Pentax Q compact system camera

Auto110

My wife had an Auto110. It lived in her handbag - Very "handy"' BUT very susceptible to camera shake - it was a bit too small to hold securely...

@EddieD -- Oh how times change!

"I get asked if Pentax are a new company when I'm being a tourist - a bit of a change from my youth when only grown ups and pros had either..."

Right, oh how times change! I had a Pentax, and my Minolta SRT101 traveled the world with me (it was my first 'grown up' camera--before that I mostly had Kodak's Box Brownies).

BTW, I won't have fully quit (at least mentally) the analog film world until digital cameras have interchangeable sensors akin the way we'd change film types for different jobs/light conditions. Being able to remove the sensor would not only allow the photographer optimise the sensor to the application but it be easy to clean too (especially so if contained in a hermetic ceramic case a la an IC, then one could simply wash it in water).

As much as I loved my old Pentax and the Pentax brand, I'm nevertheless disappointed in this Pentax Q for reasons which I've covered in my post below).

Thank you for not making me act on my own pedantic urges. I strongly agree with you, good sir.

@Joefish - - I reckon they're terrible images too.

I was an analog film photographer long before I went digital years ago--and I still use analog film too. Basically, I've no problem switching between the two systems and I've worked on imaging electronics and image sensors.

Many of those who've never owned an analog film camera don't realise how truly effective film is at integrating the limits of fine detail into smooth slightly blurred edges but which still maintains linearity within grayscale, similarly film grain (noise) characteristics had reached a high art long before the end of the film era. In fact, many books were written on these subjects.

Digital sensors are still quite brutal at the edges of linearity, suffice to say they don't handle the bottom and top few pixels of the grayscale well. Whilst there are superb digital cameras, the problem of limited dynamic range in sensors remains, and it's the subject of ongoing research.

In these Pentax Q images both compression and sensor noise are considerable. Compression noise often manifests as washed out transitions (artifacts) between light and dark areas, and when closely inspected one could be forgiven for thinking the transitions were hand drawn by pencil. It's particularly evident in the night image of St Paul's as well as in the Westminster Palace images in the transition between the building and sky.

For me, compression artifacts which limit an image's dynamic range are particularly objectionable (one often sees it in images in PDFs when magnified) and this Pentax Q has it in heaps, moreover, there's also lots of sensor (pixelated) noise too. This camera should have had a much better full-frame [35mm] sensor with a lower noise figure, better noise-reducing electronics and its stored image algorithm should not be compressing anywhere near the degree with which it is.

Frankly, this camera is a great disappointment if you're after good images; alternatively, if you're rich and just want the retro look for your mantelpiece then go for it.