Free Opinions. No Refunds.
pentax q
Hands On
14/10/2011 Filed in: Photography
I ventured out to the Henrys Photographic Show today, and managed to see or play with several recently released cameras that I’ve mentioned previously.
The X10 is the “little brother” to the X100. Coming in November, this $600 camera is what I’ve been looking for in a compact for a long time. The build quality is a notch or two above that of the Canon G12 or Nikon P7x00 series. It’s a little better built than my LX3, but it also feels way better in hand, mainly because the small body of the LX3 can be awkward at times.
The menu system is responsive, and more intuitive than any camera I’ve owned. I love that you can choose the Auto ISO upper limit as a menu item. The screen itself is quite nice, comparable to the one on my A500 DSLR. Having said that, the one thing I’ll miss from my DSLRs on the X10 is the eye detection, which turns off the LCD when you use the OVF.
Speaking of the OVF, it’s nice and bright. While it only covers 85% of the frame, it’s more than adequate for a compact camera.
The manual zoom is… dreamy. The rotating motion feels slow and deliberate, and it’s buttery smooth. It has a nicer rotating feel than any of my DSLR zooms, that’s for sure.
As for the autofocus, well, it seems to be average. About the same speed as my LX3. It is a bit of a bummer that the remote shutter trigger is mechanical. It would have been nice to have an RF or IR type of triggering system.
I can’t wait to get one.
The EP3 is a pretty known quantity these days. For me, I just wanted to see if the AF speed was as good as the hype made it out to be. The short answer is “yes”. The Olympus booth was not as well lit as some as the others, and the AF was particularly fast with the kit zoom. The rep popped on the 12mm prime, and the AF was a hair faster. It is at least as fast as my A500, and faster than all the compacts and ILCs I messed with. They had the EPL and EPM models there too, but I didn’t play with them. While I like the EP3 as a camera, I can’t get over the fact that I hate the overall design.
The Sony NEX7 is going to be very popular with serious photographers. It feels great in the hand. It’s heavy in a good way. The EVF is quite good as well, although I haven’t seen enough of them to really make any comparative statements. The focus seemed a hair slower than the EP3, but it was zippy overall. It’s a great camera, but it’s not my cup of tea, even though I’m a Sony Alpha shooter.
The NX200s on display had wires coming out of the handgrip, so it was a bit hard to get a feel for it, but it felt like a less expensive version of the NEX7. Not a cheap version, just less expensive. The LCD on the NX200 is stunningly sharp. The menu system is also really nice. I would even go so far as saying that it might even be nicer than the one on the NX10. The design of the camera is a bit better than average, although there are some design choices that will having you asking “WTF?” It boggles my mind why they printed the logo on the handgrip, where it’s most likely to wear out. The design of the on/off shutter release is also a little odd to me.
I love the lens ecosystem that Samsung has built up, and if I was going to go with a mirrorless ILC system, it would be between this one and the vapourware Panasonic GF Pro camera that may or may not ever make it to production.
As far as I could tell, the Pentax Q was behind glass, and you had to find a rep to let you mess around with it. From what I saw, however, it is small. The lenses are tiny. It looks like a really fun system, and I really love the industrial design, even though the specs may not live up to the high pricing.
Like the Q, the Nikon 1s were behind glass and required a rep. From what I did see, however, the fit and finish were underwhelming. They kinda looked cheap relative to their pricing. The handling is definitely not my cup of tea, and it will be interesting to see what kind of photographers will invest in this system.
FujiFilm X10
The X10 is the “little brother” to the X100. Coming in November, this $600 camera is what I’ve been looking for in a compact for a long time. The build quality is a notch or two above that of the Canon G12 or Nikon P7x00 series. It’s a little better built than my LX3, but it also feels way better in hand, mainly because the small body of the LX3 can be awkward at times.
The menu system is responsive, and more intuitive than any camera I’ve owned. I love that you can choose the Auto ISO upper limit as a menu item. The screen itself is quite nice, comparable to the one on my A500 DSLR. Having said that, the one thing I’ll miss from my DSLRs on the X10 is the eye detection, which turns off the LCD when you use the OVF.
Speaking of the OVF, it’s nice and bright. While it only covers 85% of the frame, it’s more than adequate for a compact camera.
The manual zoom is… dreamy. The rotating motion feels slow and deliberate, and it’s buttery smooth. It has a nicer rotating feel than any of my DSLR zooms, that’s for sure.
As for the autofocus, well, it seems to be average. About the same speed as my LX3. It is a bit of a bummer that the remote shutter trigger is mechanical. It would have been nice to have an RF or IR type of triggering system.
I can’t wait to get one.
Olympus EP3
The EP3 is a pretty known quantity these days. For me, I just wanted to see if the AF speed was as good as the hype made it out to be. The short answer is “yes”. The Olympus booth was not as well lit as some as the others, and the AF was particularly fast with the kit zoom. The rep popped on the 12mm prime, and the AF was a hair faster. It is at least as fast as my A500, and faster than all the compacts and ILCs I messed with. They had the EPL and EPM models there too, but I didn’t play with them. While I like the EP3 as a camera, I can’t get over the fact that I hate the overall design.
Sony NEX7
The Sony NEX7 is going to be very popular with serious photographers. It feels great in the hand. It’s heavy in a good way. The EVF is quite good as well, although I haven’t seen enough of them to really make any comparative statements. The focus seemed a hair slower than the EP3, but it was zippy overall. It’s a great camera, but it’s not my cup of tea, even though I’m a Sony Alpha shooter.
Samsung NX200
The NX200s on display had wires coming out of the handgrip, so it was a bit hard to get a feel for it, but it felt like a less expensive version of the NEX7. Not a cheap version, just less expensive. The LCD on the NX200 is stunningly sharp. The menu system is also really nice. I would even go so far as saying that it might even be nicer than the one on the NX10. The design of the camera is a bit better than average, although there are some design choices that will having you asking “WTF?” It boggles my mind why they printed the logo on the handgrip, where it’s most likely to wear out. The design of the on/off shutter release is also a little odd to me.
I love the lens ecosystem that Samsung has built up, and if I was going to go with a mirrorless ILC system, it would be between this one and the vapourware Panasonic GF Pro camera that may or may not ever make it to production.
Pentax Q
As far as I could tell, the Pentax Q was behind glass, and you had to find a rep to let you mess around with it. From what I saw, however, it is small. The lenses are tiny. It looks like a really fun system, and I really love the industrial design, even though the specs may not live up to the high pricing.
Nikon 1
Like the Q, the Nikon 1s were behind glass and required a rep. From what I did see, however, the fit and finish were underwhelming. They kinda looked cheap relative to their pricing. The handling is definitely not my cup of tea, and it will be interesting to see what kind of photographers will invest in this system.
Pentax Q: Insane or Ingenius?
11/07/2011 Filed in: Photography
A few weeks ago, Pentax announced a novel little interchangeable lens system camera called the Pentax Q. Billed as the world’s smallest interchangeable lens system, its size advantage came with a “major defect” that offended the sensibilities of camera buffs obsessed with speeds and feeds: a tiny sensor.
Sensor aside, the camera has a great fit and finish with a take-it-or-leave it design reminiscent of the film age. Its premium build is accompanied with a matching price - a whopping $800 for the body and a 47mm equivalent prime lens. $800 is not cheap, but I suspect that Pentax is going for the same target market as Leica’s repackaged and heavily marked up Panasonic compact cameras. It’s also not too far off from Ricoh’s line of compacts, beloved by serious photographers (for their handling) but much maligned by measurbating camera lovers. It should come as no surprise that Ricoh bought the Pentax photography division last week.
Not all camera lovers are photographers, and not all photographers are camera lovers. In my mind, camera lovers are more interested in the machinery of photography than the actual taking of photos. Obsessed with feature checklists, camera lovers flood the Internet discussion boards with their constant bitching and kvetching for every camera release. Every little missing feature is a deal breaker for these people, and if you were to look at their post volumes, you’d wonder if these people even have time to snap photos. Doubtful, since the people who are really taking pictures are too busy uploading to Flickr and Facebook than trolling rumor sites.
I love photography and cameras, but I do try to temper my requirements with my own real world use cases. I rarely make prints, and for my needs, my photos only need to look good on a few devices – an HDTV, an iPad, an iPhone and a 15” laptop. Is obsessing over sensor size a worthwhile exercise? Unlikely.
I recently took my “enthusiast” point-and-shoot camera (a Lumix LX3, if you’re wondering) on a vacation and was quite happy with the results from its smallish sensor. I didn’t want to take my heavy DSLR with me, and even with its weak low-light capabilities, I was able to capture plenty of decent outside night shots. One acquaintance actually thought I had taken my photos with a DSLR. So let’s be honest with ourselves, the Q’s image quality is probably good enough for most casual snapshot situations.
I have seen many complaints lodged against the Q for being a non-pocketable camera. Releasing a pocketable camera these days is a losing proposition. The compact point-and-shoot camera market undergoing a major disruption. Camera phones like the iPhone 4 are killing the low end of the market. Why carry another tiny device when your camera phone will do? The safer area of the market is in the slightly larger enthusiast cameras like the G12, LX5, XZ1, etc. These are ideal travel cameras, as they have a bit of heft, but not nearly as much as a DSLR.
Pentax deserves some credit for releasing this camera with a satisfactory complement of lenses on day one. Aside from the kit prime, there’s a general purpose zoom, a fisheye, and a couple of novelty “toy” lenses, which should satisfy most use cases for the Q. The Sony NEX, which has been around for over a year, is a system that is hurting for first party lenses from Sony. With the exception of the zoom and fisheye, the Pentax Q’s accessory lenses are quite affordable, with pricing under $100.
When taking a more measured view of this camera, the Pentax Q is actually an interesting and fun little camera. It is an instant classic and a collector’s item. Yes, it’s expensive and it’s got a small sensor, but if those are your biggest quibbles, perhaps that suggests that Pentax may have got many of the other pieces of the puzzle correct. I’ll admit, the day this camera was announced, the sensor and price had me thinking “WTF”? Specs aside, however, I love the aesthetic of the camera and the fact that it has an inexpensive fisheye lens. This is definitely a niche camera, but kudos to Pentax for daring to put out a cute little camera that doesn’t scream out “me-too”.
The Pentax Q should be available globally at the end of August.
Sensor aside, the camera has a great fit and finish with a take-it-or-leave it design reminiscent of the film age. Its premium build is accompanied with a matching price - a whopping $800 for the body and a 47mm equivalent prime lens. $800 is not cheap, but I suspect that Pentax is going for the same target market as Leica’s repackaged and heavily marked up Panasonic compact cameras. It’s also not too far off from Ricoh’s line of compacts, beloved by serious photographers (for their handling) but much maligned by measurbating camera lovers. It should come as no surprise that Ricoh bought the Pentax photography division last week.
Not all camera lovers are photographers, and not all photographers are camera lovers. In my mind, camera lovers are more interested in the machinery of photography than the actual taking of photos. Obsessed with feature checklists, camera lovers flood the Internet discussion boards with their constant bitching and kvetching for every camera release. Every little missing feature is a deal breaker for these people, and if you were to look at their post volumes, you’d wonder if these people even have time to snap photos. Doubtful, since the people who are really taking pictures are too busy uploading to Flickr and Facebook than trolling rumor sites.
I love photography and cameras, but I do try to temper my requirements with my own real world use cases. I rarely make prints, and for my needs, my photos only need to look good on a few devices – an HDTV, an iPad, an iPhone and a 15” laptop. Is obsessing over sensor size a worthwhile exercise? Unlikely.
I recently took my “enthusiast” point-and-shoot camera (a Lumix LX3, if you’re wondering) on a vacation and was quite happy with the results from its smallish sensor. I didn’t want to take my heavy DSLR with me, and even with its weak low-light capabilities, I was able to capture plenty of decent outside night shots. One acquaintance actually thought I had taken my photos with a DSLR. So let’s be honest with ourselves, the Q’s image quality is probably good enough for most casual snapshot situations.
I have seen many complaints lodged against the Q for being a non-pocketable camera. Releasing a pocketable camera these days is a losing proposition. The compact point-and-shoot camera market undergoing a major disruption. Camera phones like the iPhone 4 are killing the low end of the market. Why carry another tiny device when your camera phone will do? The safer area of the market is in the slightly larger enthusiast cameras like the G12, LX5, XZ1, etc. These are ideal travel cameras, as they have a bit of heft, but not nearly as much as a DSLR.
Pentax deserves some credit for releasing this camera with a satisfactory complement of lenses on day one. Aside from the kit prime, there’s a general purpose zoom, a fisheye, and a couple of novelty “toy” lenses, which should satisfy most use cases for the Q. The Sony NEX, which has been around for over a year, is a system that is hurting for first party lenses from Sony. With the exception of the zoom and fisheye, the Pentax Q’s accessory lenses are quite affordable, with pricing under $100.
When taking a more measured view of this camera, the Pentax Q is actually an interesting and fun little camera. It is an instant classic and a collector’s item. Yes, it’s expensive and it’s got a small sensor, but if those are your biggest quibbles, perhaps that suggests that Pentax may have got many of the other pieces of the puzzle correct. I’ll admit, the day this camera was announced, the sensor and price had me thinking “WTF”? Specs aside, however, I love the aesthetic of the camera and the fact that it has an inexpensive fisheye lens. This is definitely a niche camera, but kudos to Pentax for daring to put out a cute little camera that doesn’t scream out “me-too”.
The Pentax Q should be available globally at the end of August.