The "reach" of the Q - images

VisualDarkness · 12-17-2013, 07:53 AM

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

Originally posted by crewl1

The key to the above photos is
A - Q w Bigma@500
B - K-3 w Bigma@500
D - Q7 w Bigma@500

I was sure that this was the correct order since the first one had that "Q glow" look from pushing the resolution of the lens too hard.

steve1307 · 12-17-2013, 07:55 AM

Yes the K-3 was easy to pick since it looked "different" to the other 2 and the DOF was apparent.

Larry said the Q was shot at actual size and the Q7 was cropped to match the framing of the Q, so this means the Q7 image displayed actually has LESS pixels so not as high resolution, maybe slightly better noise or DR but there ain't much between them in this type of test.

I've got a camping holiday coming up in a couple of weeks. I'll definitely be packing the Q kit and long lenses to take with me this time. May even post a few shots here next month, if I get anything decent.

**crewl1** · 12-17-2013, 09:47 AM - **1 Like**

Here are the DA*300 comparisons, shot at f5.6.
I do see a difference between the Q and Q7, K-3's ability to allow extreme cropping is good but it is noticeable.
Q7 wins here.

Order
Q
Q7
K3

Q

Q7

K3

**crewl1** · 02-25-2014, 11:07 PM - **2 Likes**

I got this question from Tony about what I use to help with focus on the Q

Quote:

Larry, I saw your shots over in the "300mm lens" thread. Super sharp. Do you have some sort of focusing aid? I was shooting with my Q plus the 135mm Sakar pictured above, and could barely see the screen in the sunlight. I'm tempted to carry a towel with me to throw it over my head and the camera to kill the glare. I considered a loupe, but that sort of defeats the purpose of the Q. Perhaps a pop-up shade?

When I am doing telephoto work I use a loupe to help get the focus correct.
I previously tried just using just the magnify function and the peaking, but I wasn't totally happy.
The loupe does two things: It eliminates glare from washing out the scene and it magnifies the display, so you can zero in the focus exactly where you want it.
I usually use the 4x magnification on the Q (6x on the Q7) as well so I can really get it right.
I find the peaking function is not best for this fine type of focus so I dont use it for this. (works great for the fisheye lens though)

The loupe I use is a cheap one with metal frame that is made for a Nikon 1,like this LCD Viewfinder Loupes Magnifier Eyecup Extender V5 Hood for Nikon 1 J1 DSLR | eBay
The screw mount position has to be filed out a bit to center the frame properly but it works great.
Some folks find it a bit flimsy but it works for me.
If I try to shoot without it is more difficult to get the focus right.

I also use a tripod pretty much all the time with the telephoto Q work, I shake too much to just do it hand held or even a monopod.
Some guys are real good at it though.

---------- Post added 02-25-14 at 10:18 PM ----------

These are some shots I did today with the Sigma 70-200 OS and the Q7
Allens hummingbird stretching - Allens are fun to watch as they seems to stretch a lot and make funny poses when they do.

Annas hummingbird flashing some color

Coopers hawk hiding in a gum tree. One of a pair that is returning to a nest and hopefully will have a chick or two this season.

TonyTurley · 02-26-2014, 07:35 AM

Thanks for the detailed information Larry. Looks like a loupe is in my future after all.

**crewl1** · 02-26-2014, 08:53 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by TonyTurley

Thanks for the detailed information Larry. Looks like a loupe is in my future after all.

Sure thing Tony.
One more thing is I rigged up a retainer system inspired by the Hoodman Cinema straps to keep the loupe from falling off when I move it around.
I used rubber bands but here is the inspiration. Cinema Strap-Hoodman Corporation

TonyTurley · 02-26-2014, 08:57 AM

Good idea. $24.99 seems a bit steep for the Hoodman version. I just ordered a V5 loupe from Amazon. Should be here by Monday.

Tony

**crewl1** · 02-26-2014, 09:13 AM

Here is the pic of the plate mod, use a Dremel or file for a cleaner opening.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/189966-what-q-accessories-wo...ml#post2252478

TonyTurley · 02-26-2014, 06:46 PM

Thanks Larry.

Vince_Lux · 03-03-2014, 12:41 AM

Time to show the reach I have currently (still need to work on sharpness though):

This is the scene shot with an 11mm lens on a Nikon DX body, please notice the building when you follow the electricity line and the 2 towers it has, the front one being a bit lower then the back one.

This is the next rig: 70-200 @ 200mm + TC 2X + TC 1,4X + Adapter + Pentax Q:

Now a detail shot of the lower tower:

The goal is obviously to take pictures of smaller animals closer to me (e.g. we have a reserve of birds that breed on the ground nearby) .

Expeditioneer · 03-16-2014, 07:13 AM

An interesting thread.
It would seem that the Q7 is superior to the Q in terms of iq (expected) but are the Q and the Q10 identical in this regard?
Am I also correct to assume that the reason for the Q7 being ahead is partly because of its larger sensor being more forgiving on the glass?
Still I am somewhat surprised that it the Q7 was still better when cropped (I assume that both are cropped 100%?) as the have the same megapixel count but the Q7 has a crop factor of 4.7x whereas the Q10 has 5.6x. Or am I interpreting crewl1's post wrong?

I am planning to get a Q10 myself for maximum reach, but if the above mentioned reasoning is right, the Q7 might be the way to go...

**crewl1** · 03-16-2014, 09:47 AM

Originally posted by Expeditioneer

An interesting thread.
It would seem that the Q7 is superior to the Q in terms of iq (expected) but are the Q and the Q10 identical in this regard? I believe this is a correct assumption
Am I also correct to assume that the reason for the Q7 being ahead is partly because of its larger sensor being more forgiving on the glass? I would agree, the Q7 yields better output with the same glass vs the Q
Still I am somewhat surprised that it the Q7 was still better when cropped (I assume that both are cropped 100%?) as the have the same megapixel count but the Q7 has a crop factor of 4.7x whereas the Q10 has 5.6x. Or am I interpreting crewl1's post wrong? The cropping is not 100%, the actual crops are as shown in the lightroom screencaps, I was just trying to approximate the Q magnification with the other two cameras. The Q image is only cropped to get a square format, and was not taken down to pixel level crop.

I am planning to get a Q10 myself for maximum reach, but if the above mentioned reasoning is right, the Q7 might be the way to go...

The experiment was to figure out if it was better to have the Q's greater magnification or the Q7's better sensor. In my opinion the Q7s better sensor trumps the Q's greater magnification.

Please note that in this experiment I used the best lens I have found for this type of work, the DA*300, and was shot on a tripod with the 2 sec delay to minimize vibration and I used the Pentax OEM K-Q adapter.
Other lenses and techniques may yield different results.

Expeditioneer · 03-17-2014, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by crewl1

The experiment was to figure out if it was better to have the Q's greater magnification or the Q7's better sensor. In my opinion the Q7s better sensor trumps the Q's greater magnification.

Please note that in this experiment I used the best lens I have found for this type of work, the DA*300, and was shot on a tripod with the 2 sec delay to minimize vibration and I used the Pentax OEM K-Q adapter.
Other lenses and techniques may yield different results.

Thank you for your reply crewl1.

So I guess the q7 sensor has superior "micro contrast" or whatever one wants to call it. (in short makes better use of its pixels in terms of detail).
So now I am faced with a decision: Do I go for the 1) Q10 (cheaper I guess) or 2) the Q7, OR, 3) do I wait for another Q model to hit the market. Any guesses or rumors regarding that?

I am planning to use th Q with a 900mm Sky-watcher Apo ED like: Sky-Watcher Telescopes
Choices, choices..

**crewl1** · 03-17-2014, 11:57 AM

An advantage to the Q7 over the Q is that the wider spaced pixels mean diffraction blurring occurs at smaller apertures.
Since the telescopes lists aperture of f7.5 it might yield better IQ on a Q7 than a Q.
Q's are cheap enough where you can pick one up and if you don't like it you can sell it without much loss of $.
I dont have any experience with astro photography though so best to ask for input from the folks on this thread. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/212387-astro-q-club.html

As far as future Q versions, who knows? I am happy with what I can get out of the Q7 now.

Expeditioneer · 03-21-2014, 10:55 AM

Originally posted by crewl1

An advantage to the Q7 over the Q is that the wider spaced pixels mean diffraction blurring occurs at smaller apertures.
Since the telescopes lists aperture of f7.5 it might yield better IQ on a Q7 than a Q.
Q's are cheap enough where you can pick one up and if you don't like it you can sell it without much loss of $.
I dont have any experience with astro photography though so best to ask for input from the folks on this thread. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/212387-astro-q-club.html

As far as future Q versions, who knows? I am happy with what I can get out of the Q7 now.

Understood.
But I wounder, would you be willing to post a 100% crop comparison between the two photos above?
I still have a hard time wrapping my head around the Q7 being so superior given that the Q10 should have a lot more pixels on target.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Post your "Park Bench" "or "Picnic Table" images	tessfully	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	2199	3 Days Ago 10:28 AM
Don't say Pentax "Q" in French ... "Q" = "cul" = "A--"	Jean Poitiers	Pentax Q	52	11-10-2013 06:25 AM
"Focus Adjustment Washer" replacement...(with images)	Catalana	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	18	11-04-2012 03:40 PM
"Real Life" K5 AF.C images yet?	jpzk	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	69	02-02-2011 03:48 AM
How do I turn this so-called "film" into images?	Todd Adamson	Pentax Medium Format	12	01-07-2011 03:33 PM

12-17-2013, 07:53 AM	#916
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here. Originally posted by crewl1 The key to the above photos is A - Q w Bigma@500 B - K-3 w Bigma@500 D - Q7 w Bigma@500 I was sure that this was the correct order since the first one had that "Q glow" look from pushing the resolution of the lens too hard.

12-17-2013, 07:55 AM	#917
steve1307 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,130	Yes the K-3 was easy to pick since it looked "different" to the other 2 and the DOF was apparent. Larry said the Q was shot at actual size and the Q7 was cropped to match the framing of the Q, so this means the Q7 image displayed actually has LESS pixels so not as high resolution, maybe slightly better noise or DR but there ain't much between them in this type of test. I've got a camping holiday coming up in a couple of weeks. I'll definitely be packing the Q kit and long lenses to take with me this time. May even post a few shots here next month, if I get anything decent.

12-17-2013, 09:47 AM - 1 Like	#918
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	Here are the DA*300 comparisons, shot at f5.6. I do see a difference between the Q and Q7, K-3's ability to allow extreme cropping is good but it is noticeable. Q7 wins here. Order Q Q7 K3 Q Q7 K3

02-25-2014, 11:07 PM - 2 Likes	#919
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	I got this question from Tony about what I use to help with focus on the Q Quote: Larry, I saw your shots over in the "300mm lens" thread. Super sharp. Do you have some sort of focusing aid? I was shooting with my Q plus the 135mm Sakar pictured above, and could barely see the screen in the sunlight. I'm tempted to carry a towel with me to throw it over my head and the camera to kill the glare. I considered a loupe, but that sort of defeats the purpose of the Q. Perhaps a pop-up shade? When I am doing telephoto work I use a loupe to help get the focus correct. I previously tried just using just the magnify function and the peaking, but I wasn't totally happy. The loupe does two things: It eliminates glare from washing out the scene and it magnifies the display, so you can zero in the focus exactly where you want it. I usually use the 4x magnification on the Q (6x on the Q7) as well so I can really get it right. I find the peaking function is not best for this fine type of focus so I dont use it for this. (works great for the fisheye lens though) The loupe I use is a cheap one with metal frame that is made for a Nikon 1,like this LCD Viewfinder Loupes Magnifier Eyecup Extender V5 Hood for Nikon 1 J1 DSLR \| eBay The screw mount position has to be filed out a bit to center the frame properly but it works great. Some folks find it a bit flimsy but it works for me. If I try to shoot without it is more difficult to get the focus right. I also use a tripod pretty much all the time with the telephoto Q work, I shake too much to just do it hand held or even a monopod. Some guys are real good at it though. ---------- Post added 02-25-14 at 10:18 PM ---------- These are some shots I did today with the Sigma 70-200 OS and the Q7 Allens hummingbird stretching - Allens are fun to watch as they seems to stretch a lot and make funny poses when they do. Annas hummingbird flashing some color Coopers hawk hiding in a gum tree. One of a pair that is returning to a nest and hopefully will have a chick or two this season.

02-26-2014, 07:35 AM	#920
TonyTurley Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Scott Depot, WV Posts: 1,240	Thanks for the detailed information Larry. Looks like a loupe is in my future after all.

02-26-2014, 08:53 AM - 1 Like	#921
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	Originally posted by TonyTurley Thanks for the detailed information Larry. Looks like a loupe is in my future after all. Sure thing Tony. One more thing is I rigged up a retainer system inspired by the Hoodman Cinema straps to keep the loupe from falling off when I move it around. I used rubber bands but here is the inspiration. Cinema Strap-Hoodman Corporation

02-26-2014, 08:57 AM	#922
TonyTurley Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Scott Depot, WV Posts: 1,240	Good idea. $24.99 seems a bit steep for the Hoodman version. I just ordered a V5 loupe from Amazon. Should be here by Monday. Tony

02-26-2014, 09:13 AM	#923
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	Here is the pic of the plate mod, use a Dremel or file for a cleaner opening. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/189966-what-q-accessories-wo...ml#post2252478

02-26-2014, 06:46 PM	#924
TonyTurley Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Scott Depot, WV Posts: 1,240	Thanks Larry.

03-03-2014, 12:41 AM	#925
Vince_Lux Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 25	Time to show the reach I have currently (still need to work on sharpness though): This is the scene shot with an 11mm lens on a Nikon DX body, please notice the building when you follow the electricity line and the 2 towers it has, the front one being a bit lower then the back one. This is the next rig: 70-200 @ 200mm + TC 2X + TC 1,4X + Adapter + Pentax Q: Now a detail shot of the lower tower: The goal is obviously to take pictures of smaller animals closer to me (e.g. we have a reserve of birds that breed on the ground nearby) .

03-16-2014, 07:13 AM	#926
Expeditioneer New Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Posts: 13	An interesting thread. It would seem that the Q7 is superior to the Q in terms of iq (expected) but are the Q and the Q10 identical in this regard? Am I also correct to assume that the reason for the Q7 being ahead is partly because of its larger sensor being more forgiving on the glass? Still I am somewhat surprised that it the Q7 was still better when cropped (I assume that both are cropped 100%?) as the have the same megapixel count but the Q7 has a crop factor of 4.7x whereas the Q10 has 5.6x. Or am I interpreting crewl1's post wrong? I am planning to get a Q10 myself for maximum reach, but if the above mentioned reasoning is right, the Q7 might be the way to go...

03-16-2014, 09:47 AM	#927
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	Originally posted by Expeditioneer An interesting thread. It would seem that the Q7 is superior to the Q in terms of iq (expected) but are the Q and the Q10 identical in this regard? I believe this is a correct assumption Am I also correct to assume that the reason for the Q7 being ahead is partly because of its larger sensor being more forgiving on the glass? I would agree, the Q7 yields better output with the same glass vs the Q Still I am somewhat surprised that it the Q7 was still better when cropped (I assume that both are cropped 100%?) as the have the same megapixel count but the Q7 has a crop factor of 4.7x whereas the Q10 has 5.6x. Or am I interpreting crewl1's post wrong? The cropping is not 100%, the actual crops are as shown in the lightroom screencaps, I was just trying to approximate the Q magnification with the other two cameras. The Q image is only cropped to get a square format, and was not taken down to pixel level crop. I am planning to get a Q10 myself for maximum reach, but if the above mentioned reasoning is right, the Q7 might be the way to go... The experiment was to figure out if it was better to have the Q's greater magnification or the Q7's better sensor. In my opinion the Q7s better sensor trumps the Q's greater magnification. Please note that in this experiment I used the best lens I have found for this type of work, the DA*300, and was shot on a tripod with the 2 sec delay to minimize vibration and I used the Pentax OEM K-Q adapter. Other lenses and techniques may yield different results.

03-17-2014, 10:40 AM	#928
Expeditioneer New Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Posts: 13	Originally posted by crewl1 The experiment was to figure out if it was better to have the Q's greater magnification or the Q7's better sensor. In my opinion the Q7s better sensor trumps the Q's greater magnification. Please note that in this experiment I used the best lens I have found for this type of work, the DA*300, and was shot on a tripod with the 2 sec delay to minimize vibration and I used the Pentax OEM K-Q adapter. Other lenses and techniques may yield different results. Thank you for your reply crewl1. So I guess the q7 sensor has superior "micro contrast" or whatever one wants to call it. (in short makes better use of its pixels in terms of detail). So now I am faced with a decision: Do I go for the 1) Q10 (cheaper I guess) or 2) the Q7, OR, 3) do I wait for another Q model to hit the market. Any guesses or rumors regarding that? I am planning to use th Q with a 900mm Sky-watcher Apo ED like: Sky-Watcher Telescopes Choices, choices..

03-17-2014, 11:57 AM	#929
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	An advantage to the Q7 over the Q is that the wider spaced pixels mean diffraction blurring occurs at smaller apertures. Since the telescopes lists aperture of f7.5 it might yield better IQ on a Q7 than a Q. Q's are cheap enough where you can pick one up and if you don't like it you can sell it without much loss of $. I dont have any experience with astro photography though so best to ask for input from the folks on this thread. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/212387-astro-q-club.html As far as future Q versions, who knows? I am happy with what I can get out of the Q7 now.

03-21-2014, 10:55 AM	#930
Expeditioneer New Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Posts: 13	Originally posted by crewl1 An advantage to the Q7 over the Q is that the wider spaced pixels mean diffraction blurring occurs at smaller apertures. Since the telescopes lists aperture of f7.5 it might yield better IQ on a Q7 than a Q. Q's are cheap enough where you can pick one up and if you don't like it you can sell it without much loss of $. I dont have any experience with astro photography though so best to ask for input from the folks on this thread. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/212387-astro-q-club.html As far as future Q versions, who knows? I am happy with what I can get out of the Q7 now. Understood. But I wounder, would you be willing to post a 100% crop comparison between the two photos above? I still have a hard time wrapping my head around the Q7 being so superior given that the Q10 should have a lot more pixels on target.