[baro-nite]

One question I am wondering about is since I am starting with a 5.6 f stop on the DA*300, does adding the 2x TC bring me to a f11 aperture?

Yes.

Too bad you got chased away before getting more shots. How do they stack up when viewed at the same subject magnification?

[ivoire]

Picked up a 2x soligor 7 element tc for $15 including shipping to try out with the Tokina 400mm. Its been cloudy so i tried the tc indoors with the Tak 55 f1.8 to check image quality. Taken from 18' from target. I think i shows some real promise for getting moon/planet shots.

[crewl1]

Picked up a 2x soligor 7 element tc for $15 including shipping to try out with the Tokina 400mm. Its been cloudy so i tried the tc indoors with the Tak 55 f1.8 to check image quality. I think i shows some real promise for getting moon/planet shots.

Looks good, ivoire.

[VisualDarkness]

One thing I like with this thread is that it's based on actual real life testing and if the pics are useful or not, instead of just test papers.

[crewl1]

Yes.

Too bad you got chased away before getting more shots. How do they stack up when viewed at the same subject magnification?

Thanks for suggesting I try that.

I think the crop is better than the 2xTC shot, so at least with this unit I can forget it. I think the resulting f11 and diffraction is part of the problem.

The DA*300 just rocks

Required crop


Result from cropped Da*300


Original DA*300 with 2x TC

[baro-nite]

I think the crop is better than the 2xTC shot, so at least with this unit I can forget it. I think the resulting f11 and diffraction is part of the problem.

There's a sort of glow to the 2x shot; diffraction does seem the likely culprit. I guess some of the astro shots we've been seeing made with small apertures have been OK because atmospheric turbulence had a bigger effect.

[crewl1]

It's really noticeable on the leaves. Good thing no leaves on astro shots

[K9-K5]

It's still cold out there...
Just bazooka:


1,7xTC:

[baro-nite]

It's still cold out there...

Very nice pair of shots!

I thought this was pretty funny, as well as a demonstration of how the Q's tiny sensor is both blessing and curse -- DA* 300 on the Q, uncropped:


Eurasian House Sparrows

[monochrome]

My Q>K converter came Friday. Images will follow but I think the thread will appreciate this small amusement.

I've been completely swamped gathering every single body, lens and accessory I own onto my dining room table and aggressively negotiating the scale of the "Keep List" with my lovely wife.

She has 4,000 books. I have 14 cameras. I'm not going to win this battle, though, so --

• 3 Film cameras, and related dedicated only accessories for each (XA, KX, LX). K lenses for KX and M lenses for LX didn't fly very far
• 3 Digital cameras, and related dedicated only accessories for each (K-01, Q, ???) - F, FA and DA were classified Autofocus (phew!)

That sets up some interesting internal debate of what constitutes dedicated (where does a Sekonic L-398D go?) and some value judgements whether 'tis better to keep a lesser camera for which I have lots of accessories, a better camera that is not filled out or a sentimental favorite? But that's all for another thread.

I took a break.

I'm still learning my Q, much less expecting anything useable, but I read the Q>K instruction sheet and test-mounted with lens aperture open and converter aperture set somewhere (5-ish, I think). M100/2.8 was on the table to be sold. Mounted the 100, turned on the camera and input the lens FL, snapped the plate into the ballhead and pointed at a suncatcher hanging in the living room window - perhaps 60 feet away.

Missed the suncatcher, but achieved focus on a window mullion ....

on the second floor of my neighbor's house over 400 feet away.

Holy Cr@^&*!!

[stormtech]

Missed the suncatcher, but achieved focus on a window mullion ....

on the second floor of my neighbor's house over 400 feet away.

Holy Cr@^&*!!

Ha - the Q continues to amaze! I was so skeptical with the Q - hesitated for a long time before buying one. Then you begin to see all the possibilites........

You have such a nice collection - I don't see how I could part with any of it - but it sounds as if the Q has worked its way up on the keeper list?

[crewl1]

My Q>K converter came Friday. Images will follow but I think the thread will appreciate this small amusement.

I've been completely swamped gathering every single body, lens and accessory I own onto my dining room table and aggressively negotiating the scale of the "Keep List" with my lovely wife.

She has 4,000 books. I have 14 cameras. I'm not going to win this battle, though, so --

• 3 Film cameras, and related dedicated only accessories for each (XA, KX, LX). K lenses for KX and M lenses for LX didn't fly very far
• 3 Digital cameras, and related dedicated only accessories for each (K-01, Q, ???) - F, FA and DA were classified Autofocus (phew!)

That sets up some interesting internal debate of what constitutes dedicated (where does a Sekonic L-398D go?) and some value judgements whether 'tis better to keep a lesser camera for which I have lots of accessories, a better camera that is not filled out or a sentimental favorite? But that's all for another thread.

I took a break.

I'm still learning my Q, much less expecting anything useable, but I read the Q>K instruction sheet and test-mounted with lens aperture open and converter aperture set somewhere (5-ish, I think). M100/2.8 was on the table to be sold. Mounted the 100, turned on the camera and input the lens FL, snapped the plate into the ballhead and pointed at a suncatcher hanging in the living room window - perhaps 60 feet away.

Missed the suncatcher, but achieved focus on a window mullion ....

on the second floor of my neighbor's house over 400 feet away.

Holy Cr@^&*!!

Just be happy you don't live across from ugly naked guy. Or... should they be happy they don't own a Q with adapter ?

[monochrome]

Hah Hah Thanks - I've bought and sold most of the stuff I always lusted after just so I would know I had it for a while. But I suffer from PBA (Pentax Buying Addiction) so I have a bunch of stuff I didn't ever lust after. You don't want to see my dining room table. I refuse to KEH 15 years of eBay accumulation, so ....

I also suffer from some age-related physical infirmities and struggle with visual ..... handicaps .... which render a traditional optical viewfinder exremely challenging to use effectively.

Combine the two and my "nice Pentax collection" has mostly sat in bags and boxes in my closet for a couple years.

LiveView with the K-01 and the Q have been a Godsend and Focus Peaking is sublime.





Alas, my wife doesn't buy the argument that S-M-C 50/1.4, K50/1.4, M50/1.4, A50/1.4 and FA50/1.4 are distinct lenses, dedicated to distinct camera ranges. Same for AutoTak and SuperTak 55/1.8 and K55/1.8. Maybe she is correct, maybe she isn't, but that's not a battle I'm going to win, so .... the AboutMe list is The List.

• KX - my college graduation present, with the K50/1.4
• LX - for obvious reasons - I have an outstandingly clean copy
• XA - our Q is the digital derivative of this poor man's "busman's holiday" professional grade pocket camera (anti Leica-hipster coolness abounds).
• K10D (to be replaced if there is ever a FF Pentax)
• K-01 - sublime sensor with the superior Prime M imaging engine, and just a bit of in-your-face, I don't care what you think.
• Q - just boatloads of fun and I can use all those keeper lenses!! I actually prefer the idea of MagAlloy to engineering plastic

Selling - all CLA'ed

• K with AT55/1/8 Zebra & AT35/3.5 and box of accessories
• H1a
• SV
• SPII
• SP-F
• KM
• SF1n
• bunch of overlapping lenses (trying to keep the "better" edition in most cases)

In the back of my mind there is the idea that I should have only the three FA Limiteds. That would require some "cold, dead fingers" selling first, though.

[monochrome]

Just be happy you don't live across from ugly naked guy. Or... should they be happy they don't own a Q with adapter ?

We should all be happy I didn't get the PL 100 Polarizing Filter

[baro-nite]

Alas, my wife doesn't buy the argument that S-M-C 50/1.4, K50/1.4, M50/1.4, A50/1.4 and FA50/1.4 are distinct lenses

Uh oh. Better not let my wife read this. Though as of yet I'm missing the Tak.