I mentioned in an earlier post that I (a K-5 owner) was considering also getting a Pentax Q and I thought I would follow-up with a little bit of my reasons why (for those who may be interested).
Frankly, what got my attention was ONE POST on Pentax Forums. Interestingly, it was a post that was rebutting a poster's assertion that a Full Frame camera was useful for (among other things) macro and wildlife. The poster's images were taken with a Pentax Q. http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/194622-k5-replacement-4.html#post2052306 Prior to this post, I had really not even considered looking at the Q because I saw it as gimmicky ("Smallest, lightest interchangeable lens camera in the world") and I, frankly, couldn't believe that a sensor that small could produce anything that worthwhile. Also it was expensive. In my mind it was to DSLRs what the Pentax 110 was to 35mm film cameras. Turns out that is a very bad analogy. Prior to the post linked to above, the same poster wrote this very complete "Real World Review" of the Pentax Q and I think it bears consideration: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-q/194467-pentax-q-real-world-user-review.html The photographer's Q stuff on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/29329237@N07/sets/72157630529268492/ For starters, the heart of the Q is the Sony Exmor R backlit sensor. Secondly, the Q was the first (not sure if it is still the only) camera to use the Exmor R and also produce RAW files. (This is significant, not only because it opens up your post-processing toolbox, but because it also makes possible a lot of data for the in-camera "filters" to process in creating those fun effects.) As a manual focus lens lover, the other thing that is great about the Q is that with adapters you can put virtually any lens in the world on the front of this camera and see what it can do. Olympus OM mount, Minolta MD mount, Canon FD mount, C-mount movie camera lenses, m42 screwmount lenses ... the list is endless. When doing so, you have to keep in mind that a sensor this small comes with a large (5.6) crop factor and that brings me to the other reason that "serious" photographers should consider the Q a valuable "accessory". Consider what one can do with a 100mm f2.8 macro on this camera. It at once becomes a 560mm macro (with the benefit of greater DOF than you get on larger sensor) and a 560mm telephoto faster than anything you can get on a larger sensor camera. A lens like the Tokina AT-X 80-200mm f2.8 becomes a (35mm equiv) 450-1120mm super telephoto. This makes it a super set-up for not only macro but wildlife/birding (sitting birds, at least). Especially if using a lens set at hyperfocal distance, the Q would also make an extremely good (as in hardly noticed) shoot-from-the-hip street photography camera. In fact, anytime you need a "stealth" camera (like getting into most big concert venues these days, where a DSLR will get stopped at the door, the Q could be a great choice. Check out this comparison of a shot of the moon taken with the same lens on the Pentax Q and the K-5 (and the larger K-5 image cropped to the equiv. composition) http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-q/185934-new-pentax-red-dot-finder-q-da-300-img-3.html#post2003699 and I think you'll begin to see that you may be turning up your nose at the small sensor size in the Q a little bit too fast (at least I was). How about a shoot on the Q and process on the iPad set-up? Can't get a lot more lightweight than that! http://www.flickr.com/photos/travelchick67/6397329885/ For some of my purposes, I think the Q will require a magnifying hood such as this well-reviewed one: http://www.amazon.com/Hoodman-H-LPP3-HoodLoupe-Professional-3-Inch/dp/B001N0KEWU/ I think that this camera's "Smallest in the world" campaign might work in Japan and in Women's magazines (if Pentax advertised there). But this camera has so much going for it that I think it could have been marketed in multiple ways: to the Lomo-loving crowd. To the stealth-shooter. And most of all in a VW Beetle "Small is Beautiful" way to get people to look beyond the small sensor size to what amazing things it can produce. Check out the (multiple) posts of user "official tomoduch" on this page, to see what sort of FUN combined with great images the Q can produce. http://www.seriouscompacts.com/f90/pentax-q-samples-4129/index2.html I think that this guy's sentiments kind of nail the reality of where things are at the moment: http://pyktures.blogspot.com/2011/06/small-reality-check-on-state-of-digital.html After all of this examination, I've decided to pull the trigger on a used Q kit with the normal prime f1.9 lens, and an extra battery for $330. I'm also getting the C to Q adapter and K to C adapters that the seller is offering for another $50. As was pointed out yesterday, if you keep your eye on Amazon Deals, it is possible to get a returned Q kit (all-but-new) for around $335 and that makes it a "BUY" recommendation, in my book. People are waiting for the overdue, but promised Pentax K to Q adapter but if it isn't announced at Photokina I don't think it is coming at all. (And if it ever does, there will be more jeers over its price). That one piece alone, would have potentially turned the Q into a vehicle for selling more DFA 100mm macros (if nothing else). Yet Pentax features nobody using the Q in these ways. In short, I think the the Q may be the best camera that is combined with the worst marketing in the history of the universe. -- "The key to seeing the world's soul, and in the process wakening one's own, is to get over the confusion by which we think that fact is real and imagination an illusion. It is the other way around." -Thomas Moore, "Original Self" -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
