There are a number of studies. I believe that DA zooms are incompatible, wide primes are incompatible, most other primes are compatible. So plenty of useful lenses. If Pentax go FF and I'm sure they will, then I'd only need a wide FF zoom for a good range of quality FF lenses.

Here's a good combination:

Pentax Q, DA*300, 1.7x teleconverter, tree in the South of France, Duchess Of Cambridge.

Q hooked up to scope (1200mm) via 40mm eyepiece and FA43Ltd.

It's a bit soft around the edges but that's inevitable with the setup. The intention is to crop to the sharp area and stitch to eliminate that. I can get much closer but it becomes difficult to get a decent shot.

Stitching will give me a nice pano of the whole moon. I should be able to get a high res 150mp shot which could print fairly large. That's all thanks to the Q.

A bit like this

I agree it went down better in Asia but the price tumbled everywhere.

The Q10 specs are listed on the Pentax website:

Construction material(s): Reinforced polycarbonate plastic

It promises better AF, although I'm happy enough with it anyway on the Q, the depth of field is so large that it's difficult to mess up.

Battery life has been extended from 250 to 270 shots, which I think is neither here nor there.

The IQ is promised to be better as well with the new(?) sensor. In fact this is what they promised with the Q:

With high sensitivity noise minimized, the photographer can use the entire sensitivity range — from ISO 125 to the highest ISO 6400 — without worrying about annoying digital noise.

Whereas with the Q10 you now get:

With high-sensitivity noise minimized, the photographer can use the entire sensitivity range from ISO 100 to the highest ISO 6400 without the worry of annoying digital noise.

So as far as I can tell not much change, which leads me to believe that it is a mainly marketing lead exercise to relaunch a cheaper to manufacture version of the camera, which is a smart move. I doubt it will encourage exisiting customers to upgrade. Unless the IQ has taken a quantum leap, but I somehow doubt that. The commitment to the system is great though, rollon a wide angle pancake.

Pentax got the Q horribly wrong in terms of market positioning, that was obvious from the comments from us lot on the various Pentax forums. They produced a beautifully made product aimed at achieving a premium price, which could not be sustained for long. The biggest difference for me is that the Q is a very satisfying magnesium alloy body, the Q10 is plastic. So they are responding to the new market position by reducing the manufacturing cost. That's great as they could have ditched it. I much prefer the original design, there's no way I'd swap it for a plastic one. I'm looking forward to the wide angle prime now.

DA*300 and tc will do the job for me and the other 99.9999%. I think it's great as I think Pentax have to come up with FF options for lenses like these. It shows real commitment to the future.

It doesn't really matter to me what the price is. I won't be able to afford one.

The adapter is £250. Ouch, that's what I paid for the camera and extra lens. Obviously it will be well built but my tenth-of-the-price adapter is pretty good. I'll do without the built-in shutter. I did notice some strange effects on a moth's wings - that would be the rolling shutter effect I guess (which I don't understand). But in general I reckon fast moving objects would be pretty difficult to capture anyway at the crazy focal lengths that people are experimenting with. No doubt some nutter will be trying it out with a DA560.

Love it. We've all been there, in fact we all probably spend most of our time there. The important bit is to realise the mistakes, plenty don't.

Hilarious. I'm not sure how strong squirrels are, I would have been a bit nervous.

The squirrel is clearly a fan of the top LCD screen so wouldn't have got on with a K30.