Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-12-2011, 07:23 AM   #91
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
I'm not so sure. The NEX LA-EA2 AF adapter is large and clunky and costs a few hundred.
[...]
The penalty of extra bulk and $ probably means these sort of add-ons aren't a must-have feature for compact mirrorless. I wouldn't be surprised if hardly anyone buys these things.
Nothing is a must have. A Q may make sense w/o any adapters at all.

OTOH, the NEX LA-EA2 does make more sense than you may think. You loose on compactness but you gain an entire SLT feature set, incl. fast phase AF. It turns mirrorless as a secondary camera into a primary one. It's even better because you can opt-out on the translucent mirror (skip the adapter by using an E lens) which you can't with a NEX SLT (which is why some Sony enthusiasts already run a petition that Sony makes the translucent mirror up-lockeable in the forthcoming FF A99).

09-12-2011, 08:12 AM   #92
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,893
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
the NEX LA-EA2 does make more sense than you may think
Maybe. I guess there is a galaxy of potential uses for such a device. But it certainly breaks the concept of the NEX as a compact camera. The same may be true for the Q, of course, when we are talking about adapters.
09-12-2011, 05:33 PM   #93
Veteran Member
ManuH's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,209
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
So, it will become increasingly tough for Pentax to market a mirrorless system with no AF adapters available.
Such Pentax adapter could probably support SDM without too much difficulty. The problem is that there's not that many SDM/DC lenses. It would exclude the lenses that would make the most sense on a mirrorless: small primes. I don't know how difficult it would be to include a screwdrive motor into an adapter but that of course would be the ideal solution.
09-13-2011, 03:22 AM   #94
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by ManuH Quote
Such Pentax adapter could probably support SDM without too much difficulty. The problem is that there's not that many SDM/DC lenses. It would exclude the lenses that would make the most sense on a mirrorless: small primes. I don't know how difficult it would be to include a screwdrive motor into an adapter but that of course would be the ideal solution.
A screwdrive motor isn't too large and could be integrated into an adapter.

But I don't agree small primes are the lenses which would make most sense, except maybe for the DA 40 and 70 Ltd.

E.g., the DA 40 Ltd. is less than 450$ (in EU) and a screw-drive converter may cost too close to this. All primes smaller than 40mm would be much smaller if designed for the shorter reghistration distance, even without adding the bulk of an adapter. So, they wouldn't be a good fit for an adapter.

Moreover, medium quality glass like the kit or economy zooms wouldn't resolve high enough. Leaves the 40, 70 Ltds. and 55, 50-135, 60-250, 200, 300 SDM lenses. Of course, with 5.6 crop, any lens on the Q would be a tele lens, even the 15mm Ltd... So, compactness wouldn't be the only point of consideration here, reach being another.

09-13-2011, 03:41 AM   #95
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,100
Yes unfortunately, there are few chances to get soon such an AF adapter.
09-13-2011, 04:31 AM   #96
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,720
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Moreover, medium quality glass like the kit or economy zooms wouldn't resolve high enough. Leaves the 40, 70 Ltds. and 55, 50-135, 60-250, 200, 300 SDM lenses. Of course, with 5.6 crop, any lens on the Q would be a tele lens, even the 15mm Ltd... So, compactness wouldn't be the only point of consideration here, reach being another.
Is there a reason you left out the FA and FA limited glass? I would also include the 16-45 and 16-50, they aren't far behind the primes, in fact seem pretty comparable with the 15 and 21mm Ltds.
09-13-2011, 04:42 AM   #97
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,513
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Ok, if you prefer to keep it small ...
I'd have a serious look at the DA 70 Ltd. It seems to have the biggest resolution muscle of all longer DAs.

On the Q, use it at f/3.2 and enjoy a true 400mm lens FoV (35mm equivalent).
Almost the first thing I thought of when I heard about the Q - how fun it would be to mount the DA70 on it.

With my lowly K10D, the sharpness of the DA70 is sometimes only a burden - it exposes the weak AA filter of the K10D surprisingly often
09-13-2011, 07:04 AM   #98
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
Is there a reason you left out the FA and FA limited glass? I would also include the 16-45 and 16-50, they aren't far behind the primes, in fact seem pretty comparable with the 15 and 21mm Ltds.
I basically left out all lenses which are big and not long. I'm not so sure about the sharpness of the 16-45. The 16-50 may be sharp enough up to 25mm but it is SDM anyway and a big lens.

09-13-2011, 07:24 AM   #99
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,720
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
I basically left out all lenses which are big and not long. I'm not so sure about the sharpness of the 16-45. The 16-50 may be sharp enough up to 25mm but it is SDM anyway and a big lens.
OK, I would say the FA 50mm, FA 43, and 77 Ltd would be interesting. All are small(ish) and razor sharp in the center at f/2.8-f/4.

The 16-45 is soft at the long end, but still considerably sharper than the 18-55. Probably not very useful on the Q.
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, k-mount adapter, mirrorless, 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
Pentax Q to K mount adapter ? jogiba Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 23 12-08-2012 12:47 AM
Can I use PK mount M42 adapter on Pentax K-r vass Pentax K-r 6 12-28-2010 07:08 AM
For Sale - Sold: Genuine Pentax Mount Adapter K (M42 to K-mount) zx-m Sold Items 6 01-30-2009 01:22 AM
Pentax Mount Adapter K vs Chinese Mount Adapter Vylen Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 01-23-2009 01:03 AM
For Sale - Sold: *New* Pentax Mount Adapter-K M42 to K-Mount X Man Sold Items 4 12-31-2008 04:10 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:15 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