Red Pentax Q10 with 5-15mm Lens for £149 from SRS Microsystems
338°Expired

Red Pentax Q10 with 5-15mm Lens for £149 from SRS Microsystems

25
Found 22nd Jun 2014
Nice price! Add this to the lens deals I've been posting, and you have a rather nice kit for not a bad price at all.

Here's a pretty good review of the Q - youtube.com/wat…RyM
It's quite long, but there are some example photos in the middle, and his summary after around 9.30 explains pretty well what's what with this camera .
I'd forgotten about the built in time lapse feature - I really should use it more!

You can find some very nice pictures taken with the Q10 up on Flickr, but here are a couple of JPEGs straight out of the camera taken in the last few days knocking around in my garden - picasaweb.google.com/116…ink no editing, just as the camera makes them.

I've added some high ISO examples in there, going all the way up to 6400. At 3200 the results are certainly usable for your facebook photos etc, and compare very well with most compacts. The 'Bold Monochrome' setting looks pretty good (to my eyes) in low light. I've been quite impressed with it's performance in low light, to be honest. Even when the images get noisy, I don't mind it too much as the noise looks, to me, fairly filmlike or at least not too intrusive.

25 Comments

can have a good little outfit with tele-zoom + standard lens for less than £400

glorified compact camera .. with compact like results
buy a sony hx50 (for example) and get so very very very much more

good deal, but i'd try and stay away from Pentax. Idk I prefer Canon, Sony and Nikon over Pentax. Cheap price means cheap quality. You never want to cheap out on a camera, because most likely the sensor is not going to be good.

Original Poster

crystalclear

glorified compact camera .. with compact like resultsbuy a sony hx50 (for … glorified compact camera .. with compact like resultsbuy a sony hx50 (for example) and get so very very very much more



It is definitely a strange little beast. The handling is quite dslr-like, but in a titchy package. IQ wise, it's on a par, if not slightly better than the HX50 in low light because the Sony has more pixels jammed into the same space. The Q7 is a nice step up, too, and I expect the Q8 or whatever comes next to be even better.

But generally I agree - it's an odd camera, and you can get 'better' in other packages, though perhaps not the versatility (eg using a 50mm f1.4 with an adapter to get a blazing fast 275mm equivalent) and I'd argue that this is definitely more 'fun' than a lot of other cameras.

westernsmith

It is definitely a strange little beast. The handling is quite dslr-like, … It is definitely a strange little beast. The handling is quite dslr-like, but in a titchy package. IQ wise, it's on a par, if not slightly better than the HX50 in low light because the Sony has more pixels jammed into the same space. The Q7 is a nice step up, too, and I expect the Q8 or whatever comes next to be even better.But generally I agree - it's an odd camera, and you can get 'better' in other packages, though perhaps not the versatility (eg using a 50mm f1.4 with an adapter to get a blazing fast 275mm equivalent) and I'd argue that this is definitely more 'fun' than a lot of other cameras.



it's quirky and quaint but once the novelty factor wears off you're left (I believe) with a very poor camera.
poor by comparison to top end compacts
my experience is that the hx50 (for one) gives better results
stuff magazine swear by it (the hx50)

Original Poster

THEDEALFINDER1000

good deal, but i'd try and stay away from Pentax. Idk I prefer Canon, … good deal, but i'd try and stay away from Pentax. Idk I prefer Canon, Sony and Nikon over Pentax. Cheap price means cheap quality. You never want to cheap out on a camera, because most likely the sensor is not going to be good.


I think the Q was around £500 when it came out, and the Q10 was just shy of £400, so they weren't cheap, and don't feel it - I think Pentax really shot themselves in the foot with that release price, but they're definitely well made (and the menu system is a lot nicer than a lot of compacts).

Original Poster

crystalclear

it's quirky and quaint but once the novelty factor wears off you're left … it's quirky and quaint but once the novelty factor wears off you're left (I believe) with a very poor camera.poor by comparison to top end compactsmy experience is that the hx50 (for one) gives better resultsstuff magazine swear by it (the hx50)



Yes - it's a niche product certainly and probably of more use to people that want an almost toy camera (or digital holga type thing) to use when humping a DSLR/large sensor camera isn't practical. As for the Q vs HX50 sensor, they both use Sony Exmor R sensors, just with different pixel counts.

Myself, I'll probably end up with a Fuji X10 or XF1... really gorgeous cameras. The XF1 should be coming up in the Fuji refurb shop soon, hopefully.

Original Poster

crystalclear

it's quirky and quaint but once the novelty factor wears off you're left … it's quirky and quaint but once the novelty factor wears off you're left (I believe) with a very poor camera.poor by comparison to top end compactsmy experience is that the hx50 (for one) gives better resultsstuff magazine swear by it (the hx50)



Just found a decent deal on the HX50... A little bit tempted as it looks pretty good. This site encourages far too much spending!

THEDEALFINDER1000

good deal, but i'd try and stay away from Pentax. Idk I prefer Canon, … good deal, but i'd try and stay away from Pentax. Idk I prefer Canon, Sony and Nikon over Pentax. Cheap price means cheap quality. You never want to cheap out on a camera, because most likely the sensor is not going to be good.



Pentax make fantastic quality gear and it most certainly isn't cheap. I am a k-30 owner with a small selection of lenses. I wish I could afford some of those prized limited Pentax lenses. If anything, some consider the limited lenses to be too expensive. The quality certainly cannot be knocked though.

westernsmith

Just found a decent deal on the HX50... A little bit tempted as it looks … Just found a decent deal on the HX50... A little bit tempted as it looks pretty good. This site encourages far too much spending!



have owned and used the x10 and xf1
both very good .. specially the x10
never owned one but the pentax mx1 gets VERY good reviews
something that can be got for under £150 and represents (I believe) excellent value is the nikon j2

very tempted been thinking for a few days now at this price really want it, got lots of other gear and for some reason i want this

Original Poster

Hightowerman

very tempted been thinking for a few days now at this price really want … very tempted been thinking for a few days now at this price really want it, got lots of other gear and for some reason i want this


At this price, it's very tempting. If you're into strobist stuff, you can sync up to 1/2000s using the onboard flash as an optical trigger which is pretty neat.

crystalclear

poor by comparison to top end compactsmy experience is that the hx50 (for … poor by comparison to top end compactsmy experience is that the hx50 (for one) gives better resultsstuff magazine swear by it (the hx50)



If even the HX50 makes the Q10 look bad then the Q10 image quality must be pretty poor.
The HX50 is great in terms of features and zoom for its size but image quality is not its strong point. (I had one but didn't keep it for too long. I liked the features and zoom but didn't like the image quality.) Something like the HX50 is blown away by premium compacts such as the Sony RX100, Canon G15, Olympus XZ2, etc. Although on these cameras you are swapping better image quality for a much smaller zoom range.

So many camera snobs! Who really has £400+ to spend on a camera??!! Read the reviews on the Q10, it's apparently a good camera. Hot from me!

This is an excellent camera - I have both the original Q and the Q10 both picked up for £150 with lens. Image quality and autofocus are marginally better on the Q10, but the build quality is slightly more plastic although still very solid.

I don't feel as if I am compromising on image quality too much if I take a Q instead of my K5, and the whole system including 3 lenses fits in a tiny Lowepro Edit bag - it is the perfect walkabout camera.

Had great results with the 03 Fisheye lens (less than £100 when I bought it) when we went up The Shard a couple of weeks ago.

westernsmith

It is definitely a strange little beast. The handling is quite dslr-like, … It is definitely a strange little beast. The handling is quite dslr-like, but in a titchy package. IQ wise, it's on a par, if not slightly better than the HX50 in low light because the Sony has more pixels jammed into the same space. The Q7 is a nice step up, too, and I expect the Q8 or whatever comes next to be even better.But generally I agree - it's an odd camera, and you can get 'better' in other packages, though perhaps not the versatility (eg using a 50mm f1.4 with an adapter to get a blazing fast 275mm equivalent) and I'd argue that this is definitely more 'fun' than a lot of other cameras.


its not just the effective focal length thats affected by crop factor but the effective aperture
so its like 5.1 apsc equiv wideopen, probably want it stopped down some too so not really
Edited by: "brilly" 23rd Jun 2014

Original Poster

brilly

its not just the effective focal length thats affected by crop factor but … its not just the effective focal length thats affected by crop factor but the effective apertureso its like 5.1 apsc equiv wideopen, probably want it stopped down some too so not really


Not quite -
The focal length and aperture remain unchanged - A 50mm f1.4 is always going to be a 50mm f1.4 - using it on a cropped sensor doesn't change that.
What does change is the field of view, which is where things change in relation to aperture - with a 50mm f1.4 on a cropped sensor, you get greater depth of field.
Basically, depth of field is inversely proportional to crop factor.

So, if you put a 50mm f1.4 on, say a micro four thirds camera (for easy maths!) and shoot wide open, you get an equivalent field of view of 100mm (2x50), the light gathering of an f1.4 lens (no change), and the depth of field of an f2.8 (2x1.4).

I'm practical terms on the Pentax Q, it means that where on a full frame camera shooting with a very fast telephoto lens you would have a very narrow area in focus (a person's eyes might be in focus, but the tip of their nose out of focus) you get the same view and light gathering (so the same shutter speed and ISO) but with more in focus (from in front of their nose to the back of their head).

That's why if you like blurred backgrounds, crop sensors aren't so popular - you need proportionally faster lenses to get the same amount of blur.

Hope that helps!

Original Poster

Just had a quick Google and these two links say what I was trying to say a lot better (and in more detail) than I managed -
bobatkins.com/pho…tml
bobatkins.com/pho…tml

westernsmith

Just found a decent deal on the HX50... A little bit tempted as it looks … Just found a decent deal on the HX50... A little bit tempted as it looks pretty good. This site encourages far too much spending!

HX50, where is the decent deal?

westernsmith

Not quite - The focal length and aperture remain unchanged - A 50mm f1.4 … Not quite - The focal length and aperture remain unchanged - A 50mm f1.4 is always going to be a 50mm f1.4 - using it on a cropped sensor doesn't change that. What does change is the field of view, which is where things change in relation to aperture - with a 50mm f1.4 on a cropped sensor, you get greater depth of field.Basically, depth of field is inversely proportional to crop factor. So, if you put a 50mm f1.4 on, say a micro four thirds camera (for easy maths!) and shoot wide open, you get an equivalent field of view of 100mm (2x50), the light gathering of an f1.4 lens (no change), and the depth of field of an f2.8 (2x1.4). I'm practical terms on the Pentax Q, it means that where on a full frame camera shooting with a very fast telephoto lens you would have a very narrow area in focus (a person's eyes might be in focus, but the tip of their nose out of focus) you get the same view and light gathering (so the same shutter speed and ISO) but with more in focus (from in front of their nose to the back of their head).That's why if you like blurred backgrounds, crop sensors aren't so popular - you need proportionally faster lenses to get the same amount of blur. Hope that helps!


well oops yeah i guess but then the thing is as image quality is lower than on dslr etc you could just bump the iso up along with stopping down the lens to get the same effect

Original Poster

brilly

well oops yeah i guess but then the thing is as image quality is lower … well oops yeah i guess but then the thing is as image quality is lower than on dslr etc you could just bump the iso up along with stopping down the lens to get the same effect



You'll need MUCH larger pockets, though!
The other factor, for extreme telephoto, is cost - a 300mm f2.8 costs a lot more than the equivalent lens on a Q.

As for the image quality, there's definitely a trade off, but you can still get good results - The birding pool on Flickr has some impressive examples - flickr.com/gro…ng/

Original Poster

djdynamite123

HX50, where is the decent deal?


hotukdeals.com/dea…581

westernsmith

You'll need MUCH larger pockets, though! The other factor, for extreme … You'll need MUCH larger pockets, though! The other factor, for extreme telephoto, is cost - a 300mm f2.8 costs a lot more than the equivalent lens on a Q. As for the image quality, there's definitely a trade off, but you can still get good results - The birding pool on Flickr has some impressive examples - https://www.flickr.com/groups/pentaxqbirding/


but thats part of the point, you dont need that 300mm 2.8 lens, a standard longish zoom with raised iso will give the same reach and shutter speed

guess i can see the point with longer reach though where the difference is alot bigger
Edited by: "brilly" 25th Jun 2014

Bought one when Amazon dropped the price to £160. As a purchaser of strictly compact cameras it's the first "real" camera that I've ever bought. As far as I'm concerned it's a very good camera to actually learn about digital photography and fiddle with too. I've bought a super cheap cctv lens and c-mount to Q adaptor to muck around with after discovering this thing called bokeh and how to achieve the effect. I've also got a TV Zoom lens from Toyo or something that looks very similar to this ebay.co.uk/itm…924 , which I rescued from a discarded microscope setup at my work place. And now I've got the lens to work on the Q10 using the C to PQ adapter. It's fun messing around with lenses and learning as you go along. I never knew any of this stuff before I bought the Q10 and I wouldn't have if I'd bought something with a fixed lens setup I suppose.

You guys who say buy the Sony cam or any other better fixed lens cam over this, well, I guess you know your stuff, but as a total newbie to photography the Q10 is the nuts......and I like fiddling with it :-D. It's a JOKE!!!!

This camera is a good learning tool and stepping stone to maybe something better when you actually know what the f*ck you're doing........ which admittedly I don't! :-). But I'm slowly but surely getting there thanks to the Q10.

Edited by: "Loui" 30th Jun 2014
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text