It looks like they are deadly serious with this. As I've already said elsewhere: I don't see the point. Panasonic (GF), Olympus, Sony and Samsung already offer large sensor alternatives that offer a fine balance of size, features, flexibility and image quality.
Yes, the Q is smaller but when Pen/GF/NEX + pancake is already small enough to always be with you, why bother with something smaller that delivers inferior results?
From Thom Hogan's article "Mirrorless Summer 3" currently on the front page:
dpreview called the Pentax Q "ever-so-slightly eccentric." No, it's not slightly anything. It's over-the-top bizarre. Bizarre enough that Pentax will sell a few to people who are more interested in being able to pull a mini-mini-SLR out of their pocket to impress others ("Name's Bond. Thom Bond"). Meanwhile, the rest of us will be taking better pictures with an Olympus XZ-1 for half the price.
Yes, the Q is smaller but when Pen/GF/NEX + pancake is already small enough to always be with you, why bother with something smaller that delivers inferior results?
I guess we'll see if the backlit sensor is really impressive, or a gimmick.
The available lenses read like a bad joke.
I have to think they know that their SLR consumers (me included) that are typically not professionals, would consider switching to a mirrorless and just abandoning DSLRs. They already have the smallest DSLR and some really nice compact primes, so I understand them wanting to do something 'different'.
In this case I wish they would trade on their reputation for the W series indestructible compacts and make a water/shockproof small DSLR or mirrorless camera. But that is either too obvious or cost prohibitive or both, I would guess.
Preview and lots of debate over at dpreview. The Q is not for me but whatever guys over at Pentax are smokin' may well be.....
I don't understand the target audience for this either. The sensor is smaller than an S95, G12, LX5, etc. It'll probably be a real quality small sensor camera and I suppose the ability to change lenses is a potential advantage. But if I really want small and portable the S95 or LX5 work well at much less cost. And if small size is not crucial the m4/3 / NEX cameras would seem to offer considerable advantage. I'll hold an open mind but on paper, it has no real appeal to me.
Comments
Pentax, always making questionable decisions.
Reminds me of this video!
http://www.youtube.com/user/DigitalRevCom#p/u/9/54Pq5Url2Nk
Yes, the Q is smaller but when Pen/GF/NEX + pancake is already small enough to always be with you, why bother with something smaller that delivers inferior results?
I guess we'll see if the backlit sensor is really impressive, or a gimmick.
The available lenses read like a bad joke.
I have to think they know that their SLR consumers (me included) that are typically not professionals, would consider switching to a mirrorless and just abandoning DSLRs. They already have the smallest DSLR and some really nice compact primes, so I understand them wanting to do something 'different'.
In this case I wish they would trade on their reputation for the W series indestructible compacts and make a water/shockproof small DSLR or mirrorless camera. But that is either too obvious or cost prohibitive or both, I would guess.
I don't understand the target audience for this either. The sensor is smaller than an S95, G12, LX5, etc. It'll probably be a real quality small sensor camera and I suppose the ability to change lenses is a potential advantage. But if I really want small and portable the S95 or LX5 work well at much less cost. And if small size is not crucial the m4/3 / NEX cameras would seem to offer considerable advantage. I'll hold an open mind but on paper, it has no real appeal to me.