The Pentax Q - a real World user review
- Thread starter pinholecam
- Start date
I got a 3rd party on ebay.
During CP+ earlier in the year, Pentax showed a prototype adapter with a built in shutter.
Its supposed to be scheduled for a 2012 release, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it comes out soon.
The expectation is that it supports max flash sync speeds of 1/250 with and external flash even with the adapted lenses.
Planning to get the Pentax Q, two questions need help.
1. The macro shots of bugs and spiders, are those real shots from FA100mm WR + P Q , with minimum PP ? or are those shots heavily PP ?
I asked because if I get PQ + FA100WR, would I be able to get nice macros without much PP ?
2.The other question actually is to Pentax webstore- are they going to drop P Q price any time soon ? I could feel something is coming down ...
TQ
1. The macro shots of bugs and spiders, are those real shots from FA100mm WR + P Q , with minimum PP ? or are those shots heavily PP ?
I asked because if I get PQ + FA100WR, would I be able to get nice macros without much PP ?
2.The other question actually is to Pentax webstore- are they going to drop P Q price any time soon ? I could feel something is coming down ...
TQ
Now, hold your horses here a bit, cause I noticed that you posted a couple of times either here or in the Pentax sub-section thinking that the Q seems better than the K-01 and also about certain aspects of camera functions (exposure bracketing, metering related questions and camera basics).
This camera is not a cure-all.
Its a fun, interesting, unique tool (which can give good results as shown)
I'd say that its another tool in the photographers bag.
If the DSLR is the sledgehammer, this is the fine craftmans tool hammer.
You can't use it to smash a wall, but it can certainly work on that jeweled pendant.
Use it within its limitations and use it to its strengths.
I don't want to leave you with the impression that somehow this is the best and only camera you will ever need.
Macro is not just about getting a camera and lens.
IMHO, its more about lighting and how to get to the insects.
So, yes, you can get the very good results with the Q and macro lens, but its not a free ride or just spending money (ie. need some work)
Just come to the Pentax outing this weekend to try for yourself if it meets your requirements.
As for your questions :
1. Of course they are real shots with Q+100 macro.
PP is a basic levels> saturation> resize > light sharpen for the resize
2. Er.... No idea, since I'm not Emjay.
Yes, that's what I needed a second camera for, but was not sure if the Q photos need a lot PP or not, looks like quit minimal.
I need a 2nd camera, for quick shots of people, scenery and insects macro , without having to bring Kr out.
However, was not sure how the Q fare against point and shoot like Canon IXUS , Panasonic TZs range, ..hopefully could try it out tomorrow with your Q.
Thanks.
See you.
I need a 2nd camera, for quick shots of people, scenery and insects macro , without having to bring Kr out.
However, was not sure how the Q fare against point and shoot like Canon IXUS , Panasonic TZs range, ..hopefully could try it out tomorrow with your Q.
Thanks.
See you.
The Q proved to be nice enough for me to get another lens for it, the Fisheye (Toy lens).
Toy Lenses are manual focus with a non-changeable aperture.
IQ is decent, but nothing to shout about.
But they are pretty cheap and a fisheye is fun to play with.
Here's a brief on the lenses:
Thanks for these images. I did try this camera for about 2 days before I returned it to the shop. The only reason was the looks. I preferred the more sophisticated look to hold rather than a beer can. Still, these lenses being so small and compact are a big plus for me.
The return policy in Australia is that good ? I don't know any shop in Singapore that has such return policy.
I mentioned that I'd probably be able to take a better shot of the Moon if I had more time to focus in the earlier post, so here's one I managed a while back when the sky looked rather clear and I had a bit more time to focus.
Pentax Q + F*300/4.5 + 1.7xteleconverter.
cropped for 16:9 format.
This is equivalent to 2800mm.
Pentax Q + F*300/4.5 + 1.7xteleconverter.
cropped for 16:9 format.
This is equivalent to 2800mm.
Last edited:
Philip, hope the outing cleared up the doubts about the camera
Hi JK, Yes, seeing how's the macro shots are taken first hand is really helpful and many thanks.
I am putting Q on the buying list, just waiting for i case Pentax pulls out a new rabbit from the hat, like today X-5, though its a different kind of category.
I did wish that the Q was 16MP.
One question, do you think the lens 01 - 8mm is it very long ? is it wide enough for small group shots ?
Thanks, birding would be good model with your new now longer set up.
IMHO, we can't expect the megapix to just go up.
If 16mp is squeezed into such a small sized sensor, very few lenses have the resolution esp. at wider apertures for a sensor with this sort of pixel density.
01 prime is equivalent to 47mm FOV on 135mm format. If should be fine for small group shots (say a family of 4-5), but you will have to stand some distance away. DOF isn't a problem of course.
The best way to gauge is to put on your zoom lens set to 30-31mm on your Kr and see for yourself if the working distance is fine for you.
2800mm equivalent is IMHO, not suited for birding. Every single movement of the setup or shooter is accentuated by the long focal length.
Better to stick to something shorter (maybe 300-1100mm equivalent)
Here is a sample I managed to obtain to compare the 5.5 crop factor of the Pentax Q as compared to an APS-C camera using a telephoto lens.
Pls ignore WB differences as the sample from K5 was obtained from another shooter shooting at the same time as me and I have no control over the WB and processing.
K5 with Sigma 100-300/4 at 260mm
Pentax Q with FA*200/2.8
Pls ignore WB differences as the sample from K5 was obtained from another shooter shooting at the same time as me and I have no control over the WB and processing.
K5 with Sigma 100-300/4 at 260mm
Pentax Q with FA*200/2.8
Definitely the Q gave a much better resolution of the lion, it would be interesting to compare w X-5 16MP sensor at same crop factor when released in Sep12.
Similar threads
