[pschlute]

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.

---

smaller sensor (= sensor pixels concentrated in a smaller area).


Smaller sensor - a Q is well worth considering, married to a high res lens like a 90mm macro gives you pushing 500mm equivalent.

No sorry that is just bad science.

Whatever lens you put on a camera delivers the same image at the sensor. A 90mm lens on a "Q" sensor gives you the magnification of a 90mm lens on a 12MP sensor. He will be worse off than he is now. All you are telling him to do is to effectively enlarge a 12MP "Q" sensor image so it looks bigger. How is that going to help him?

[kevinWE]

If you don't mind full manual try locating a Optomax. I picked up my 400mm for 30.00 on eBay. This was several years ago, but I'm sure you could still find a decent deal on one. Mine is a manual 400mm 6.3. the lens wont set the world on fire, but you can get your fair share of keepers. I have a file from my K10D, It's a JPEG and fairly small file that's been enlarged, so it doesn't do the image must justice. I know it's not 500mm but it may work for you. I put a 2x converter on mine and shot the moon. I will load both photos here.

As I said, it's not the greatest lens in the world, but at the price point, it truly can't be beat.

[marcusBMG]

No sorry that is just bad science.Whatever lens you put on a camera delivers the same image at the sensor.

Agreed.

A 90mm lens on a "Q" sensor gives you the magnification of a 90mm lens on a 12MP sensor.

???????

He will be worse off than he is now. All you are telling him to do is to effectively enlarge a 12MP "Q" sensor image so it looks bigger. How is that going to help him?

A eg 90mm lens on a Q gives you a completely different FoV than on apsc. The 12MPx of the sensor are all in that portion of the image circle, this is not the same as simple cropping or enlargement. It's about results. You (and the OP) can check out the results of using telephoto lenses on Q's in the adapted lenses tested thread. And here's a moon pic - Q + tamron 500mm mirror.
Don't get me wrong I agree with what I think you are saying: there's no cheat, no short cut. But for the OP to get, as I imagine, a eg bird filling rather more than a fraction of the viewfinder, well a Q is one way.

[aslyfox]

I agree with UncleVanya that a K-3 would certainly be beneficial. I noticed a dramatic increase in cropability moving from my K-5 II to K-3 II. Increased megapickels + no AA filter = significantly more detail captured.

A good 500mm mirror lens - Tamron and MTO - have decent sharpness and color, are not huge and can be fun to use. . . .

I agree with the suggestion of a good mirror lens

you could get one for a fraction of your budget

used within its limitations you could get some very good photos

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/71775-mirror-lens-club.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/383644-mir...ml#post4589578

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/173-general-photography/395398-how-many-...se-days-4.html

---

Last edited by aslyfox; 11-17-2019 at 05:13 PM.

[calsan]

Keep still and stay in the same spot. Eventually, birds will get used to you being there. You will get nicer shots when the birds are closer, regardless of the lens. Check out the patience required in this 'making of' article. Now admittedly, he has a long lens, but it's the sitting around waiting to the point that the bird ignored him that was key. The Making of "Asio flammeus" - Photo Contests | PentaxForums.com

[swip]

If you are not concerned about image IQ, you maybe able to get a 500mm for $200. But at some point, you will care about the IQ. So, I suggest save the $200 now and wait till you can afford a decent zoom lens such as one of the Sigma lens suggested in this tread. You will be better off this way.

[K2 to K50]

I would shop for a second-hand teleconverter - might require some concentrated and repeated googling, but if you keep at over a period of 4-6 weeks eventually you should luck onto a second hand 1.4x or even a 2x..

But I also agree with others who have suggested an upgrade to the KP or the K70 partly funded by selling your K50. The extra megapixels do help when it comes to cropping and enlarging. I upgraded from a K50 to a KP in June this year, and immediately started getting better results, esp with the 55-300mm PLM. Am now in the marked for the Pentax 1.4x tele converter but might need to forego the current run of 20% sales and wait another few months, for budget reasons.

But if you are prepared to go second-hand you could do it.
Teleconverter SLR Camera Lenses for Pentax for sale | eBay
Pentax Rear Tele Converter Converter-A 1.4x-S 1.4 X S SLR w/ Caps | eBay

[reh321]

Whatever lens you put on a camera delivers the same image at the sensor. A 90mm lens on a "Q" sensor gives you the magnification of a 90mm lens on a 12MP sensor. He will be worse off than he is now. All you are telling him to do is to effectively enlarge a 12MP "Q" sensor image so it looks bigger.

The pixels on a “Q” are much closer, so a 90mm lens on my Q-7 does deliver something like 9 times as many pixels as my K-30 does - which makes it act like a 270mm {three times as long} on my K-30. However, any 90mm lens that on a “Q” is manual focus, and with several years experience, I never became sufficiently adept at it - the 77-420mm PLM lens-plus-TC mounted on a KP is better for me.

[UncleVanya]

The pixels on a “Q” are much closer, so a 90mm lens on my Q-7 does deliver something like 9 times as many pixels as my K-30 does - which makes it act like a 270mm {three times as long} on my K-30. However, any 90mm lens that on a “Q” is manual focus, and with several years experience, I never became sufficiently adept at it - the 77-420mm PLM lens-plus-TC mounted on a KP is better for me.

My own experience is limited to m43 rather than q for adapted lenses and I found handholding and focusing a 135mm manual focus (270mm equivalent) was hard enough... I like the idea, I just wish there was an autofocus adapter for k to q.

[kypfer]

I would shop for a second-hand teleconverter - might require some concentrated and repeated googling, but if you keep at over a period of 4-6 weeks eventually you should luck onto a second hand 1.4x or even a 2x..

But I also agree with others who have suggested an upgrade to the KP or the K70 partly funded by selling your K50. The extra megapixels do help when it comes to cropping and enlarging.

Agreed Teleconverters aren't everyone's cup of tea, but they do work within reason in good light. The Kenko Pz-AF units have the advantage of the power connectors as well as the screw-drive, so will work with my Sigma 150-500mm HSM lens (no screw drive) as well as my older lenses. Do note, with a "native" lens maximum aperture of f/6.3, only the 1.5x adapter will give any degree of a/f reliability, and then only in good light on a static subject. If you're looking for birds in flight, forget the teleconverter unless your lens is reasonably wide aperture ... this is where the extra megapixels of the newer bodies come into their own and allow much tighter cropping! Also note, these older teleconverters don't notify the camera of their existence, so the EXIF still shows just the basic lens info, also the Shake Reduction makes no account of the longer focal length. I don't know if the newer Pentax converters are better in this respect ... my budget doesn't allow me that level of luxury

[biz-engineer]

My best kit on apsc was the Pentax DA*300 f4 with HD TC 1.4x on the K3 (420mm apsc, 630mm FF equ.)., a lot more expensive than $200, but not that expensive kit for the images that kit can deliver.

[catfishjohn]

Camo clothing can make a big difference. Don't forget camo gloves and face cover, your hands and face move a lot and shine like a new dime. A wide brimmed camo hat can shade your face. Usually getting closer is better than getting longer. If you can do both even better.

[luftfluss]

I found this to be an interesting statement from the DA 1.4x TC review:

It is interesting to note, however, that the K-3 without a teleconverter delivers roughly the same resolution as the K-50 with it in use, albeit with a bit of moiré in this particular scenario.

[aslyfox]

for many there is a balance between what we would like to be able to obtain and what the budget will allow

my wife has been very nice to me, and it helps to be able to find good " experienced " equipment via the marketplace and other sources or find new on " sale " to keep costs down

but not all members have that luxury and thus must make do with a less than a " perfect " choice

photography, IMHO, is a combination of knowledge, experience and equipment

I am amazed at what I see here at the forum posted by those who may not have the " latest and brightest " equipment

[MarkJerling]

So I've been pondering the question of how to extend my "reach" for a few years now. I currently have a Pentax K-50 with the 55-300. I'd really like to reach out farther, around 500mm at minimum. With a budget under $200, what is the general consensus of how to best get there? Purchase of a refurbished PowerShot zoom, mirrored lens, 3rd party 500mm manual lens, etc? I keep thinking that I'll have the budget to afford a "legitimate" lens, but that hasn't happened yet, and I'm willing to experiment.

(Reason: I wish to capture more images of birds, and my stealth abilities are terrible)

Alan

With a budget of $200, what you need is hiking shoes. Walk closer to your subject.

Sorry, could not resist. You'll struggle to get a 500mm lens of acceptable quality for double or triple that.