Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-25-2013, 10:52 AM   #166
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,440
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
I think in better light you can stop down further and get rid of it some more.
I added an older shot that I did with the Fotodiox and did not track the settings but it was a brighter environment so I assume I was able to stop down more.
I presume a f5.6 since the diffraction is not showing too bad.
This could be the sweet spot for the lens, I just need better light to confirm.
I would also guess F5.6 and I would try it to, but as you know my adapter makes it a guessing game with a lens without an aperture ring. I have a couple of lenses at higher priority too.
QuoteOriginally posted by Shanti Quote
Hi here it is quick n dirty flash pic
Looks pretty well balanced as I thought! Not too shabby of a size for a longer tele.

01-25-2013, 11:00 AM   #167
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by VisualDarkness Quote
I would also guess F5.6 and I would try it to, but as you know my adapter makes it a guessing game with a lens without an aperture ring. I have a couple of lenses at higher priority too.
Is it possible to get the Fotodiox w aperture in your part of the world? You could sell off your Kiwi, it would make your experience adapting newer lenses to the Q much more enjoyable I think.
01-25-2013, 11:03 AM   #168
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,440
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
Is it possible to get the Fotodiox w aperture in your part of the world? You could sell off your Kiwi, it would make your experience adapting newer lenses to the Q much more enjoyable I think.
I'm sure I can get it, but I think I will wait a while and hope I get money for the original adapter (I'm unemployed).
01-25-2013, 11:05 AM   #169
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
Original Poster
Yes, first things first. Best of luck.

01-25-2013, 11:43 AM   #170
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Riverside CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 269
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
It's raining here so sorry for the crappy subjects.
It's gotta rain here sometime. Looks like the whole weekend will suck. I might try some lenses on test targets to pass the time.
01-26-2013, 09:36 AM   #171
Site Supporter
Shanti's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 903
QuoteOriginally posted by VisualDarkness Quote
I'm sure I can get it, but I think I will wait a while and hope I get money for the original adapter (I'm unemployed).
Hi VD where have you found the fotodiox w/aperture in Europe? can only find on Amazon.com need to get one as well...
01-26-2013, 10:08 AM   #172
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,440
QuoteOriginally posted by Shanti Quote
Hi VD where have you found the fotodiox w/aperture in Europe? can only find on Amazon.com need to get one as well...
I think it's Amazon.com for us too but it should work just fine and don't get any more expensive than if it was available here.
01-26-2013, 12:53 PM   #173
New Member




Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1
Canon FD 50mm f=1.8

I just bought a Pentax Q 2 weeks ago and same day I ordered a a Pentax Q - Canon FD adapter. I was expecting some zooming, but the lens + the adapter finally became on a big zoom, bigger than what I wanted. I'm looking now for a C mount , or D-mount that gives me a lomo like result, any recommendations ?

Actually the adapter I bought goes beyond infinity, so sometimes on fast shooting becomes tricky.

Anyway here you can see how the lens fits on the camera :



No effects in this photos
On day light:




On low light conditions:



01-26-2013, 05:10 PM   #174
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,440
Schneider Kreuznach Cinegon 1:1.9/11,5 C-mount

Heres my short review of the Schneider Kreuznach Cinegon 1:1.9/11,5 in C-mount (pew, what a name).

The lens feels solid but is a bit weird to handle due to the having the rings near the mount and is quite front heavy. I suspect that the front part from the black cone actually is an extra tele extender put on a shorter lens, the chrome part closest to the mount.

The lens mounted with a KIWI Q-C with a cardboard shim I cut to get infinity at infinity and not at half way.

F1.9



F2.8



F4



F5.6



F8



F11



This lens suffers heavily from flare! I think it lacks any coating or got a really brutal one and you should use a hood with lens.

I rate it as a good lens for somebody that wants something a bit longer than the 01 and for filming.
(Full sized test pics on flickr)

Edit:
Adding a couple of real life examples of the lens:


















Last edited by VisualDarkness; 03-21-2013 at 09:49 PM.
01-27-2013, 11:44 AM   #175
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Durham, nc
Photos: Albums
Posts: 891
Tamron 28-75 f2.8 Continuous

Purple Fringing is well controlled, even wide open. At f2.8 there's a hint of a red fringe in OOF areas, but it's not distracting like purple fringe is. The lens is sadly pretty soft at f2.8. You can fix it to a point in post, but it's soft enough that significant detail is lost. At f2.8, the lens is significantly better at the tele end than it is at the wide. There's a little more of the red fringe at 28mm, it's softer, and strangely bright objects have a glow about them. This is gone by F4.

At F4 the lens performs very well, it's an amazing difference between 2.8 and 4, things are now reasonably sharp, and significant detail that was a smudgy blur at f2.8 can now be seen. There's no red fringing at either end. In fact, both wide and tele look excellent.

At f5.6 this lens is pretty damn amazing. Very sharp with lots of detail. Detail that was hinted at at f2.8 and shown at f4 is now extremely clear. But it's completely usable at f4. In fact, there's a stop between f4 and f5.6, but I didn't test there.

The only real downside is the lens has a very short focus throw, which makes it difficult to nail the focus perfectly, especially when hand holding.

Overall, a great lens.

When I compare the telephoto of the Tamron to my 100mm f3.5 macro, the Tamron is significantly sharper at f4 than the 100mm macro is at f3.5. The 100mm has significant purple fringing at f3.5 where the Tamron has none. However, one full stop up to f5.6 and the 100mm macro wins by a hair.


28mm f2.8:


28mm f4:


28mm f5.6


75mm f2.8


75mm f4


75mm f5.6


Charles.
01-27-2013, 06:42 PM   #176
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Riverside CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 269
Pentax FA 28 to 80

I went through and tested all my K mount and most of my screw mount lenses today. I'll be posting them as I can.

First up - The Pentax FA 28 to 80 zoom.

All shots taken using Fotodiox adapter, tripod mounted, 2 second timer, no SR. All shot @ 5.6 as this seems to be the agreed upon sweet spot for most lenses on the Q and has shown to be true in my testing.

I used a test chart I got on eBay. I have no idea how it's supposed to be used. The listing said it came with instructions. It didn't. When I asked the company for instructions they referred me to an article on the internet about testing lenses that had nothing to do with the chart. Anyway, even without the technicals, all the tests I did today were done using the same chart so you can compare relative sharpness.

I've given an 800x800 crop of the center of the chart, and an 800x600 1:1 of whatever showed at the given focal length based at the center of the chart. No sharpening was applied in either case.


80mm - Center Crop


80mm - 1:1


65mm - Center Crop


65mm - 1:1


50mm - Center Crop


50mm - 1:1


35mm - Center Crop


35mm - 1:1


28mm - Center Crop


28mm - 1:1
01-28-2013, 09:24 AM   #177
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
Original Poster
Thanks for the reviews Trashfunkel, Visual Darkness, ChopperCharles and Post-Eos. Adding them to the index.
01-28-2013, 10:28 AM   #178
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Durham, nc
Photos: Albums
Posts: 891
I'm doing this for each of my lenses, whenever there's a nice clear day to shoot that telephone pole target. Well, and whenever I have some free time. Expect several more to be posted in the next few weeks, as well as comparisons.

Charles.
01-28-2013, 10:56 AM   #179
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Riverside CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 269
QuoteOriginally posted by ChopperCharles Quote
I'm doing this for each of my lenses, whenever there's a nice clear day to shoot that telephone pole target. Well, and whenever I have some free time. Expect several more to be posted in the next few weeks, as well as comparisons.

Charles.
I'm glad you're doing this with the same target. It makes it much easier to compare. I'm using the test target so mine are all the same. Yours are real world and think that's a little better than mine. I just have nothing suitable outside my door.

You and I only have 1 lens in common, the F35 to 70. It'll be interesting to see how they match up with the two different targets.
01-28-2013, 11:18 AM   #180
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Durham, nc
Photos: Albums
Posts: 891
I'm looking forward to comparing the F35-70 to my Tokina 35-70. I'd be interested to see some teleconverter comparisons too. I have a really crappy 2x tele that I can't get to make a sharp image to save my life, and I'm interested in finding one that's reasonably priced and reasonably sharp, especially on the Q.

Charles.
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!
200mm, 50mm, adapter, auto, camera, f1.8, f2.8, flickr, focus, hawk, infinity, lens, macro, mirrorless, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q-s1, q10, q7, shot, shots, smc
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Has anyone tried Canon lenses on the Q/Q10? NeilGratton Pentax Q 14 05-31-2013 09:03 AM
Ideas on diffusing the onboard flash of the Q? Tonto Pentax Q 28 05-19-2013 11:46 AM
Pentax Q lenses tested by Photozone Mistral75 Pentax Q 9 11-16-2011 12:11 PM
Dumb Question: Adapted Leica lenses on film bodies? Why not??? DanielT74 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 10-26-2011 12:05 AM
Could Pentax sell you on the Q if they had better lenses? devorama Pentax Compact Cameras 17 06-29-2011 09:34 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:59 PM. | 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