Pentax Q10!

Started Sep 7, 2012 | Discussions thread
Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 37,025
Re: It's kind of funny how...

jon404 wrote:

Maybe you have an awesome gallery somewhere, or maybe you realize that the sensor of the Q outperformed the XZ-1 on the Dxo mark...

No, no gallery. I'm an amateur. Post pictures now and then on the Xara-Users Forum ( http://board.xara-users.info/ ), in the photography section.

And, no, didn't know about the lens comparison.

I wasn't talking about a lens comparison but a sensor comparison.

Glad to hear the Q is better than the XZ-1. I wish Dpreview would put pix from in in the studio comparison area. But here's a question... if you had something like an XZ-1, and wanted an ILC to go with it, wouldn't you go for a Pentax K-5 or K-30 instead -- to get a REAL difference in sensor size?

Well, that depends doesn't it? If I still want the small pocketable size, no, I wouldn't go DSLR. I mean, that's part of the point of the Q! The XZ-1 is a good camera so to someone who want to upgrade from it the first questions I would ask is why.

IF they want a bigger sensor, then yes, the Q is not for them. And you know that's fine. All I am criticizing here is, it's funny how people do a knee jerk reaction to the Q sensor size and wished it was at least 1.7' when the Q sensor at 1/2.3' does better than sensors in other compact cameras that have been well regarded like the LX5 and XZ-1. It goes to show their attitude and that they basically don't even know what they are talking about.

This is possible because different technologies do different variants. Q is using a Sony sensor, LX5/XZ-1 are using a Panasonic sensor (the Q sensor is also newer).

You can see the attitude further in how people assume that for sure - the Q10 will have exactly the same sensor of the Q. Seriously, how ridiculous can this get?

Or, on the other hand, if you had a K-5 and wanted a small companion camera, wouldn't you get a simpler, more pocketable camera than the Q? A good, small, P & S -- with manual controls?

No. Why would I want a simpler camera? And you know the Q interface being pretty much the K-5's is quite simple actually even if feature rich.

First I don't see a P&S that has the ergonomics and photographic centric controls of the Q. No 1/8000 shutter speeds or 1/250 external flash sync for example. The Q has the "pro controls" that are needed if you need them.

Second, the Q with its 01 prime is pocketable already. I literally wear it.

Third, having that fast lens is something that at that focal length, is not in the other cameras. And it's great for shooting street life (which I do).

Fourth, the Q as I mentioned does a bit better in IQ than several of them anyway.

Finally the Q has other lens options… the new coming up 80-250 telephoto constant F2.8 zoom looks pretty exciting indeed! Where do I get that option with other compacts?

Maybe Pentax is going after all those older people who used to buy Minoxes.

Nope. But your comment shows again the kind of ignorant attitude I am decrying here. I'll give you this much: Pentax sure has a marketing challenge here, but not necessarily for the reasons you may think.

-- hide signature --

Jonathon Donahue -- Olympus XZ-1 tips at http://jon404.com

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- "You are taking life too seriously if it bugs you in some way that a guy quotes himself in the .sig quote" - Ricardo

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
ET2
ET2
wll
wll
wll
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow