how many Q owners?


Link Posted 27/03/2012 - 20:36
So I was just wondering how meany people have bought a Q?



Link Posted 29/03/2012 - 12:46
Just John then?
Bodies: K5IIs, K7, MZ5n, LX, MV
Lenses: DA*16-50, DA18-55WR, DA18-135, DAL35, M50 F2, A50 f1.4, FA50 f1.4, DA*50-135, DA55-300, Tamron 70-300, DFA 100 WR Macro, M135 f3.5, Sigma 120-400 APO DG HSM, Tokina 500 f8.0
Flash: Metz 58, Metz 48
Accessories: BG4, Pentax right angle finder, Pentax mirror adaptor lens, O-ME53 Viewfinder Loupe
Auto 110 System: Auto 110, Winder, 18mm, 24mm, 50mm, 70mm, 20-40mm, AF100P, 1.7x telecon


Link Posted 29/03/2012 - 13:04
I do indeed have one and my friends Phil and Christianne have one as well. There's two for starters!
Best regards, John


Link Posted 29/03/2012 - 14:55
I have one and I like it. I got it when the price went down to supplement my K7.


Link Posted 29/03/2012 - 16:28
Chris at SRS said that sales were picking up now the price had come down to something more sane.

Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.

My website


Link Posted 30/03/2012 - 19:57
I only bought mine a few weeks ago. I did not know that it used to be more expensive than it is now


Link Posted 30/03/2012 - 22:01
I'm seriously considering getting one as I had a quick play with a Q last week and fell in love with it. I was just totally won over by it. I did not expect to be!!!!

My website (Hadfield Photography)

Pentax Gallery Artist page:link

Flickr Photostream: link


Link Posted 30/03/2012 - 22:13
I only went to the shop to have a look and ended up with a new camera


Link Posted 31/03/2012 - 21:01
TBH the initial price was a bit steep, but now it is getting better. Not perfect, but better. Possibly, if the price went down to around £350-£400 for the dual lens kit, then it would hurt sales of "Premium" compacts.
As it stands, it is more of an indulgence, and a non-starter to those who don't understand it.

Apparantly, the online shop - Park Cameras - have not sold a single one. But again that was only in Feb, and possibly that has changed.

It is a beautifully made camera with great handling. But unless people understand the IQ of Pentax lenses, they are going to go for something different, which is a shame.
Some Cameras

George Lazarette

Link Posted 31/03/2012 - 21:36
Which raises the question, Mr Hatter, who is this for?

Personally, I don't think it's a substitute for an SLR, though it might be a reasonable alternative to one when on holiday, say, and needing to travel light. So, it could be complementary.

It will be interesting to see what the new owners think about it when they've had it six months.

Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Last Edited by George Lazarette on 31/03/2012 - 21:37


Link Posted 01/04/2012 - 12:34
I am very tempted. It may not be a substitute for a DSLR, but it's now a viable alternative to a compact camera for people (like me) who want a little bit more functionality and quality in a similarly small package.

I was erring towards the WG2 when it was announced (similar price, similar sensor), but the results I have seen so far from that camera (Pentaxforum's review) are poor in comparison.


Link Posted 02/04/2012 - 22:15
I bought mine in January from Paxtons in Parramatta and haven't looked back. It does everything and in some cases more that the bigger mirror cameras. I can walk around with it my pocket an carry it all day. I am going to use it to tour Britain in August. I highly recommend the Q especially for quick snappy shots and for travel.
Brett Bellis


Link Posted 02/04/2012 - 23:39
The Q clearly is a great camera, but is it any more useful than the hundreds of basic compact cameras available many of which are also pretty good too, albeit (for me) also lacking a viewfinder? Then is it as good as the compacts that are adorned with a viewfinder, whether top of the range ones costing hundreds of pounds with an APS-C sensor or even the truly cheap ones around the £50 mark?

To me I suspect the £50 one with a viewfinder is more useable than the Q, even if the picture quality is not so good. Having said that I've not tried a Q, let alone used one in the bright sun so am I doing it an injustice - is it a jewel amongst thorns?

If it did have a viewfinder then they'd be no contest.

John K
Last Edited by JAK on 02/04/2012 - 23:49


Link Posted 02/04/2012 - 23:55
I think in one way we are always being a little unfair if we draw conclusions without having tried something, although sometimes reasonable deductions can be made.

The Q produces some nice quality and I'm getting better with mine as I go along. It's got a middling function for me and this puts it above the always-in-the-pocket very compact W90 but below the K20D and K-5 DSLRs that we currently use.

Every camera we have has a different ethos and a different application.

The W90 is tough, waterproof and very compact. I will always have at least that with me, just in case. I may not be anticipating any photography in this scenario, but I can pull good enough quality out of it for anything interesting that crops up.

The Q id for trips where a camera bag is not possible, for whatever reason. Photography is likely, so it's my best option under these circumstances. Quality level is more than satisfactory.

If I can take a camera bag then it's my Billingham Hadley Pro and a small DSLR kit. At least the 18-135mm, 55-300mm and 100mm Macro.
Best regards, John


Link Posted 03/04/2012 - 00:14
Thanks John. Well we might not have tried that one but have tried similar experiences, eg liveview on the K-5 for instance and other compacts so we know of the problem first hand.

If the general consensus of users say its no issue at all with the Q and framing pictures is a doddle - the screen is easily visible whatever the conditions then it might encourage me to take a peek. If I had a dealer near me who stocked one I may even do that in any event, unfortunately I haven't so can only rely on what others report. It's too expensive still to take a gamble on being able to use it or not if I purchased one untried!

John K
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.