how many Q owners?

The Pentax Q with K-mount adaptor is a very interesting prospect as it would be the equivalent of something like a 3.5x teleconverter (compared to APS-C). Of course the image quality is not as good as a DSLR but I'm guessing it would still be considerably better than using an actual 3.5x teleconverter on a DSLR, not to mention the fact that unlike a teleconverter it would have no detrimental effect on the lens's effective aperture value. 1650mm (rough 35mm equivalent) at F/4 anybody? Get yourself a DA* 300 and a Pentax Q...

Sounds good. How many elements are in the K mount adapter or do you mean equivalent FOV.

Best regards.

I'm not sure I understand your question but a K mount adaptor for the Q has no lens elements as far as I know. All it has to do is put some space between the Q mount and the K mount in order to provide the correct register distance.

I didn't understand how the 1650mm came into it as any lens in front of any sensor cant change focal length hence I assumed you meant FOV.

Best regards

Yes, that is what I meant. You could crop your way there on a DSLR but you'd have a whole lot less than 12 Megapixels left. Don't make me do the maths on that one.

I just got my Q yesterday.Really Qute camera.

Despite not being able to find one I am still tempted. I am convinced by a decent performance in daylight outdoors, but I'd really like to see how it performs at ISO400-1600 in lower light. I would be very grateful if a Q owner could post some examples.

This image is with the standard prime at ISO 1000 and in green light from the "LED Tree" that Shaney is looking at. It also demonstares how ell the lens controls flare. The lights are burned out of course as they are very bright, but the shadows show what noise levels can be expected. The whitish vertical lines in the background are white window frames.

Tried one at the last SRS open day. Lovely little camera, but no view finder, and the accessory view finder is both limited (to one lens) and hugely expensive. Both the man from Pentax and the SRS team agreed that the absence of a view finder restricted it's appeal.

If it had a view finder I'd have bought it, as the performance was suberb.

Here's hoping there's a Q2 with optical 'finder!

Optical viewfinders on compact cameras are not up to much though - I've always used the screen with this type of camera. At first it seemed odd, but after a while it's fine.

have to agree with this. At first I did not get on with the screen but now am happy with it.

Adrian

Thanks for posting the image. Would be interested to see more as and when you take them. Would it be possible to tag gallery images 'Q' so I can easily find them.

This was one of the first: https://www.pentaxuser.com/photo/user-5/witley-court-43708

Apart from the most recent image of the cat, there's a block of Q images in my portfolio, mostly with the fish-eye lens. I have added a tag anyway, but just scroll through my recent uploads and you'll be looking at Q images.