN: Richard Butler & Simon Joinson

Don't you think it's worth doing a full review, now? I mean before it is out of production!


Hey, the Q is now $399 with the 47mm f1.9 prime lens. Everyone I know or have spoken to who owns one loves the camera. I think the risk is quite low by now. If you like the Q, just buy one (I certainly plan to). Just don't expect it to be a K-5 or K-30.

Comment edited 58 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Nicolas Isaksson

I want a full review!!!

Also, is Pentax quality ok? I read the K01 review and there seemed to be serious problems. I am concerned about this because I will buy it through Amazon and I live in South America where there is no presence of an authorized Pentax representative.


It's a pity that there will be no review for this little beauty. Seems like DPR decided that because it has a smaller sensor, it's not relevant. But so many people don't print these days, and cool photo blogs and Flickr galleries are all the rage. So I'm wondering does an ILC has to meet a certain sensor size threshold to earn a review? The Q offers big performance for it's size, easily beating some larger sensor P&S for IQ. Isn't that compelling enough to warrant a review?


just another chanced missed to review this little gem, DP Review has been slipping for a while now. Shame was a great site a few years back.

1 upvote
Zvonimir Tosic

When specs on paper are obvious, then the review is also obvious and that is kind of task DPR can deliver promptly, and make the majority their audience happy and content.
But when you have a camera like a Pentax Q, or a Leica M9, or, when specs on paper and real life performance in hands of imaginative people are in discord, then DPR has a problem delivering a review that is understandable to its audience and not damaging to the camera brand.
So DPR knows majority of their audience well, they know what they like by analysing clicks, most visited pages, etc. and are thus aware of their limits of comprehension too.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

Agreed- full review sorely missed!!!!

Kenri Basar

I would like to buy one but it is too expensive for me... I don't know where I can find one in India so I looked on and it is around $800-$1200...
I like the small concept. I am a 5feet tall female and carrying my Canon 40D with additional lenses is quite bothersome so I got Olympus EPL2. Olympus is just fine but I would like to buy something even smaller....
I like the concept and the look of Pentax Q but I hope the sensor was bigger or 4/ I am no technical person as to why it can't be bigger...
The price is the killing factor for me... :(

solarider - $388, spectacular price.


purchased for AU$445 with 01+02
took well over 3000 photos in last 6 weeks and love it
marvel in engineering and highly addictive


I like my XZ-1, and I'm not reading anything here that would get me to buy it for my shirt-pocket camera.


When do we get a full review - it is long over due.

inevitable crafts studio

i would so much like to have the internals of the grd4 in that :)


Well its good to hear the Pentax Q has dropped to $499 if and when the camera hits $399 i take a dive


It is absolutely fantastic and I would not have problem to pay $299 for it, or maybe even $399.
Very Q-ute. But the $799 price in Henrys, is sure a mistake, right? Typo, 7 instead of 2 or 3 at worst.


Having purchased the camera and shooting with it for awhile it is a pleasure to use. It's small size and build quality causes the owner to want to carry it everywhere thus never missing the opportunity for candid photography.
I've achieved very impressive photos when using manual lenses with adapters. The video quality is quite good at 14 Mbps and opens up quite a bit of tele-video capabilities for those seeking long range videography.
The image quality is on par with the current crop of point and shoot cameras but is underpar to the other interchangeable lens cameras.
If you consider it a point and shoot camera with interchangeable lenses you'd have a good summation of the camera.......for some it will be worth it and for others it will not.

Reg Natarajan

This thing is selling for $619 at the local camera store and $500 with free shipping on eBay, both with the 8.5mm kit prime. It's the same price as the X10 in the real world. They're both great cameras, imo.

1 upvote
inevitable crafts studio

one having white orbs and one doesnt :)


With a GN of 6 for the flash, you can only get about 8 feet away from your subject.



For $ 800 I could get a Fuji X10 with a couple of hundred dollars left over and bigger sensor plus free orbs or a Canon G1X with a sensor a little bigger than micro 4/3.



Well handling system. good samples images. Have to keep an eye on the lens line up...


Yes, those sample images are good but is this camera really relevant apart from it's novelty value? A Canon S95/100 is about the same size and offers a similar zoom range with its non-interchangable lens and allthough the lens options in the Pentax may be faster, the canon offsets this with better low light performance.
Also, the portrait lens equivalent is not going to give shallow depth of focus meaning that really there is no point to having interchangable lenses on this camera.

A good fun toy for a child or novice but not even of much use to learn about the differences in the characteristics of lenses of different focal lengths. i.e. not even a good learning tool as an intermediate step from compact to DSLR or other interchangable lens system camera.


I'm pleasantly surpised with the sample images as well. Hmm, this will require some further investigation. I like what I see!

1 upvote
Roger Knight

I have to say that I am amazed by those shots in the preview gallery posted today.

I really did not expect such quality.
I also have to say that I agree with everything raised by Raist3d.

It seems that the quality of the results from tiny sensors has risen remarkably with the Pentax Q and the Fuji X10 especially when one considers that many in both galleries were taken at around 6MP rather than the full 10 or 12MP size.

I do however think that the cost is a problem to me and it's a shame because the sales of lenses would bring the total outfit cost up very high especially if you factor in a viewfinder which I find I must.

This makes the Fuji X10 a bargain even though tele range is limited somewhat.

Cyril Catt

I already have a robust, Minox-like Canon TX1 with a 39-390 mm equivalent zoom which will focus down to zero mm, and retracts behind a solid metal shutter when not in use. Its smaller than the Pentax Q. It is a very useful on-hand-at-all-times model which cost me a third the price of the Q, and I won't be tempted to buy other lenses and carry them with me.



The camera may be pricey but I think many here are missing a lot of points.

The sensor actually does better ISO than the LX5 or XZ-1. Yes, I have tried it from raw, both. And I have had the LX5 for well over a year so I know what I am saying here (and the LX5 is by no means a bad camera. We also need to get rid of the notion that talking good about a camera model necessarily means the other one s*cks).

Most here haven't even touched it. This camera is super well built and has superb ergonomics. I want to see how much the AF and startup has improved with the firmware upgrade- which it has.

Better photography is being done with an iPhone than many of the complainers about sensor size are doing here. The key thing to the Q is a sensor that allows at least a wide enough range of expression while keeping the smallest well built camera around with superb ergonomics. Good interface and ergonomics matter. This camera has those.


No eye level viewfinder -1. No matter what.

1 upvote
Ibida Bab

I would've bought this camera if it was Japanese made quality product. I have a ZX5n film camera that bought 15 years ago, Made in Japan quality, still as awesome as it was that first time I took it out of the box. On the other hand I own 2 Pentax digital cameras that are already showing signs of wear and problems, needless to say they were not manufactured in Japan. Forget Pentax, I am in line for the x10 as well, as long as the production models are made in Japan.

Neil Morgan

you wont say that after youve handled one. Very well made.

Debankur Mukherjee

Wrong planning from Pentax - No one will buy this camera with a 2.3 sensor at this price and so many lenses. A 2.3 sensor has its own limitation.


Like pcblade, I also had a play with a Q today. I am warming to it. beautifully made, tiny, well designed, and from the look of the images already taken, impressive performance, especially considering the sensor size. The toy lenses arn't actually toy's, yes they may be fixed aperture, and have no AF nor in-built shutter, but the optics are typical SMC-Pentax glass, ie high quality multi coated optics.

Still, the initial price is far too high!, and the as yet unhandled Fuji X10 may put the spanner in the works.

However, if you already have Pentax and want a well built pretty good performing camera that will work with all Pentax accessories that you have, it might be worth looking at. But only when that price comes down!


I've tested this afternoon and make some photos :
- I've experienced some lag : time to focus and trigger the shooting ;
- the raw are in DNG format ;
- the noise is already present at ISO 125 in the dark areas ;
- the camera is very small and nice looking ;
- the build quality is great ;
- they are some automatic corrections taking place with the 8mm f1.19 ;
It's like a jewel : you can put it in your pocket and touch it to get the feeling of having a camera with you all time :)
you can see some sample on my flickr account :


Gonna get killed by the X10...


I see a few commonalities, but the X10 feels so utterly different from the Q that the recurring comparisons don't ring true to me. They both look retro and they share some traits, but as cameras 'in the hand' (feel, size) they are so so different. And aside from the Euro-settler states, these two cameras seem to have different gender appeal.


Puny sensor, low IQ, high price .... hmmm, who would buy this crap!!??


low IQ? This beast is creating images on par with m4/3


BTW you posted this thrice


@zanypoet, I guess you haven't seen the images. They are excellent.


@zanypoet, I guess you haven't seen the images. They are excellent.


Quality compacts like the XZ1 or the S95 have /bigger/ sensors, are just as pocketable, much less expensive than the kit, have a reasonable zoom range and glass is mostly just as fast throughout the zoom range.

Even if the sensor of the Q is better right now, the next generation of compacts will have the same sensor technology, but in a smaller package, and at a price not much higher than the Pentax standard zoom.

Why on earth should anyone buy this obscenity?

Which of these two cameras has a smaller sensor and costs twice as much?


The next generation of Q will also have a better sensor. It's how this game is played. What the other ultracompacts don't have is the ability to use different lenses, a better ergonomics/interface (despite the smalls size) and a better build.

1 upvote

if this had a k-mount with an apsc sensor it would be perfect. especally considering how well it would compliment the limited lenses


At $350-$400 this would be a maybe. At $800, this will definitely not be considered.


i think even $500 would be fine given the IQ this thing has. $600 is pushing it but even the MAYBE. $800? no way


From full sized samples seen in Flickr, the lenses are foggy even on a sunny day and contrast is woefully low. But those fixed lenses are optically well behaved perhaps due to simpler construction without those fuzzy optical artifects typical of zooms. But the coating and glass quality do not appear to be convincing. Was attracted by the rediculous small size but overall I am disappointed and will not pursue this.


@Duckie, visit a doctor and have your eyes checked. It seems you can not see properly. To a normal person whose eyes are alright there is no such problems. Lenses are not foggey, they are high quality lenses (normal and zoom). About the coating educate yourself about pentax's SMC coating, who knows even you might learn something.


Who told you anything from Pentax must automatically be acceptable and anthing else must be wrong? Your mother I guess? This outrageously laughable. Don't tell me you are fathered by one of those Pentax SMC coating engineers!


@Duckie, I tried and used the camera and seen the pictures that come out this camera. So based on my experience , you not only need to visit doctor for vision problems , you also need some mental help.


Wow, this really makes the Leica M9 a bargain.

It would take $24,685 worth of Pentax to equal the sensor area of one M9.

(30.89 times the area for FF)


Images? There's a lot of doubt regarding the sensor size. I'd have said that the IQ would be an essential part of any review.

Don Simons

Saw the mockup today in a Tokyo camera store where there is a big promotion for it. It is another toy accessory for the people who want something different are willing to pay for it. Looks like one of those Minox minatures on steroids and will attract the eye of passers by.The FX 100 can at least do some serious photographic work and be a nice accessory. "Q" for Quirky.


$200 and I will consider it! :) This looks small and easy to carry around.


$200? I think Pentax won't stop tossing up our consumers's pocket until they find $2000.


i think $450 is much more resonable


$200? Yeah, and I'd consider a Fiat 500 for $3000. Not gonna happen. It's not cheap to produce something this small.


has anybody reviewed this yet?


Using today's sensor technology, it doesn't really make much sense. However, if and when sensor technology improves further, maybe someday a sensor this small will have enough sensitivity and dynamic range for most photographer. By then, the system will have more applications.

1 upvote
L Bradford

This camera makes absolutely no sense to me at all. With the small sensor, just go buy a fixed lens competitor from Canon,Panasonic, Olympus or Sony. Otherwise just go for the slightly larger cameras from the aforementioned companies, and it will be a much larger sensor.

Total comments: 279