[crewl1]

Thank you guys for the advice and encouragement. I used a wireless remote to trigger the shutter but perhaps didn't wait long enough for the lens to stop shaking completely. Plus, the v. short reach of the wireless remote got me bumping into the camera a lot.

As far as stopping down, I tried it at +/-5.6 (wide open), at 8, 11, 16 and this is the best I got. Clearly, I need to experiment more with the aperture. Still not quite sure what PK-Q adapter (Fotodiox) does with a lens that has its own aperture ring, do I leave it on Open?

I will definitely wait for the moon to climb higher before my next attempt. And, so many other lenses to try

It does look a wee bit better in b&w, I think

Looks good. I don't have my Fotodiox anymore so I will let others comment on where the ring needs to be, but I think it is closed position.

[stormtech]

Looks good. I don't have my Fotodiox anymore so I will let others comment on where the ring needs to be, but I think it is closed position.

I get a bit confused every time I mount a lens on the Fotodiox adapter with or without an aperture ring. What I do is look into the lens as I set either the adapter or lens to be sure I have it doing what I want. Confusing to me because the adapter ring control is marked "Open" and "Locked".

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

I get a bit confused every time I mount a lens on the Fotodiox adapter with or without an aperture ring. What I do is look into the lens as I set either the adapter or lens to be sure I have it doing what I want. Confusing to me because the adapter ring control is marked "Open" and "Locked".

Most definitely mount the adapter in the open position and leave it there when using a physical aperture lens. Otherwise, the mechanism will interfere with the aperture. The lens ring, of course, is more accurate than the adapter coupler.

[crewl1]

Thanks for clarifying, Jim.

[jpzk]

Regarding the previous few posts: with the Pentax adapter, does the same mounting matters?

Also (on another topic), I would like to know more about the "pixel pitch" of the Q relative to the mounted lenses.
Is there a section/post where this is explained in detail?

Cheers!

JP

[crewl1]

At the top of the Q forum there is a sticky called 'Resources' - I posted a couple of links on how to use the adapter that should explain things.

Not sure what you mean by pixel pitch relative to Q? You mean the diffraction limits?

[baro-nite]

Regarding the previous few posts: with the Pentax adapter, does the same mounting matters?

I've never paid any attention to where the ring is when I mount the lens; if it matters I'll be shocked.

I would like to know more about the "pixel pitch" of the Q relative to the mounted lenses.

Not sure if I'm answering your question or not, but pixel pitch is simply the size of the pixels, about 1.5µm on the Q compared to about 4.8µm on the K-5. I.e., the Q has about 3.1x greater pixel density (linear). This is really where the added reach comes from, and also where the diffraction problems come from.

[jpzk]

At the top of the Q forum there is a sticky called 'Resources' - I posted a couple of links on how to use the adapter that should explain things.
OK, will be re-reading that. Thanks.
Not sure what you mean by pixel pitch relative to Q? You mean the diffraction limits?

Well, someone had mentioned that in a previous post ... so I was wondering what it meant.

JP

[jpzk]

I've never paid any attention to where the ring is when I mount the lens; if it matters I'll be shocked.

I didn't pay attention either when I first tried the kit this morning but since someone mentioned something about the way the adapter is to be mounted, I though it would matter.
Probably not in the case of the Pentax-brand adapter.

Not sure if I'm answering your question or not, but pixel pitch is simply the size of the pixels, about 1.5µm on the Q compared to about 4.8µm on the K-5. I.e., the Q has about 3.1x greater pixel density (linear). This is really where the added reach comes from, and also where the diffraction problems come from.

Yes, that is what I wanted to know.
Thanks for the reply.


JP

[drougge]

Most definitely mount the adapter in the open position and leave it there when using a physical aperture lens. Otherwise, the mechanism will interfere with the aperture.

No no no, ALL versions of the K mount allow the camera to open the aperture. All versions use exactly the same mechanism, where opening the aperture is an active action from the camera, having it closed is the default state. Thus, setting the adapter to open will keep any lens (with an aperture lever, which is almost all of them) open. Set it to closed ("lock") when using the aperture ring on the lens.

I've never paid any attention to where the ring is when I mount the lens; if it matters I'll be shocked.

Doesn't matter when you mount it, just close it before expecting the aperture ring to do anything.

[stormtech]

Well I just looked with my M 150 lens mounted. When the adapter is in the "Lock" position, the aperture is wide open and turning the aperture ring on the lens does nothing - stays wide open.

With the adapter in the "open" position, the aperture ring on the lens closes the aperture in stops just like it should.

This is why I need to look at the aperture itself each time I mount a lens ( M or DA) to be sure what is happening - just can't remember each time.

[drougge]

Well I just looked with my M 150 lens mounted. When the adapter is in the "Lock" position, the aperture is wide open and turning the aperture ring on the lens does nothing - stays wide open.

With the adapter in the "open" position, the aperture ring on the lens closes the aperture in stops just like it should.

This is why I need to look at the aperture itself each time I mount a lens ( M or DA) to be sure what is happening - just can't remember each time.

No wonder you can't remember, given that it's clearly incorrectly marked. Mine closes the lens towards "lock", and will keep the lens open if turned towards "open". (And of course, this applies regardless of if the lens has an aperture ring.)

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

Some confusion has taken place regarding how the newer (adjustable) Fotodiox adapter works. It is correct that all the K mount lenses have the aperture lever and work in the same way. Mounting a lens on this adapter always should be done with the collar in the marked "open" position which ensures a clean mount coupling (as the lens faces out, this is the left or counter-clockwise position). If the lens has its own physical aperture, just leave the adapter collar alone and use the more-precise ring on the lens. If you have a modern mount lens with no physical aperture the coupler collar will open up the aperture as you move the adapter collar to the right (clockwise) into the marked "locked" fully open aperture position.

Mounting a lens when the Fotodiox adapter collar is in the marked "locked" position probably will not do damage, but the coupling system may or may not work depending on how the lever and pin mesh. At worst, you might have to giggle or carefully pull away the lens lever outward (away from the center of the lens to get it re-aligned correctly).

I think post #655 is correct in the accepted terminology, but does not apply properly to the particular markings of the Fotodiox adapter. That post needs clarification, or some folks will do the exact opposite of the appropriate action.

[barondla]

My Q-Canon FD adapter is complicated. I have to mount lens to adapter and adjust aperture, while looking thru back of lens. When all is well, I mount it on the Q. my adapter is also labled backwards. Throw in the strange Canon breech lock mount ( old lens stay still while newer ones rotate) and it gets confusing fast.
thanks
barondla

[stormtech]

If the lens has its own physical aperture, just leave the adapter collar alone and use the more-precise ring on the lens. If you have a modern mount lens with no physical aperture the coupler collar will open up the aperture as you move the adapter collar to the right (clockwise) into the marked "locked" fully open aperture position.

I think post #655 is correct in the accepted terminology, but does not apply properly to the particular markings of the Fotodiox adapter. That post needs clarification, or some folks will do the exact opposite of the appropriate action.

Thanks for clarifying this - you are saying exactly what I said above. I even checked mine - had it in my hands when posting. Then I thought I was missing something when I was told that my adapter must have the markings wrong on it........