M4/3s Being Smaller than Pentax Q

tjdean01

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Feb 20, 2013
Messages
872
This is interesting. I was trying to think of a use for my Pentax Q (since its pixel pitch is too high to adapt lenses) and have even made posts about it. I like the little camera but any lens I try to buy for it is trumped by m4/3s.

-Pentax 01 Standard Prime f/1.9 (40mm eq) - I was thinking this lens would for sure be the default one to buy at around $150, but it doesn't really give me anything my Olympus PM2 + 20mm f1.7 pancake doesn't. Same exact focal length and not decidedly much smaller: http://j.mp/1rurIzj

-Pentax 02 Standard Zoom f2.8-4 (28-80mm eq) - After seeing the sub $100 price for this lens used and the relatively fast speed I figured this would be the one. I do own the Panasonic 12-32mm pancake (similar FL, f3.5-5.6, however) for my PM2 and the combo is quite a shorter than the Q + the Standard Zoom: http://j.mp/1tqc3HV

-Pentax 04 Wide Toy Lens f7.1 (35mm eq) OR 07 Mount Shield f9 (53mm eq) - both small and could be really fun. But, then again, I already have the Olympus 15mm f8 Body Cap Lens which is 1/2" long and I can push the ISO to 3200 and be happy with that. The Q I wouldn't go over ISO800. Plus I have the 14. Neither lenses exact but sizes comparison similar: http://j.mp/1tqegTz

And yes, the body of the Q is definitely smaller than my PM2 (and plus I only paid $100 for it and it's all solid metal so that's probably why I like it), but then again, check it out next to the GM1: http://j.mp/1rus1tS#sthash.54Ls6rdt.dpuf

m4/3s is making me want to sell this Q!
 

RichardB

Snapshooter
Joined
Nov 19, 2012
Messages
495
Location
Maryland, US
Real Name
Richard
The Q is a worthy camera. Its sensor punches above its weight. I sold mine because its uses were too similar to those of my MFT gear, and I needed only one system for those tasks.
 

fortwodriver

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
993
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Real Name
Frank
I'm pretty sure Pentax made a decision on size based on how holdable the camera would be. Sensor size and lens size factor in, yes, but I suspect they still wanted a camera that had good grip'ability.

It's an interesting experiment, but it's not new. Pentax had a lot of fun with the 110 format. They produced a nice little DSLR system for it in the 70s. I do wonder why they chose not to use the "cigarette pack" design for the Q... It would have been a nifty looking little design for those who never had/saw the original Pentax 110 system.
 

pellicle

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 10, 2010
Messages
3,956
Location
Killarney, OzTrailEYa
Real Name
pellicle
I'm pretty sure Pentax made a decision on size based on how holdable the camera would be. Sensor size and lens size factor in, yes, but I suspect they still wanted a camera that had good grip'ability.

It's an interesting experiment, but it's not new. Pentax had a lot of fun with the 110 format. ...a nifty looking little design for those who never had/saw the original Pentax 110 system.
as one who owns a Pentax 110 (and loved them when they were released) I look to that system and wonder why it is we don't have a system today that is as compact as it is.

cameraTwins

that these lenses perform well enough on m43 today is a testimony to how compact things can be.
this is the 50mm on my GF1
P1030786


Given that my slim and tiny cell phone has a screen and a 5mp autofocus camera built into it I can't see why such a device as the 110 could not be made today for little money.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom