http://www.photozone.de/pentaxq/687-pentaxq515f2845?start=1
The distortion is found to be even more severe than that of the Q "01" prime, at a rather terrible level!
And, let's look at the posted samples, I don't think it is anything better than what I can get from my WG-1 (My Samples/Full Review Here and Here). In contrast, I've found that the WG-1 images do have better per pixel sharpness (the P-Q pictures always look Soft!) and the colour rendition of the WG-1 pics also look better than what the Pentax Q produces! Noise at the base ISO isn't that unnoticeable as previously expected, neither. Just look at the blue sky in various samples. And at only ISO 250, the noise in the blue sky is already very obstructive and it is indeed looking really bad.
2. I think we have more than enough measurbation reviews these days for the Pentax Q. So, here is a Pentax Q review from a pure user perspective:-
http://wouter28mm.wordpress.com/2011/11/10/my-pentax-q-impressions/
After all, the P-Q would look better if we appreciate its design concept like this! :-D
3. The famous Japanese DC Watch gear reviewer and editor, Mr. 伊達淳一, has published his practical Q test review (Google English translation here) with the adoption of telescope lens and yet a Tokina ATX 100mm Macro lens on the Q and made some super-square-tele shots for birds and etc. The results are posted. Enjoy!
In particular, just see how he modified the Q for better view-finding.. Impressive?! :-o
Related:-
What to Do When a Mirrorless Has No EVF? :-o