I always thought the lomo crowd was a good target group for this camera. Fotodiox also makes a great non-electronic K to Q adapter (I always feel like I'm taking about cards when I write that). It has a built in tripod mount, which is very nice.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Darren Addy <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
