Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-30-2012, 07:38 PM   #76
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Every time you remove and remount it wiggles into a slightly different location.
I received the Xtenda-A-Sight today and now see what you mean. If I come up with anything to make it fit better I will report back.

09-30-2012, 10:11 PM   #77
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
I received the Xtenda-A-Sight today and now see what you mean. If I come up with anything to make it fit better I will report back.
Hi crew1 and barondla,

If there's enough room between the side of the foot and the shoe, try jamming a toothpick in one side and breaking it off so it doesn't stick out. If you do this on the same side each time, you should get a fairly consistent zero. BTW, my original design Xtend-A-Sight is a snug fit in every hot shoe that I've ever mounted it on, and doesn't have this problem. Looks like they improved it and made it worse. . .


Scott
10-01-2012, 07:24 PM   #78
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,327
Original Poster
Good idea snostorm. If I remember the description of the original adapter they said it required an allen wrench or something to fit it to the hotshoe. This new one is supposed to have a foot too big and you grind/ sand to fit. They claim hotshoes are all different sizes. Well their new "too big" foot is in fact too little for the Q. Their foot is also a thinner metal than a flash foot so a "sole" could be added to to make it ticker. This bottom sole could be a little wider to reduce the slop. Wish Pentax would build one of their own.
thanks
barondla
10-12-2012, 09:04 AM   #79
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
Just ordered an RD10 from eBay seller tcacc for 5% off at 64.00 US.
BHPhoto shows them for less but they are special order.
If the eBay deal sounds like a good price to anyone, here is a link as there are a couple left.
Pentax Gameseeker? RD10 Dot Sight PX89701 NEW | eBay

10-14-2012, 06:57 AM   #80
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 7
The Q and Print Size

Hi all,

I have been reading everyones post and must say I am impressed with the setups of the Q for long range shooting. I have the K5 + DA* 300, but often find it not having the reach I need for my wildlife shooting. The new HD 560 lens was in my buying box until Pentax released the price...$7000 is a tall order. So I am now very much looking into a Q setup. However, I have a question to all... what is the largest print size of high quality (displaying on the wall) can one go with the Q? I would need to be able to print at least up to a 13 x 19 and match quality of print to my K5. Can this be done or is this outside the Q and its small sensor?
10-14-2012, 02:01 PM   #81
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,327
Original Poster
Crewl1, think you will love the Pentax red dot. It sure makes aiming faster. Carry an extra battery. Even with the on/off switch facing me, I have left it on at the end of the day.

thanks
barondla
10-14-2012, 03:31 PM - 1 Like   #82
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,327
Original Poster
Bwickett, welcome to the Q forum. Glad you have found it fun and informative. Hope we can help you see the advantages of the Q.

You ask an interesting question. Don't panic, but I am afraid the short answer is no. The Q can not totally compete with the best aps-c sensor and camera combo( K-5). But imho neither can 4/3 and most other cameras.

The Q will have a little less dynamic range. Except for FF what matches the K-5 at this? This can be worked around by careful composition, proper exposure, and shooting raw. For landscapes the in camera hdr works well (actually better than the K-5).

With adapted lenses the resolution will be a little less than the K-5. Small details like fur & feathers aren't as distinct. Especially if you zoom to 100% to check out every little pixel. This does depend on the quality of your lens. The Q pushes a lens really hard. Kind of like using a teleconverter. If the lens purple fringes the Q will tattle on it. Special sharpening methods can help here.

Q color isn't quite as punchy as a big dslr. It is less intense & saturated. For many subjects I prefer the more subtle Q color.

It doesn't look good for the Q. Our hero is tied to the train tracks with no hope of escape. End of story.

But wait. We have covered all the technical points. The Q can't match K-5 perfection. It falls a LITTLE short. About like a dslr from 5-6 years ago.

In the REAL WORLD the Q does fine. Throw out test charts, pixel peeping, etc. Look at how many Q owners on this forum have K-5 or other dslrs. Most are more than happy with the quality of the Q.

1. At work I have 13x19 Q and dslr prints hanging on the wall. Don't remember any one looking at them, from a normal distance, and saying the Q prints look inferior. The man that printed my shots bought a Q to keep with his FF camera kit.

2. Recently won 1st place, professional category, in a state nature photography contest. The Q had to compete with FF cameras and big lenses (even a 600 f4). The State conservation dept. ran the contest. The exhibit will travel the state and then move to conservation depts in other states.

3. Many of my friends now have Q's. One was using K-7/bigma. Now it is mostly the Q and Pentax DA*300 f4. Another has all but given up on a D7000/Tamron 200-500 setup. Just uses Q with 80-200 2.8.


Bwickett, if you are into nature photography you should own the Q! It will get shots that even your K-5 and the 560 would have a tough time pulling off. The DA*300 is eq. to 1640mm. The 560 in the K-5 is eq. to 840mm. If you crop the K-5 to match the Q combo how much quality will you loose? Won't be enough pixels left for 13x19 enlargements without interpolation.

Even with the 560 there will be shots you won't get. It takes time to setup such large lenses, tripods, etc. As one friend told me there is a certain procedure to working with big lenses.

The Q is so inexpensive I can't imagine any one into nature photography skipping it. You already have one of the best lenses for the Q- the DA*300. At the Q's current price you would find it tough to buy a decent teleconverter. And it won't be anywhere near 4x! It will get you shots you can't get any other way! What good is better quality if you can't even get the shot?

I have approx 10 interchangeable lens digital cameras. The Q would be second to last to go!

thanks
barondla
10-14-2012, 06:24 PM   #83
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
+1 for Barondla's sentiments above.
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
It doesn't look good for the Q. Our hero is tied to the train tracks with no hope of escape. End of story.
Made me

10-14-2012, 11:22 PM   #84
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
I was looking into gathering a lot of info for a long post to recommend the Q as a long shooting accessory to a DSLR kit, and then barondla pretty much said it all. . .and with some humor and flair. . . I don't think you'll get a much more honest assessment of what to expect if you get a Q to shoot long with adapted lenses. Let me add a few thoughts.

Compare what you'd need to shoot considerably longer with DSLR gear. At least a 300 f2.8 + TCs, or a 500 f4.5 at 6-7 lbs. + 2 lbs for the body. You can't shoot these all day without good support gear, so a name-brand tripod and head that's rated at least 18-20 lbs (you usually want something that's rated at twice what you expect to use.) Even CF tripods in that class weigh 6-7 lbs and add another 2 lbs for a head that will allow you to handle the big lens with enough ease that you can actually use it. With the Q, you add maybe 30 oz to the kit that you're already carrying. If you don't have a tripod, you'll still want to get one -- shooting this long with quality is not really a hand holding proposition -- but you can get away with a considerably lighter system. My Q + 300mm f4 tripod consists of a quality CF travel tripod, a very lightweight, but very solid ball head, and a Wimberley Sidekick gimbal -- under 4.5 lbs total. Each of the components are rated at over 15 lbs, and I've found they support my K-5 + 300mm f4 class lenses easily, and when not stressed by extending the legs fully, they also do an excellent job with my heavier glass (FA* 300 f2.8 + TCs + Q or K-5). I do a lot of my shooting sitting, so this is actually practical for me.

Shooting the Q with adapted super teles is challenging -- I need an LCD loupe to make MF with the LCD easier, a Red Dot sight and mount to make subject acquisition a lot easier, and a tripod/gimbal to free up my hands to make the whole process easier and more reliable. I also need to use good long lens technique because getting quality results from shooting very long is not really consistent with a casual approach. Consider that you'd essentially need all the above except maybe the LCD loupe to shoot really long with a DSLR. . .

If you have a realistic approach, I don't think you'll be disappointed with what you can do with the Q and long adapted lenses, and it will cost you a relatively small fraction compared to what you'd need to get it done with any larger format body -- and add little to what you need to carry around. . . and you get an outstanding ultra compact camera with the 01 prime as a bonus. . .

Scott
01-07-2013, 07:40 PM   #85
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
I hadn't thought about this before, but in checking into the member's request for a Pentax Red Dot scope not being shippable to Australia, I ran into quite a few articles about gun related equipment being illegal to take or send outside the US without the proper permits.

It appears that any gun related objects including scopes and sights are now classified as objects of war and you can be interrogated or arrested and have it confiscated for having it with you when trying to exit the US.

Granted a lot of the information is from gun forums, but to be safe I won't be taking my RD10 with me when I fly out of the country.

If anyone can confirm or refute this please chime in.
01-07-2013, 08:02 PM   #86
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,258
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Got the Pentax red dot in to replace the Tasco. Like the Pentax better. It is sealed, has "stretchy string" connected lens caps that have clear openings. The finder can be usd with the caps on. This saves a lot of time on a grab shot. Also like the intensity settings can be seen from behind the camera vs the side. The Pentax also has full length rails that fit my hotshoe adapter much better than the Tasco. Only down side is the Pentax is a little bigger (1/2-3/4 inch longer). Not a big deal. Hope the weather and eagles cooperate tomorrow!
thanks
barondla
I have some totally "newbie" questions here (and it may look like stupid questions too):

Why would you have this "red dot finder" as shown here?
I have never (yet) tried mounting my DA*300/4 on my Q camera (did not get the adapter yet), so I only assume this is to get a better "approximation" of the subject since it would be a quite a distance ?
Also, you mention that "it can also be used on the K5 in af for birds in flight" (quote), now how would that be?

Again, sorry for the misunderstanding and for my limited knowledge.

Cheers.

JP
01-07-2013, 08:17 PM   #87
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
When you see an object at a distance you want to take a picture of, the field of view with a long lens on the Q is very small and it can be time consuming to acquire the object.

The finder helps because you can adjust the internal pointer to show the area the lens is capturing, so you are in fact pre-aiming the shot by looking through the finder.

This principle can be used for birds in flight, without the Q because if you use auto focus you can easily track the flying bird with the finder while pressing the shutter and the camera is capturing the bird through the telephoto lens.
01-07-2013, 08:29 PM   #88
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,258
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
When you see an object at a distance you want to take a picture of, the field of view with a long lens on the Q is very small and it can be time consuming to acquire the object.

The finder helps because you can adjust the internal pointer to show the area the lens is capturing, so you are in fact pre-aiming the shot by looking through the finder.

This principle can be used for birds in flight, without the Q because if you use auto focus you can easily track the flying bird with the finder while pressing the shutter and the camera is capturing the bird through the telephoto lens.
OK' now I get it !

And since we are on the subject, I was browsing for one of those finders and there seems to be an export restriction on those (from the USA anyway) ?? I realize that those finders are for other-than-photography reasons ... are they that difficult to acquire?

Thanks for the info !!

JP
01-07-2013, 09:50 PM   #89
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
Just ordered an RD10 from eBay seller tcacc for 5% off at 64.00 US.
BHPhoto shows them for less but they are special order.
If the eBay deal sounds like a good price to anyone, here is a link as there are a couple left.
Pentax Gameseeker? RD10 Dot Sight PX89701 NEW | eBay
Crew. Any particular reason to buy that model and not the HS20 Red Dot Sight Scope 89702 ?
01-07-2013, 09:52 PM   #90
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by jpzk Quote
And since we are on the subject, I was browsing for one of those finders and there seems to be an export restriction on those (from the USA anyway) ??
Only to Canada .... they reckon you'll be able to shoot birds from across the border
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, caps, dot, finder, mirrorless, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q10, q7, tasco
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does my 55-300 have a focussing issue ? [img] photoleet Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 11-17-2011 12:23 AM
K5 and the focusing indicator the red dot nirVaan Pentax K-5 1 08-12-2011 08:30 PM
Red alignment dot came off SlickYamaha Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 15 08-02-2011 07:04 PM
Pentax K-R - Red Dot in Video marlonf Pentax K-r 15 11-12-2010 10:53 AM
Red and Blue dot in my picture? jeremy_c Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 11-17-2008 09:19 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:30 AM. | 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