Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-08-2013, 06:37 PM   #571
Loyal Site Supporter
baro-nite's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: North Carolina, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,298
QuoteOriginally posted by stormtech Quote
Maybe I am off in my thinking or math, but....the DA*300 on the K-5 is a 420mm equivalent FL. The M 150 on the Q is a 825mm equivalent.
Well, you're a little off, in that the K-5 crop is more like 1.5. But the crop isn't really the important factor, it's the pixel density. The Q has roughly 3x the pixel density (linear) of the K-5. So, yes, a 150 on the Q is 50% more pixels (again, linear) than the 300 on the K-5, but that's a poor tradeoff against extra noise, smaller DR, touchier focusing, more CA, and, since we're talking about bird photography, no AF and generally slower handling. Unless you want to shoot video. And sorry, I should have said FA*300 in your case.

I don't know that the 135 or 150 will have a particularly long focus throw. I've never used either, but in my experience it is only macro and manual super-tele lenses that have an extra-long throw.

02-08-2013, 07:40 PM   #572
Site Supporter
robtcorl's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: St Louis, MO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,638
Some folks like the wide stuff, some like the long stuff.
I'm strictly a hobby shooter, and like the long stuff.

For me the jury is still out about a heavy crop of my DA 55/300mm compared to an adapted lens on the Q.
I do know that I'm loving the reach, even if IQ is not quite up to snuff, with an adapted lens on the Q.

Wish I could afford some fast long glass for my K-5, but I can't at this time.
So I'll keep on comparing.

PS: A rough check of my M 135/3.5 shows that the end to end throw is about 190/195 degrees.
As a retired land surveyor that's a pretty good guess, I think.
02-09-2013, 11:31 AM   #573
Loyal Site Supporter
drougge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Malmö
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 787
QuoteOriginally posted by baro-nite Quote
I don't know that the 135 or 150 will have a particularly long focus throw. I've never used either, but in my experience it is only macro and manual super-tele lenses that have an extra-long throw.
Macros have longer total throw, but not usually longer throw per focus change. At least in my experience. (My A100/4 macro has much touchier focus than my M100/2.8 non-macro when used as a tele, even though the total focus throw is longer.)
02-09-2013, 11:32 AM   #574
Loyal Site Supporter
baro-nite's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: North Carolina, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,298
QuoteOriginally posted by drougge Quote
Macros have longer total throw, but not usually longer throw per focus change
Good point!

02-10-2013, 08:24 AM   #575
Pentaxian
MegaPower's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hong Kong / Irvine, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 561
Q + A*300/4
I think all are f8







Q + vivitar 3x + A*300/4
F8 on the lens, the result is pretty good to me.
This vivitar 3x is sure better than some cheap 2x that I had.

I cannot stop the bird from moving its month and the light does not allow me to shoot a faster shutter.

Last edited by MegaPower; 02-10-2013 at 08:39 AM.
02-10-2013, 08:33 AM   #576
Pentaxian
MegaPower's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hong Kong / Irvine, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 561
Above set up

The set up:
Q + vivitar 3x + A* 300/4



The "orange dot" shows you the size of the second bird.
02-10-2013, 10:00 AM   #577
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,246
Great results, nice looking setup. That 300 is on my list of lenses to try to get

Hans
02-10-2013, 10:03 AM   #578
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
Great shots TFS the setup pics, MegaPower.
Ha! I have one of those white tripod rings with the canon logo. I spray painted it black

02-11-2013, 08:49 AM   #579
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,246
Kr vs Q

I shot the same bird with the Kr and DAL 55-300 @ 300 and from the same spot the Q with DAL 55-300 @300 and cropped the Kr image to the same FOV of the Q and was impressed. Both hand held with the same lighting. Same PP, slight sharpening and slight addition of contrast for all images. Both were shot @ f8. Center image was shot with Q.


Hans

Based on Larry's comments I found a shot from the Kr that was shot from closer to the bird but without the motion blur (the bottom 2) Not quite as dramatic I still believe the Q turned out better. Bottom shot full frame one above cropped to about the Q view
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-r  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-r  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-r  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-r  Photo 

Last edited by hnikesch; 02-12-2013 at 06:20 AM. Reason: added shot without the motion blur
02-11-2013, 09:10 AM   #580
Site Supporter
robtcorl's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: St Louis, MO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,638
QuoteOriginally posted by hnikesch Quote
I shot the same bird with the Kr and DAL 55-300 @ 300 and from the same spot the Q with DAL 55-300 @300 and cropped the Kr image to the same FOV of the Q and was impressed. Both hand held with the same lighting. Same PP, slight sharpening and slight addition of contrast for all images. Both were shot @ f8. Bottom image was shot with Q.
Hans
Very impressive results from the Q!
I love this type of comparison.
Since getting the Q, I've hardly picked up my K-01, and not sure where my K-5 even is.

Plenty of PF around this critter, but I still like the shot.
Handheld, un-cropped, with a M135/3.5, and 640 ISO.
02-11-2013, 09:13 AM   #581
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
QuoteOriginally posted by hnikesch Quote
Kr vs Q I shot the same bird with the Kr and DAL 55-300 @ 300 and from the same spot the Q with DAL 55-300 @300 and cropped the Kr image to the same FOV of the Q and was impressed. Both hand held with the same lighting. Same PP, slight sharpening and slight addition of contrast for all images. Both were shot @ f8. Bottom image was shot with Q. Hans

Impressive Hans. There appears a bit of motion blur on the K-r shot, bot the contrast and sharpness of the Q shot is really good.

Last edited by crewl1; 02-11-2013 at 09:20 AM.
02-11-2013, 09:22 AM - 1 Like   #582
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
QuoteOriginally posted by robtcorl Quote
Very impressive results from the Q!
I love this type of comparison.
Since getting the Q, I've hardly picked up my K-01, and not sure where my K-5 even is.

Plenty of PF around this critter, but I still like the shot.
Handheld, un-cropped, with a M135/3.5, and 640 ISO.
Great shots, A little PP should clean that grape juice right off that squirrel
02-11-2013, 09:09 PM   #583
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,246
Great Horned Owl chicks

A few days later and the lighting is no better than last time, extreme back lighting on a fuzzy body, again monopod with DAL 55-300 f8, last shot with DAL 55-300 on Kr This time I shot in raw and tried to compensate for the poor lighting but still couldn't get the shadows sharp.

Hans
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-r  Photo 
02-11-2013, 09:24 PM   #584
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
QuoteOriginally posted by hnikesch Quote
Last edited by hnikesch; Today at 08:58 AM. Reason: added shot without the motion blur
Agreed the Q still is ahead. Nice job.

The owls are amazing, too bad the light isn't helping. You are getting nice bokeh from the K-r combo
02-13-2013, 06:03 PM   #585
Veteran Member
stormtech's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In the boonies (NW Penna)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,670
No images to post yet - but received my M 135 3.5 today which I bought especially for the Q. I got very lucky with this ebay buy - lens is just like new and even came with its original hard case which was not listed in the auction. My original thoughts were correct in that the nice small size of the lens is nice and easy to hand hold even for me. And the beautiful smooth dampened long focus throw is sweet. This will be my 825mm gun to get those ducks in the middle of the river.

Last edited by photolady95; 04-17-2016 at 02:39 AM.
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!
adaptor, camera, focus, frame, hummingbird, images, iso, loupe, marco, mirrorless, nikon, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q-s1, q10, q7, setup, shot, shots, sigma 500mm, sort, thanks
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Post your "Park Bench" "or "Picnic Table" images tessfully Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 1349 13 Hours Ago 04:00 PM
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 18 11-04-2012 03:40 PM
"Real Life" K5 AF.C images yet? jpzk Pentax K-5 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



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:44 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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