[mpreston]

New photos at Post #7 with shake reduction turned off on K20D

I just got the RJ PK-PQ converter and did a quick test with some lenses.

The focusing is tricky on the DA40, FA50 but the DA300 is not bad along with the DA16-45 and DA50-135.

I put a Diet Coke can on the fence about 30 feet away. Using a tripod I took the same image with the Q and the K20D.

The Q image turn out better than I though and, to me, seems sharper than the K20D's image at the same size.

This Q/DA300 combination has some potential for tele pictures that need time for setup. Not much good for any action shots.

The DA zooms where good also - especially the 50-135 which seemed pretty sharp also. Time will tell with actual picture of something other than a pop can.


Pentax Q vs K20D with DA300 and the K20D image at 1:1

---

Last edited by mpreston; 03-13-2012 at 05:56 AM.

[Ole]

Interesting experiment. The Q definitely looks better. The K20D image has sharpening artifacts from either the camera's sharpening settings, or postprocessing. The edges of the letters are the tell tale. And it is out of focus, I think.

[barondla]

Can't wait to see more of your images. Know the Q works well with DA*300 ( use it all the time). Will be interested to see how the other lenses work.
thanks
barondla

[snostorm]

I think that the most important thing that is illustrated by this test is the IQ of the Q crop.

Comparing the small white dots just to the left of the inserted text "D", and above the "x", and on the leg of the K on the can in the Q shot with the same dots on the K20 shot shows a vertical elongation which suggests the effects of some camera shake, whether it might be mirror slap or shutter vibration, or from some other source. In addition, there also seems to be some misfocus, but I'm not sure if this isn't just the effects of the upsampling interpolation. I'd say that this sample is not an indication of the best that can come from a K20 in any event.

Regardless, the Q sample shows that the Q, when mated with a recognized premium lens, is capable of producing very high quality images -- without the "for the sensor size" qualifier.

Scott

[mpreston]

There could be camera shake and some focus issues with the K20D when I did this little comparison. Both shots where taken on a tripod and I could of used MLU to decrease any mirror slap issues. I wasn't trying to do it like a lab experiment This was just as a quick test to see the capacity of the Q with a high quality lens like the DA300.

I let the K20D use spot focus. So it could of picked a slightly different area than I did using the manual focusing on the Q. Sharpening on the K20D is at +2. The images where not PP'd in any way. The enlarged K20D image was increased by approximately 350% in photoshop (no wonder it doesn't look good). Files where saved as max quality Jpegs.

I think the K20D image at 1:1 looks pretty darn good (open the attachment) and if you enlarge any image by 3.5X it is going to fall apart. I'm a graphic designer and I work with digital images every day. We never increase image sizes if we can help it and if we have to we'll keep any increase in image size to under 150%.

I'm no measure-bater but I think the Q with the DA300 produces a nice sharp image. The K20D makes nice sharp 1:1 images, but if you want the subject the same size as what the Q produces, it can't keep up. The thing is the Q has limitations since the focusing is so cumbersome. So anything moving faster than a snail is not going to be captured very easily with a Q.

I guess I wanted to address the sensor issue that a lot of people rag on. Even without comparing the K20D images, the Q w/DA300 is capable of producing very acceptable IQ.

I'll do some tests with my Da50-150 next when I get a chance. Initial shoots look good so far.

[ihasa]

Interesting. It's predictable that the K20D image would fall apart if you resized it in this way; the comparison between the 1:1 crops is much more interesting to me. You have shown that lenses like the DA300 aren't remotely being fully exploited by our 14.6 / 16MP sensors, as well as that they are sharp enough for a small sensor camera like the Q. You can see that the smaller sensor area has exaggerated the CA somewhat, but for a 1:1 image from a 12MP sensor, it's pretty good and certainly looks usable.

[mpreston]

I realized that the K20D had the shake reduction turned on and was causing some blurring. So I did a quick reshoot yesterday late afternoon when the sun finally poked out for a bit.

I tried to keep camera shake to a minimum the best I could with my tripod and used the remote control F like I did before. I think the shots show how well both cameras perform with this lens. Both pictures were shot at f4.0 @ 1/500 ISO 125 (or very close to that). Stopping down one stop really helped the K20D while the Q looked pretty much the same.

Interesting thing I noticed is that the Q image on the left - you can actually see the raised edge of the silk screen printing. This lens is very impressive on both cameras. The Q really shows what this tiny sensor is very capable of capture telephoto images, especially with the 5.5 crop factor and good telephoto lenses the results are pretty good. I'm continually impressed with this little camera.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

---

Last edited by mpreston; 03-12-2012 at 11:29 AM.

[stern]

;

I just got the RJ PK-PQ converter and did a quick test with some lenses.

The focusing is tricky on the DA40, FA50 but the DA300 is not bad along with the DA16-45 and DA50-135.

I put a Diet Coke can on the fence about 30 feet away. Using a tripod I took the same image with the Q and the K20D.

The Q image turn out better than I though and, to me, seems sharper than the K20D's image at the same size.

This Q/DA300 combination has some potential for tele pictures that need time for setup. Not much good for any action shots.

The DA zooms where good also - especially the 50-135 which seemed pretty sharp also. Time will tell with actual picture of something other than a pop can.


Pentax Q vs K20D with DA300 and the K20D image at 1:1

WOW! I am definitely impressed.That is something for those "the Q is a mere toy gadget" whiners!

[Caat]

Stick a Sigma 180mm on the Q and you'll have awesome magnification for macro!

[AldAsAck]

Hello everyone,
I just got me a Pentax Q and a chinese made K-Adapter. I have made my first tests using various lenses.
The DA* 300 works best for me.

Here are some links.

The first 2 are made with K5 and DA*300
IMGP5282_mod | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
IMGP5483_mod | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

The other two are made 5 minutes laster using the same setup but now the Q instead of the K5.
IMGP0412_mod | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
IMGP0457_mod | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

A little hard to focus in bright light. but the result surprised me when looking at the results on a 24 inch screen.

Here is nother test I made with the tip of a church tower. Both images are 1:1
pqda3001 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

From now on, I will always have the Q and the K-Adapter in my long range pack.

[jogiba]

Stick a Sigma 180mm on the Q and you'll have awesome magnification for macro!

Q with 105mm Kiron :



Panasonic DMC-ZS20 superzoom (24-480mm eqiv lens) macro @24mm eqiv handheld :

[emalvick]

I think the important thing on the original comparison isn't that the Q is better than the K20d, but that the Q is good independently. Photos elsewhere, in this forum, over the years, have shown that the DA*300 is a good lens on all K bodies including the K20d. The posts here show that it is also good on the Q.

A real interesting comparison would be to use both cameras but adjust the location of the camera to try and match the field of view. That may be easier said than done. I've never really looked at the Q or realized what a difference in sensor size there is.

[ve2vfd]

I had been thinking of getting a q-PK adapter and this pretty well convinced me... I am so curious to see how it will perform with my DA*60-250 and even more curious of my 600mm Sigma mirror lens.

Pat

[barondla]

ve2vfd,can't believe you have waited this long to add the PK adapter. Especially since you own the kick butt 60-250. On the other forum brandrx has posted shots with this combo and they are great.

Remember the Sigma 600 fondly. Had the army green one. It was a decent lens. Afraid the Q with 60-250 will give the K-5 and 600 a good beating. The 600 on the Q will be intetesting to see. Not sure how often I would use that much lens. Mirror should lack edge color fringing

Make sure you get the adapter with aperture control or the zoom will be useless.
thanks
barondla

[littledrawe]

Has Pentax released their p/k-q adapter?