Pentax Q Compact System Camera - Black (12MP, 5-15mm Lens Kit) £149.99 delivered @ Amazon.WAS £319
600°Expired

Pentax Q Compact System Camera - Black (12MP, 5-15mm Lens Kit) £149.99 delivered @ Amazon.WAS £319

£149.99Amazon Deals
66
Found 17th Jul 2013
53% off original price.Plenty of lenses available for this camera.


12MP CMOS back-illuminated, high sensitivity sensor
Sensor Stabilization system (Shake Reduction)
Continuous shooting 5 frames/sec
3" High Definition LCD Screen
Full HD Video, Codec H.264, 30 fps

66 Comments

http://goo.gl/rwUVa

Was certainly not £319
Edited by: "jaset" 17th Jul 2013

was this price for ages on amazon france. finally in the UK also

I wouldnt be supprised if it was £319 Ive been looking at these and this seems a very good price

wildbilly1

I wouldnt be supprised if it was £319 Ive been looking at these and this … I wouldnt be supprised if it was £319 Ive been looking at these and this seems a very good price



Why? is it good camera?

Just wondering what 15mm is equivalent to, when compared with a normal compact camera? Is it roughly equivalent to, say, a 10x zoom?

my lumix dmc-tz7 is slowly dying ;/ - was looking for rather cheap replacement with more manual fun
i think i found one - thanks, ordered.

dooper

Just wondering what 15mm is equivalent to, when compared with a normal … Just wondering what 15mm is equivalent to, when compared with a normal compact camera? Is it roughly equivalent to, say, a 10x zoom?

Well, no, 5x3=15 so this is a 3x zoom. As to equivalent, it'll be about the same field of view as a kit zoom on a DSLR. i.e. 18-55mm for APS-C or the old 28-85mm kit zoom on film SLRs.

afrik

my lumix dmc-tz7 is slowly dying ;/ - was looking for rather cheap … my lumix dmc-tz7 is slowly dying ;/ - was looking for rather cheap replacement with more manual funi think i found one - thanks, ordered.



TZ7 is an awesome camera,mines been used to death this is a decent bit of kith though for the price

look elsewhere people, the pentax Q is a 'questionable' mirrorless camera system, if you have only £150 to spend then look for a 2nd hand m4/3 or sony nex kit

jaset

Was certainly not £319



afrik

my lumix dmc-tz7 is slowly dying ;/ - was looking for rather cheap … my lumix dmc-tz7 is slowly dying ;/ - was looking for rather cheap replacement with more manual fun i think i found one - thanks, ordered.



Actually had a TZ3 here Even the first of the TZ lines were amazing imo

jaset

Was certainly not £319



The Pentax Q was iriginally released in 2011 and retailed at over £600 with the 8.5mm prime (which is cheaper than the 5-15mm zoom.

Couple of pics taken with my Q and the prime. Great little street camera as well.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8113/8654968213_0c50ea4085_c.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8264/8645824285_15cba18d9d_c.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5495/9043093161_ddc86f04eb_c.jpg


Edited by: "Sockpuppetuk" 17th Jul 2013

godsakes

look elsewhere people, the pentax Q is a 'questionable' mirrorless camera … look elsewhere people, the pentax Q is a 'questionable' mirrorless camera system, if you have only £150 to spend then look for a 2nd hand m4/3 or sony nex kit


Agreed!!!

What's this camera like for a beginner, I went to the local zoo the other day and took a load of snaps with my iPhone5 and just wanting to take my photos to the next level, after doing some reading around it seems I would like something better than a simple point and shoot but maybe not a slr due to the high cost, Csc?

im trying to justify this one :P.. dont have a dslr, but do have a Tz10

what makes it questionable godsakes?

this camera has a sensor size of a compact camera. it's just a fancy compact camera.

Just incase anyone wants to sell this kit lens on once you get one (If you want a prime rather than the zoom), I shall pay £50 for it.

Sockpuppetuk

Couple of pics taken with my Q and the prime. Great little street camera … Couple of pics taken with my Q and the prime. Great little street camera as well.


Your shot of the lizard is taken at just ISO320 and already you're getting the noisy smudged affect on the leafs, visible on a web sized shot. I'm sure it's right for some people but I'd argue the majority would be better off with some of the competing mirrorless systems.

And before someone pulls the old "it's all down to the photographer" I'm sure a capable photographer will do well with a pin hole camera and instead of using a flashgun illuminate the shot with the brilliance of their artistry, that's what REAL photographers do ;-)

Edited by: "godsakes" 18th Jul 2013

Yesterday I took receipt of the 5-15mm zoom (from srs microsystems via ebay). I’ve been using my Q for some time, now, but with the 8.5mm standard prime mostly. It’s one of my most used cameras. In fact, probably my most used, this year, displacing my Fujifilm X10. This Q is almost impossible to see the screen in the bright sunshine, though, which is something I hadn’t noticed in all the time I've had mine until now, now that we have some sun. I’ve also got the toy lens wide, the toy lens tele, and the fish-eye. I use the fish-eye a lot (I shoot panoramas a lot). I’d recommend another battery or two, as I can easily drain a single battery in just a lunchtime’s shooting. Luckily it takes the same batteries as my Fujifilm X10. This might be an old model of Q (there’s been a Q10 since, and just announced but not available yet, a bigger sensor Q7), but only last week or so there was another easily applied firmware update. Also, the raw format is DNG. I haven’t had enough usage of the 5-15mm yet but the 135 film camera equivalent focal lengths I read from it are 27mm to 83mm, so it’s basically the equivalent of a 28-85mm full frame mid-range zoom, or the equivalent field of view of an 18-55mm APS-C mid-range zoom. It’s quite a good lens, too. The little 8.5mm f1.9 prime is superb, though, if you can get that (srs microsystems have some left, after that, they’re not going to be possible to get, either alone or with a camera).

My test shots yesterday with my new 5-15mm zoom: flickr.com/pho…16/

andrewt

What's this camera like for a beginner, I went to the local zoo the other … What's this camera like for a beginner, I went to the local zoo the other day and took a load of snaps with my iPhone5 and just wanting to take my photos to the next level, after doing some reading around it seems I would like something better than a simple point and shoot but maybe not a slr due to the high cost, Csc?



It's not really much of a step up, it's a bit of an odd system as most of the mirrorless cameras offer not just the flexibility of interchangeable lenses but also much larger sensors than most compact cameras. The Pentax Q system's sensor is very small, the same as in most compacts (1/2.3in) so if you're wanting to step up I'd agree with the recommendation of either Panasonic/Olympus micro 4/3 or Sony NEX. A larger sensor can offer a good step-up as you get the benefits of much better high iso performance (so less noise in low light), wider dynamic range (the amount of detail you can capture in the bright and dark areas before they go white/black) and more control in post processing.

It's a difficult question to answer as for every advantage you choose there is a tradeoff, a larger sensor in turn means a larger lens so the NEX and micro 4/3 cameras are bulkier compared to compacts and their standard zoom lenses are tiny 3x or similar compared to the colossal zooms the compact superzoom cameras like the TZ series offer which they can do because their sensor is so small.

I would like to have a play with a Pentax Q camera but it would really need to be cheaper since it would just be a play around camera for me.

John

simont_space

Nice review here on it. http://youtu.be/f8QdMmI7RyM



Great review - makes me want to buy this, despite the compact camera size sensor and image quality - although I'm not sure it would be so much fun with just the one lens.


godsakes

look elsewhere people, the pentax Q is a 'questionable' mirrorless camera … look elsewhere people, the pentax Q is a 'questionable' mirrorless camera system, if you have only £150 to spend then look for a 2nd hand m4/3 or sony nex kit



But you can't carry them and their lenses in a pocket


SpideyPunk

Just incase anyone wants to sell this kit lens on once you get one (If … Just incase anyone wants to sell this kit lens on once you get one (If you want a prime rather than the zoom), I shall pay £50 for it.



Do you seriously think anyone's that dumb? (or did you mean you'd give them the prime and £50?)

wombat6025

Do you seriously think anyone's that dumb? (or did you mean you'd give … Do you seriously think anyone's that dumb? (or did you mean you'd give them the prime and £50?)



How is that assuming they are dumb? The camera and the lens are £149, if they wish to purchase/otherwise acquire a prime lens instead (I know a lot of people only use Primes 90% of the time, hence my offer) they would effectively pay £99 for the camera.. It was an offer.

Jetpac

im trying to justify this one :P.. dont have a dslr, but do have a … im trying to justify this one :P.. dont have a dslr, but do have a Tz10what makes it questionable godsakes?



What 00ss0 & Johnmcl7 said

The Pentax Q just seems mostly pointless, it only has a compact camera sensor - if keeping the size small was your main issue, you'd stick with a decent compact camera. Hell some high end compacts like the Sony RX100 (not cheap) have significantly larger sensors than the Pentax Q

If image quality and thin depth of field is more important to you then you'd want a larger sensor system such as the micro 4/3 and sony NEX systems.

The Pentax Q is in no man's land, which is a shame Pentax actually make some decent & under rated DSLR bodies but every attempt they've had at a mirrorless camera has been laughable not just the Q but also the K-01

godsakes

Your shot of the lizard is taken at just ISO320 and already you're … Your shot of the lizard is taken at just ISO320 and already you're getting the noisy smudged affect on the leafs, visible on a web sized shot. I'm sure it's right for some people but I'd argue the majority would be better off with some of the competing mirrorless systems.And before some pulls the old "it's all down to the photographer" I'm sure a capable photographer will do well with a pin hole camera and instead of using a flashgun illuminate the shot with the brilliance of their artistry, that's what REAL photographers do ;-)



Yep - some of the actual images taken have seriously dampened my ardour - think I'll pass on this.
After messing around with compacts in all their guises it's time for me to get serious and put image quality as a priority

SpideyPunk

How is that assuming they are dumb? The camera and the lens are £149, if … How is that assuming they are dumb? The camera and the lens are £149, if they wish to purchase/otherwise acquire a prime lens instead (I know a lot of people only use Primes 90% of the time, hence my offer) they would effectively pay £99 for the camera.. It was an offer.



The cheapest I can find that lens is £109.... So a £50 offer is trying it on a bit.

Plus you can get the body only for a hundred quid anyway. Been that price on eBay for a while.
Edited by: "Sparkster" 18th Jul 2013

godsakes

What 00ss0 & Johnmcl7 said The Pentax Q just seems mostly pointless, it … What 00ss0 & Johnmcl7 said The Pentax Q just seems mostly pointless, it only has a compact camera sensor - if keeping the size small was your main issue, you'd stick with a decent compact camera. Hell some high end compacts like the Sony RX100 (not cheap) have significantly larger sensors than the Pentax Q If image quality and thin depth of field is more important to you then you'd want a larger sensor system such as the micro 4/3 and sony NEX systems.The Pentax Q is in no man's land, which is a shame Pentax actually make some decent & under rated DSLR bodies but every attempt they've had at a mirrorless camera has been laughable not just the Q but also the K-01



I really don't understand why you can't understand the niche market the Pentax Q has taken up. It was never meant to be a replacement or backup camera for DSLR owners. It's target market largely resides in Japan where there's a demand for smaller, lighter and convenient cameras which allow for creativity a point and shoot camera doesn't allow you to explore. You can pixel peek all day, but at the end of the day most of the photos taken by the Q are going to be used as moderately sized prints, or simply used online. There's nothing wrong with a bit of noise here and there if the photographer has succeeded in conveying something in a moment they saw and captured. What's more, if the sales of the original Q were so abysmal they wouldn't have thrown money at it to create the Q10 or the Q7. What I'm trying to get through to you is the fact that the Pentax Q isn't "pointless" or "laughable" for that matter.

There are plenty of reasons why Pentax haven't concentrated on m4/3 system cameras. The market is simply saturated at this point, and there isn't a viable entryway into the market. I digress...the Pentax Q is a fun camera to use, and since it's light as a feather, you'll be carrying it everyday without swearing under your breath every 10 minutes for lugging around a sizable weight around your neck. Photos taken on this can still outshine any fluff that's pumped out from "photographers" who have better "performing" cameras yet fail to perform.

*rant over*

X) Hot deal. This has been the going rate for new Pentax Qs in Japan for some time. But it's the cheapest it's ever been here for sure.

Edited by: "waitingformyfirmware" 18th Jul 2013

There’s this: adorama.com/alc…est
I rate my Q quite highly as a decent quality camera, given the small sensor. I consider it to give better quality shots than my Fuji X10, and always focuses precisely and quickly, which my X10 often doesn’t. However, it’s a small sensor camera and there’s no getting away from that. I rarely use the Q in jpeg mode, almost always raw DNG through lightroom. I find the jpegs disappointingly mushy. I think among the small sensor cameras, this is at a leading edge, and the next jump up would be to the RX100 / Nikon 1 class of sensor, or the new APS-C 28mm equiv lensed pocket cameras such as the new Nikon Coolpix A (Eh?) and the Ricoh GR (of which, most agree the latter is better and cheaper), but then you’re talking £600 to £830.

One significant point, which originally sold it to me, and still maintains itself as a joyful reason every day I use it, is that shooting with the Q is simply a load of fun. Tiny camera, but huge fun. Mine’s on a wrist strap (in fact, it’s on a wrist strap I use in my left hand, and this is the only camera I’ve ever been able to use totally left-handed, sitting upright in my palm in portrait orientation).

I also have a Panasonic TZ30 which I absolutely hate and wish I’d never bought — the quality is rubbish, and the GPS tags my pictures with where I was last time I used the camera. My Nokia Lumia 920 can pretty much equal it if not beat it, at the widest view.
My wife has a Fujifilm F770EXR which we find far nicer than the TZ30, and much better reacting GPS. I think the output is better, too (and can be raw). It doesn’t match my Fujifilm X10, though — the X10 beats it noticeably in many ways, picture quality included. Somehow, the Q manages to take the edge on the X10, quality wise (when both are at raw — the Q at jpeg is nearly as bad as the TZ30). I don’t think there’s a direct linear correlation between sensor size and picture quality result. Obviously the bigger the better, but there’s more at play than just size alone. As the bishop said to the actress.

Banned

best camera at this price range

dooper

Just wondering what 15mm is equivalent to, when compared with a normal … Just wondering what 15mm is equivalent to, when compared with a normal compact camera? Is it roughly equivalent to, say, a 10x zoom?



The 'zoom' of a lens tells you the ratio between the shortest and longest focal length of the lens. A lens advertised as 10X zoom will 'magnify' the captured image 10 times bigger, but the important thing to consider is magnified 10 times bigger compared to what?
When you hear 2X zoom you think twice as big, but that's actually not true. It's useful to understand zoom as a form of cropping. When you zoom in you take a crop of a portion of the scene and make it take up the whole image. Of course its done optically so you don't lose quality. When you zoom in 2X you capture 1/2 the height and 1/2 the width of your original scene. So 2X zoom means you can only capture 1/4 of the 1X image. The image below illustrates this difference - as you can see 8X zoom actually capture just 1/64 of the scene - which equates to a tonne of zoom - 64X the pixels of the zoomed in portion of the scene.http://snapsort.com/learn/lens/images/zoom_comparison.jpg

waitingformyfirmware

I really don't understand why you can't understand the niche market the … I really don't understand why you can't understand the niche market the Pentax Q has taken up. It was never meant to be a replacement or backup camera for DSLR owners. It's target market largely resides in Japan where there's a demand for smaller, lighter and convenient cameras which allow for creativity a point and shoot camera doesn't allow you to explore. You can pixel peek all day, but at the end of the day most of the photos taken by the Q are going to be used as moderately sized prints, or simply used online. There's nothing wrong with a bit of noise here and there if the photographer has succeeded in conveying something in a moment they saw and captured. What's more, if the sales of the original Q were so abysmal they wouldn't have thrown money at it to create the Q10 or the Q7. What I'm trying to get through to you is the fact that the Pentax Q isn't "pointless" or "laughable" for that matter. There are plenty of reasons why Pentax haven't concentrated on m4/3 system cameras. The market is simply saturated at this point, and there isn't a viable entryway into the market. I digress...the Pentax Q is a fun camera to use, and since it's light as a feather, you'll be carrying it everyday without swearing under your breath every 10 minutes for lugging around a sizable weight around your neck. Photos taken on this can still outshine any fluff that's pumped out from "photographers" who have better "performing" cameras yet fail to perform. *rant over* X) Hot deal. This has been the going rate for new Pentax Qs in Japan for some time. But it's the cheapest it's ever been here for sure.



Great post. I totally agree.

waitingformyfirmware

I really don't understand why you can't understand the niche market the … I really don't understand why you can't understand the niche market the Pentax Q has taken up. It was never meant to be a replacement or backup camera for DSLR owners. It's target market largely resides in Japan where there's a demand for smaller, lighter and convenient cameras which allow for creativity a point and shoot camera doesn't allow you to explore. You can pixel peek all day, but at the end of the day most of the photos taken by the Q are going to be used as moderately sized prints, or simply used online. There's nothing wrong with a bit of noise here and there if the photographer has succeeded in conveying something in a moment they saw and captured. What's more, if the sales of the original Q were so abysmal they wouldn't have thrown money at it to create the Q10 or the Q7. What I'm trying to get through to you is the fact that the Pentax Q isn't "pointless" or "laughable" for that matter. There are plenty of reasons why Pentax haven't concentrated on m4/3 system cameras. The market is simply saturated at this point, and there isn't a viable entryway into the market. I digress...the Pentax Q is a fun camera to use, and since it's light as a feather, you'll be carrying it everyday without swearing under your breath every 10 minutes for lugging around a sizable weight around your neck. Photos taken on this can still outshine any fluff that's pumped out from "photographers" who have better "performing" cameras yet fail to perform. *rant over* X) Hot deal. This has been the going rate for new Pentax Qs in Japan for some time. But it's the cheapest it's ever been here for sure.

So what are we saying here then, it has a small sensor like a compact, a small zoom, no viewfinder.And it has a niche market. Why?. A lot of compacts nowadays have a good zoom which in itself makes them a better option than buying this along with several lenses to cover the focal range of say a Lumix TZ40. I have read a fair few results of people saying image is not that good, Its a novelty camera really and from what i can see a bit of a flop, it has no real market place or advantage over a compact. Unless image quality is better?

This is worth a read for a decent review. I always use steves digicams to help when buying cameras:
steves-digicams.com/cam…tml

This thing doesn't just have a small sensor, it has a tiny one. 1/2.3 inch is superzoom size. The better compacts (like the canon s100) have a 1/1.7 sensor. I appreciate that some people like this camera but it just doesn't make sense to me. If you want good pictures from a small camera, I would get a s95/s100. If i had more cash, I would get an RX100. If I needed a zoom, I would get a superzoom.

If you want much better pictures you need a bigger sensor. It is possible to pick up a used panasonic GF1/GF3GF5 with a lens for around this price. One of those will offer miles better quality and not be too much bigger. If you are prepared to stretch the budget a little further then the panasonic GX1 is a great camera and can be had second hand for a couple of hundred pounds.

I really dislike the old "put this camera in the hands of a excellent photographer then he will produce better images than most people will with the best DSLRs". That's all well and good, but if you put a good DSLR is that photographer's hands then the pictures he would take would blow this pentax-q away. Composition and light source would remain the same but depth of field, dynamic range, micro contrast, colour accuracy and the true resolution cannot be replicated with a tiny sensor. Pros would much rather use their camera phone because they always have it on them, they might have an RX100 or m4/3 for travel/walkabout if they wanted something lightweight and use the full frame DSLR for assignments. They would never use one of these unless it was the guy who did the press shots for this camera.

This camera just reminds me of one of those Nissan micras that teenage boys drive around. The have alloy wheels, go faster stripes, big exhaust, low profile tyre, bucket seats and a big stereo. They still have the 1 litre engine and will lose a drag race with pretty much anything they are up against.

Have a look at this link for sensor sizes. This has the same sensor size as the a810.

Original Poster

fzbob

Agreed!!!


Couldn't disagree more

Original Poster

If you're considering buying this camera take the opinions on here with a pinch of salt.I will be looking at the reviews on amazon from confirmed buyers.

Poor camera and poor system, but if £150 is pocket money for you it makes an interesting toy.

waitingformyfirmware

It was never meant to be a replacement or backup camera for DSLR owners.


So it's what? a toy camera? a quick cash grab from Pentax?

waitingformyfirmware

It's target market largely resides in Japan where there's a demand for … It's target market largely resides in Japan where there's a demand for smaller, lighter and convenient cameras which allow for creativity a point and shoot camera doesn't allow you to explore.


So tell me why can you be more creative with the Pentax Q than a decent compact camera?

waitingformyfirmware

You can pixel peek all day, but at the end of the day most of the photos … You can pixel peek all day, but at the end of the day most of the photos taken by the Q are going to be used as moderately sized prints, or simply used online.


Translation, the image quality is nothing special

waitingformyfirmware

if the sales of the original Q were so abysmal they wouldn't have thrown … if the sales of the original Q were so abysmal they wouldn't have thrown money at it to create the Q10 or the Q7.


From Pentax's perspective they're effectively selling you a overpriced compact camera with extra options for add on sales (lenses). It makes sense from their perspective it doesn't make sense from a buyer's perspective IMO.

Sockpuppetuk

Couple of pics taken with my Q and the prime. Great little street camera … Couple of pics taken with my Q and the prime. Great little street camera as well.



HUKD meet up?

The 2 groups of people that make me laugh are 'prosumer' cyclists and photographers. People need to learn that the best camera is the one you have with you. Look how tiny this thing is, not everyone wants to lug around a DSLR especially in this weather. This camera looks great for street photography and the shots look like they have a lot of character (from YT review)

If you wanna be 'that guy' who goes around the park taking close ups of flowers then stick to your £1k+ DSLR!!
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text