Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-31-2011, 12:19 AM   #1066
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Think a few adapters exist to measure interest. Don't think they are being mass produced yet. Zxaar, would love to know if Image stabilization works with non-chipped lens. Does the focal length input menu pop up like
Pentax dslrs?
I will keep in mind about it, might print your question and ask them directly, if I went there.


QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Wonder why they restrict people keeping pics taken with adapter?
thanks
barondla
I think the reason is that they are still improving the design or may be tweaking it. The purpose might be to get feedback from people who understand photography.

Personally I do not have interest in k-Q adapter so, for me it is low priority. I might go there if I have nothing to do and if they do not want prior appointment.

08-31-2011, 01:41 AM   #1067
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Wonder why they restrict people keeping pics taken with adapter?
Well, most lenses will look very poor with this adapter.

The Q is diffraction-limited at f/4.6 and diffraction-influenced down to f/2.3. Most lenses will not resolve <2 Ám at such wide apertures. Only a few selected top notch lenses will. Maybe, Pentax does not want to stick their finger into this caveat of the Q/K adapter?
08-31-2011, 02:01 AM   #1068
Veteran Member
ghelary's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 617
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Well, most lenses will look very poor with this adapter.

The Q is diffraction-limited at f/4.6 and diffraction-influenced down to f/2.3. Most lenses will not resolve <2 Ám at such wide apertures. Only a few selected top notch lenses will. Maybe, Pentax does not want to stick their finger into this caveat of the Q/K adapter?
The Online Photographer on diffraction

I'm not worried about diffraction and I'm pretty certain that lenses will still be usable at f8 and above.

But what really true in your comment (and what really matters) is that no lens but the best ones will be able to resolve enough for the pixel density for this camera. It's like mounting a 6x7 lens on an APSC DSLR, deception can ensue.

Peak sharpness remain at the same aperture whatever is the sensor used, it may just not be visible.
08-31-2011, 07:07 PM   #1069
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
10 minutes with Q

I tried Q yesterday in Yodobashi osaka. Here are first basic impressions.

1. Its small. With its normal lens , it is easily carry-able in shirt pocket. Very light too. This was the best aspect of Q.

2. Auto focus was okey, not so snappy as dslr but workable.

There are two bad news (for me at least)

3. I set camera on jpg+DNG and there was a lag between 1 to 2nd photo. Camera takes time to get ready for next photo, the time was typically 2-5 seconds. So if you are in hurry then forget about using DNG with it.
(camera did screw up the names also, that means if jpg file was 0061.jpg the corrosponding DNG was say 0059.dng etc.

4. higher isos >= 800 is useless, i won't use it above 400. In fact I would not use it above iso200. (I do not even go to iso400 on k-x also, so i am just bit crazy). At base isos however it was very good, but still , in my opinion, it is only a 6-8mp camera. To get pixel level quality one should downscale to 6-8 mp even at base isos. (with fast F1.9 lens this shall not be much of an issue)

Would I be buying one? answer is 99% yes, but it is for my wife. For me I think whenever possible will stick to Sony R1 and k-x.

08-31-2011, 07:18 PM   #1070
Veteran Member
Christine Tham's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,269
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
I tried Q yesterday in Yodobashi osaka. Here are first basic impressions.

1. Its small. With its normal lens , it is easily carry-able in shirt pocket. Very light too. This was the best aspect of Q.

2. Auto focus was okey, not so snappy as dslr but workable.

There are two bad news (for me at least)

3. I set camera on jpg+DNG and there was a lag between 1 to 2nd photo. Camera takes time to get ready for next photo, the time was typically 2-5 seconds. So if you are in hurry then forget about using DNG with it.
(camera did screw up the names also, that means if jpg file was 0061.jpg the corrosponding DNG was say 0059.dng etc.

4. higher isos >= 800 is useless, i won't use it above 400. In fact I would not use it above iso200. (I do not even go to iso400 on k-x also, so i am just bit crazy). At base isos however it was very good, but still , in my opinion, it is only a 6-8mp camera. To get pixel level quality one should downscale to 6-8 mp even at base isos. (with fast F1.9 lens this shall not be much of an issue)

Would I be buying one? answer is 99% yes, but it is for my wife. For me I think whenever possible will stick to Sony R1 and k-x.
Hi

Thanks very much for your first impressions! I have been trying to find it here in Australia, but one shop said they are not expecting stock until mid October.

A few questions:
1. Lag between photos. This is a potential deal breaker for me. Any lag in JPEG or Raw mode? Can I take quick shots in succession?
2. High ISO - how does it compare to K10D (which in my experience is not really usable above ISO400 without post processing) - the sample images led me to believe the Q is better than the K10D up to ISO1600. Comment?

Have you compared to GF3. Would you consider the GF3 to be superior/inferior (I have the same concerns with GF3 lag between shots and high ISO performance)

よろしくお願いします。
08-31-2011, 09:18 PM   #1071
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
about the lag

@Christine Tham

I am in office so can not write in detail now, will try to add in evening.

But about the lag.

There are two types of lags :

1. When you press button then after button press camera actually takes picture after some time or lag.
2. Camera is not ready to take another picture because it just took picture and it is in middle of processing it.

Type 1, lag is not there in Q. This type of lag is most annoying and if it were there, I would not even touch this camera next time. But this lag is not there in Q.

Type2 lag was the lag I observed and it happened when I chose jepg+DNG both. After photo was taken camera was busy processing + saving the files (I suspect it was more saving RAW files).
Some times this lag comes because camera is trying to apply some filter or try to do lens correction etc. So next time I try I might try to explore this better. Yesterday there was lot of interest and i did not feel like playing it with too much because others were standing behind me to try it.
08-31-2011, 11:01 PM   #1072
Veteran Member
Christine Tham's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,269
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
There are two types of lags :

1. When you press button then after button press camera actually takes picture after some time or lag.
2. Camera is not ready to take another picture because it just took picture and it is in middle of processing it.

Type 1, lag is not there in Q. This type of lag is most annoying and if it were there, I would not even touch this camera next time. But this lag is not there in Q.

Type2 lag was the lag I observed and it happened when I chose jepg+DNG both. After photo was taken camera was busy processing + saving the files (I suspect it was more saving RAW files).
Some times this lag comes because camera is trying to apply some filter or try to do lens correction etc. So next time I try I might try to explore this better. Yesterday there was lot of interest and i did not feel like playing it with too much because others were standing behind me to try it.
If you can explore whether lag type 2 can be reduced by shooting Raw, that is much appreciated.

I hate lag type 2 - I notice on K-5 I do get lag type 2 if I turn on lens correction, but otherwise there is no "lock out period" - I can shoot a series of rapid shots in quick succession (actually, these days I just leave the camera in continuous fast mode, and I hold the shutter longer if I want to take a series of shots)

If it is not possible to reduce lag type 2 on the Q, I will give up on the Q and buy a GF3 instead.

PS - by Yodobashi Osaka, did you mean Yodobashi Umeda - this is a photo of the latter when I was there in 2008:
08-31-2011, 11:29 PM   #1073
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
yepp i mean yodobashi umeda.

I will try to explore more about the lag part on saturday, if it is going to be any help.

09-01-2011, 02:03 AM   #1074
Pentaxian
aurele's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,967
maybe the memory card wasn't very fast too ?
09-01-2011, 02:22 AM   #1075
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by aurele Quote
maybe the memory card wasn't very fast too ?
Hard to tell, but here is the fact : The card was same as I use on my k-x without any problems. I just took the card from my k-x and shot the images into it.
09-01-2011, 05:17 AM   #1076
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,327
Is this camera a "prototype" or the finished consumer model? Sounds like there is a lot of interest in it.
thanks
barondla
09-01-2011, 06:19 AM   #1077
Veteran Member
ManuH's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,209
QuoteOriginally posted by Christine Tham Quote
1. Lag between photos. This is a potential deal breaker for me. Any lag in JPEG or Raw mode?
This is a deal breaker for a 800$ camera. I would have hoped that a last the buffer and processing speed would be comparable to say a K-x or even a K-m. Otherwise it's just an expensive toy.
09-01-2011, 06:29 AM   #1078
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,512
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
4. higher isos >= 800 is useless
I wish they would rather use a larger sensor - like the new Fuji X10 which uses a 2/3" sensor.
09-01-2011, 06:38 AM   #1079
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by ghelary Quote
The Online Photographer on diffraction

I'm not worried about diffraction and I'm pretty certain that lenses will still be usable at f8 and above.
I am aware of all this, rest assured.

But the link you provide isn't exactly applicable here. Because the Q isn't an APSC camera and a tiny sensor (in comparison) needs more careful consideration of diffraction effects -- whatever be the # of pixels.

E.g., the NEX 7 (despite its 24MP) has 3.9Ám pixels while the Q has 1.55Ám pixels.

And therefore let me tell you that a lens at f/8 is not usable at the Q: The Airy disk radius at f/8 is 3.5 Q-pixels and everything above 2 pixels is mud (pixel-contrast with 2 pixel-radius Airy disks is 10% only and everything above is lost). Of course, you can use a lens at f/8 -- but don't expect sharp images then. OTOH, you're right, f/8 is still only 1.4 NEX7-pixels and it makes perfect sense to use a lens which is sharpest at f/8 on the NEX7 (although a lens best at f/5.6 would render quite a tad sharper).

Therefore and like the article you cite suggests, you'll need a lens which is sharpest between f/2.8 and f/4. Very few such lenses (for APSC and FF) exist.

Last edited by falconeye; 09-01-2011 at 06:44 AM.
09-01-2011, 06:54 AM   #1080
Veteran Member
ManuH's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,209
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Therefore and like the article you cite suggests, you'll need a lens which is sharpest between f/2.8 and f/4. Very few such lenses (for APSC and FF) exist.
Sharpest at f/4 seems to be the domain of primes. Many Pentax primes perform the best at f/4, at least according to Photozone. Only in the center but this is not an issue if adapted on the Q. It would be fun to see how the FA 77mm performs on the Q for example.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, mirrorless, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q10, q7
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Spotmatic motordrive...in the flesh! pickles Pentax Film SLR Discussion 8 08-09-2010 01:00 PM
Of Flesh and Clay dantuyhoa Post Your Photos! 9 11-11-2008 11:57 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:31 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top