[LaurenOE]

Yes - that is the aperture setting lever that is linked to the dial on the adapter. In one direction you can watch it move as you move the dial.

Cool.

[Docrwm]

Quick question.
My adapter makes a little clicking noise when I handle it, and on closer inspection there is a little lever on the inside that freely moves. The lever must grab something as it doesn't make the noise with a lens attached.



Anyone else? Normal?

Thanks for the closeup. It's the aperture linkage.

Oops - Crewl1 beat me to it.

[hnikesch]

This could be an issue on very sunny days possibly since the aperture needs to be kept fairly open to avoid diffraction.

Larry, The Q has an ND filter when using the 01 lens but not on a 3rd party adapter. Is the ND filter included on the Pentax K-Q adapter, it would have to be part of the adapter.

Hans

[crewl1]

Larry, The Q has an ND filter when using the 01 lens but not on a 3rd party adapter. Is the ND filter included on the Pentax K-Q adapter, it would have to be part of the adapter. Hans

The adapter does not have an ND filter - the menu option is disabled with the adapter.

One of the members indicated that you CAN activate the electronic shutter when using the Pentax adapter, and I have now done that which gives me the higher shutter speeds I occasionally may need.

Edit - the info was provided by member drougge - thanks!

[blackcloudbrew]

Ok, I got my adapter yesterday and have begun to figure it out. A lot has already been said here.

1. I want the telephoto foot adapter too. Good to know there is one, bad not to know where to find it.
2. I can't find the documentation online for this adapter anywhere. I have the paper copy but, just didn't bring it home so I looked for it on the Pentax site. Nothing there. Odd.
3. Does anyone have an idea why (per the manual) one can't use a 6x7 or 645 lens via an adapter to K mount? I just tried my Pentax A 645 135mm lens on a cheap 645 to K mount converter on the K to Q adapter and while it was a bit hard to find the focus (as it is the equivalent of a 742mm lens, perhaps?), it worked...I'm guessing its about the weight of the 6x7 or 645 lenses on the Q mount. If it's something else I'd sure like to know.

Other than that, ok, the point of this smart, well built, and expensive adapter is that for lenses that no longer have manual f-stop controls, this little guy provides a way to use them. So instead of allowing you to use old lenses on your new camera, this one allows you to use new lenses on your new camera. I believe that was worth the price of admission. Very clever.

[crewl1]

Other than that, ok, the point of this smart, well built, and expensive adapter is that for lenses that no longer have manual f-stop controls, this little guy provides a way to use them. So instead of allowing you to use old lenses on your new camera, this one allows you to use new lenses on your new camera. I believe that was worth the price of admission. Very clever.

For that point there are cheaper adapters that can control aperture on DA lenses.
I think the big gain with the Pentax adapter is the leaf shutter that is not found on any other adapter.
It opens up more possibilities for flash and hand held use.

I'm keeping an eye out for a foot as well, would be nice to not have to cannibalize the DA*300. There are a few members that are looking into getting some made so I'm hopeful we will have a source.

[crewl1]

2. I can't find the documentation online for this adapter anywhere. I have the paper copy but, just didn't bring it home so I looked for it on the Pentax site. Nothing there. Odd.

I scanned mine to have a PDF version available. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-q/205119-original-pentax-q-pk-adap...ml#post2193992

[blackcloudbrew]

For that point there are cheaper adapters that can control aperture on DA lenses.
I think the big gain with the Pentax adapter is the leaf shutter that is not found on any other adapter.
It opens up more possibilities for flash and hand held use.

Hmmm...was not aware that there were such adapters out there. Any examples, or do I just have to do some web searches?

Hadn't really thought much about the LS feature and flash. It's not an area that I've had much interest in, but it's always nice to know that you can do something because then you are likely to try it or use it. Anyway, this is an excellent thread already with lots of answers.

I have one comment though I wish Pentax might consider for it's DSLRs, I'm liking the Q's focal length screen over the K menu version. You can either enter the specific length or dial in quick reference numbers. It took a little getting used to but I think it's really easier to use and also to adapt to odd or unusual focal lengths. However, my guess is that there is little differences in SR in say between 31mm and 35mm input length.

[crewl1]

Hmmm...was not aware that there were such adapters out there. Any examples, or do I just have to do some web searches?

Amazon.com: Fotodiox 11LA-PK-PK-Q-new Lens Mount Adapter with Aperture Dial, Pentax K/PK Lens to Pentax Q-Series Camera Fits Pentax Q Mirrorless Cameras: Camera & Photo

[blackcloudbrew]

Amazon.com: Fotodiox 11LA-PK-PK-Q-new Lens Mount Adapter with Aperture Dial, Pentax K/PK Lens to Pentax Q-Series Camera Fits Pentax Q Mirrorless Cameras: Camera & Photo

Oh...how about that! Thanks for the info!

[LaurenOE]

Amazon.com: Fotodiox 11LA-PK-PK-Q-new Lens Mount Adapter with Aperture Dial, Pentax K/PK Lens to Pentax Q-Series Camera Fits Pentax Q Mirrorless Cameras: Camera & Photo

Just an F.Y.I. - the K - Q adapter inputs EXIF data that the adapter was used as it has some inteligence built into it along with the other cool bits talked about here.

While pricey the Pentax adapter is worth the money.

[Docrwm]

I scanned mine to have a PDF version available. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-q/205119-original-pentax-q-pk-adap...ml#post2193992

Very nice of you, not much to it is there?

[SonDa5]

Just an F.Y.I. - the K - Q adapter inputs EXIF data that the adapter was used as it has some inteligence built into it along with the other cool bits talked about here.

While pricey the Pentax adapter is worth the money.

But if both photo results are similar I don't think the extra technical details are worth the extreme high costs. I want to get a Pentax K-Q adapter but I think its over priced.

[unixrevolution]

Awesome! Just in time for Thankschristmas! Great review, thanks.

Thankschristmas is all about the deals nowadays. They commercialized it just like they did Christmahannukwanzaakuh and Schleptoberfest.

[snostorm]

But if both photo results are similar I don't think the extra technical details are worth the extreme high costs. I want to get a Pentax K-Q adapter but I think its over priced.

Hi SonDA5,

It really depends on what you want to do with your Q and adapted lenses.

Here's where I stand -- I want to use the Q mostly for super telephoto and handheld macro shooting with flash (and secondarily as a high quality pocket compact). The very significant advantage of the Pentax adapter with the integral shutter is for the macro stuff.

With a 3rd party adapter, the Q defaults to 1/13 sec shutter speed with flash. This is because it can only use the electronic shutter in the sensor since only Q Quality Line lenses have mechanical shutters (leaf shutters in each lens). When shooting outdoors during daylight, the ambient light overpowers the flash at 1/13 sec, so using flash to freeze either camera shake, subject motion, or both in macro shooting is ineffective. The Q, with adapted dedicated macro lenses has a lot of potential, because the crop factor adds almost 4x perceived magnifcation, and the camera and lens combination is comparatively small and light -- macro shooting is often done in very awkward positions so the light weight is very convenient.

The Pentax adapter helps this situation, which I had tried to work around for the better part of a year. The shutter in the adapter allows me to use external P-TTL flashes with adapted lenses at up to 1/250 sec, which effectively can eliminate ambient light for outdoor daylight handheld macro shooting, and it seems that i can use external manual or auto thyristor flashes at 1/160 sec, which will also accomplish the same effect.

For super telephoto shooting, flash is not often a requirement, so the advantages of a mechanical shutter are a bit more esoteric. Electronic shutters are prone to "rolling shutter effect". This is visible as essentially a bending distortion of a subject that moves laterally in relation to the camera while the shutter is "open". It isn't really evident in most situations because shutter speed is usually pretty high during daylight, but I've seen it as a very subtle rippling in what should be a dead straight line on some shots taken with 3rd party adapters, even at relatively high shutter speeds. Granted, I had to really look for it at very high image magnifications, and it really didn't effect the viewing of the image at normal sizes -- but digital photographers, especially on forums like this can be a particularly picky lot when we choose to be. . . If this were the only advantage, I'd stick with the 3rd party ones and be satisfied.

Bottom line, to realize the Q's potential for getting very high perceived magnifications in handheld macros with flash, the high price of the Pentax adapter is worth it to me. I've got over 6x the price of this adapter already sunk into dedicated macro lenses, and though I'm not pleased to have to spend a lot more money to use them as I had originally envisioned, I'm happy that Pentax came up with a solution. Putting a precision shutter mechanism into an adapter is not an easy proposition, and the cost is justified IMO. Also, the aperture adjustment mechanism is easily the most precise and easiest to use of all the adapters that can adjust apertures so far, and the anti internal reflection treatment is also the best I've seen, so it appears they didn't spare much expense in building this adapter. I'm happy they didn't price it higher. . .

Bottom line, extrapolate your possible uses for this camera and adapter. It's better to buy the one that will meet all of your projected needs than to get the less expensive one, then find that it falls short, and have to buy the more expensive one in addition. YMMV of course.

Scott