Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax Q

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 4, 2011, 11:59 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default This is getting interesting. . .Q + K and M42

Hi All,

I've only had a few opportunities to shoot the Q with my SLR lenses. It's challenging to nail the focus, but I'm getting the hang of focusing with the LCD. MF is tricky, even with the MF Takumars and their long focus throw but it's possible, even for me. . . When I get a K>Q adapter with a tripod ring, it'll be a lot easier.

All of these were handheld, shot in jpeg, the D FA 100 and FA 50 shots were cropped to 8x10, the Takumar shots are all uncropped. All were PP'd to taste with Dnoise and Infocus only, and resized for posting.

The FA 50 f1.4 allows focusing to @ 1.5 ft, so as @ a 180mm EQ on APS-C, allows some available light close up capabilities.

FA 50/1.4, 1/100, f2, ISO 200


The D FA 100 f2.8 Macro is EQ to using a 360mm Macro on APS-C, so ultra close ups indoors are a possibility.

D FA 100/2.8, 1/100, f2.8, ISO 1250


D FA 100/2.8, 1/100, f2.8, ISO 800


D FA 100/2.8, 1/100, f2.8, ISO 640


Outside the slower M42 Takumars are small, so much more handy, the FLs are longer, and the MF feel is helpful for faster focusing. I used Pentax original M42 to K adapters. Both of the K mount lens adapters were loose on my camera's K adapter, so I stretched a small rubber band over the lens mount which added more friction so the lens doesn't rotate when focusing or adjusting the aperture ring.

The 135/3.5 Super Takumar is EQ to a 486mm on an APS-C. It wasn't long enough for the distance I was forced to shoot at, so I only took a couple of shots with it. It's rated @ 8.33 on the PF lens database.

135mm f3.5 Super Takumar, 1/200, f3.5, ISO 125


The 200mm f4 Super Multicoated Takumar is a very nice compact 200mm for use on the Q. It's EQ to a 720mm on a APS-C.

200mm f4 Super Multicoated Takumar, 1/320, f4, ISO 250


200mm f4 Super Multicoated Takumar, 1/125, f4, ISO 125


200mm f4 Super Multicoated Takumar, 1/400, f4, ISO 250


Just to give some perspective, here's a shot taken with the 47mm EQ prime from the same spot as the Takumar shots, about 15 ft away from the tree.



These shots are not as good as I can get with my DSLRs and 510mm and 714mm lens/TC combos, but, considering handheld with no SR at 490mm and 720mm EQ, MF using an LCD, and "consumer" grade tele primes that cost me less than $20 USD each 6 years ago, they're not too shabby with the Q. Shooting from a tripod would help considerably. Shooting the Q with super tele lenses, despite the very light weight is very challenging, but fun.

The one thing that's a bother though is that these 60's vintage lenses don't have the ED glass to control PF and CA, and with the very high pixel density of the Q, color aberrations that are barely noticeable on larger sensors are very evident on Q shots, especially when super accurate critical focus is hard to achieve. I've got a good method of eliminating these aberrations, and don't mind them, but more modern lenses with better color aberration correction would probably be better for the Q.

All in all, so far the Q is living up to my expectations as a digital TC. I think that when I get the K>Q adapter with the tripod ring, the A*200/2.8 and FA* 300/4.5 will do even better.

Scott

Last edited by snostorm; Nov 5, 2011 at 12:05 AM.
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 5, 2011, 9:39 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
rhermans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Antwerp - Belgium
Posts: 3,454
Default

Scott those results are stunning.

Ronny
__________________
rhermans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2011, 3:40 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
nhmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Posts: 5,202
Default

They look amazing to me.

Patty
nhmom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2011, 9:10 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

They really are impressive, especially when you consider the size of the camera. I do think a tripod would make things easier to manage.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 5, 2011, 10:16 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

Hi Ronny, Patty , and Harriet,

Quote:
Originally Posted by rhermans View Post
Scott those results are stunning.
Ronny -- Thanks!

It's still a work in progress, and I feel results will just get better when I get to know the camera better. The SLR lenses' capabilities with a 5.53x crop factor are so different, that it's a whole new world working with this camera. The 50/1.4 can be shot like a 180/1.4 on a Pentax DSLR, but it also focuses to 45 cm, and the 1:1 macro fills the frame with a 6.17 mm subject instead of a 23.7mm subject with a DSLR, so you can pull back to where the lens gives you a 4:1 mag ratio, and you have about 3x the DOF at the same relative magnification on the image. I've still not even come close to discovering all the possibilities.

This is really fun. . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by nhmom View Post
They look amazing to me.
Patty -- Thanks!

I'm really having fun with this with my makeshift combination of adapters. When I get an adapter with a tripod mount and aperture control ring, it should get even more interesting -- another couple of weeks to a month according to the supplier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtngal View Post
They really are impressive, especially when you consider the size of the camera. I do think a tripod would make things easier to manage.
Harriet -- I'm pleased so far, but the Takumars are just above average lenses, and you know what a difference * class lenses can make. . . sharper and more contrasty -- I can't wait. . . but I'm holding off until I get the right adapter so I can get a realistic evaluation with very stable support. I'll be working with unprecedented reach using 300mm and beyond lenses on the Q.

The good thing is that Av priority seems to work fine with the adapted lenses, so I only have to concentrate on finding the subjects in the frame (not easy) and MF (also not easy).

One of the real fun aspects for me is to come up with ways to work around these problems, but I'll have the winter to figure them out, and I already have some good ideas of how to do this.

Thanks for taking a look everyone.

Scott
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:50 AM.