In 2012 I took over 7,000 photos with the diminutive Pentax Q, and have been blogging about from day one (almost). I write about cameras as I use them, learning and sharing along the way, because I believe that you can't really know a camera by shooting it in a testing lab and doing a couple of walkabouts. This is especially true these days, as cameras have a lot of customizable and special features that take some time to play and work with to understand.
Here are some of the more informative posts:
- Here We Go Again
- A Tale of Two Tomatoes
- ISO800 on the Pentax Q is Pretty Clean
- Struggling with Fishy Eyes
- Fisheyes of Man
- Video Comparison: Drift HD 1080p vs Pentax Q
- Self Portrait, July 2012
- This is what ISO3200 looks like on the Pentax Q
- This is what ISO3200 looks like on the Pentax Q, part 2
- ...and this is why I bought the Pentax Q...
- Diana Takes Aim
- At Village Whiskey, Philly
- Lag of Pentax Q rear LCD
- Quiet street at ISO6400
- Mount Washington Auto Road, New Hampshire
- This is What Riding in the US Desert Southwest is Like
- Another gratuitous, "I am riding a cool motorycle in the epic American Southwest" photo taken with the Pentax Q
- So Fine. All Mine. That about sums it up.
- Two Cameras in the Cheap Seats
- Riding in Acadia National Park, Schoodic Peninsula, ME
- Visions of Jello
- Lost in thought
- Laugh
- Pentax Q goes to the Shoe Store
- Me, 29 October 2012
- Pentax Q takes Manhattan
- On the Road with Pentax Q
- Tiny tripod
- Pentax cameras (K-5, K-01, and Q) used for RoadRUNNER Story
Click here for a complete list of Q-related posts.
Great blog. My first DSLR was a Pentax K-x. It just died on my today and I am looking at buying something new. The Q10 has definitely peaked my interests. 99% of the time I am using my 18/55 lens and have it on "sports" setting for my lack of tallent.
ReplyDeleteI am trying to get a good comparison between the k-x and the q10. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks you
Thanks for reading, Justan. My wife has the K-x and I have used it extensively. It is a much "better" camera than the Q - much better image quality, faster AF, faster FPS, better in low light, and so forth and so on. The Q, while fun, is no direct replacement, but if you like taking artful shots of subjects that don't move and use a tripod when the light isn't good, then the Q may fit your needs. If you want to photograph moving subjects in poor light, maybe check out the K-30, two generations newer than your K-x. On the other hand, maybe get the K-x fixed???
Delete