Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-26-2012, 12:59 AM   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
Thanks Stan, Sonda5 and Scott for the reviews.
HI Larry,

More to come from me, but it'll be a little while . . .

Scott

12-26-2012, 01:02 AM   #17
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by MarinatedHerring Quote
I would like to contribute but I know next to nothing about photography. I could literally only post the lens info and some basic shooting information. I wouldn't know where to start when it comes to reviewing the lens. If that is okay then I will take all my lens tomorrow to the park and get samples with all of them. Hopefully we have a sunny day tomorrow (I doubt it)
I'm pretty sure we all say sure, why not?
12-26-2012, 06:19 AM   #18
Veteran Member
stormtech's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In the boonies (NW Penna)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,670
QuoteOriginally posted by MarinatedHerring Quote
I would like to contribute but I know next to nothing about photography. I could literally only post the lens info and some basic shooting information. I wouldn't know where to start when it comes to reviewing the lens. If that is okay then I will take all my lens tomorrow to the park and get samples with all of them. Hopefully we have a sunny day tomorrow (I doubt it)
Don't worry about a lens review - if you can just post an example shot and the shooting info that would be great!
12-26-2012, 06:43 AM   #19
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
baro-nite's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: North Carolina, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,372
QuoteOriginally posted by snostorm Quote
the 70mm has some promise as a close up lens
Thanks for the report on this lens. I saw one in a camera shop a couple of weeks ago and was struck by the build quality; beautiful little lens.

12-26-2012, 06:55 AM - 2 Likes   #20
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
baro-nite's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: North Carolina, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,372
DA* 200/2.8 on Pentax Rear Converter-A 1.4x-L


Wide open. Cropped to about 80% of original size and resized for web. Sharpening taken just a bit beyond standard capture sharpening, with some color smoothing noise reduction applied.


Wide open, lens balanced on my knees. Uncropped and resized for web. Sharpening taken just a bit beyond standard capture sharpening, with some color smoothing noise reduction applied. Note purple fringe on the sign lettering; no correction has been applied here.


Stopped down half a stop. 37.5% crop.
12-26-2012, 06:56 AM   #21
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
baro-nite's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: North Carolina, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,372
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
So even if the info is available in another thread, let's collect them here and if it looks like a good reference maybe it will become a sticky.
Would be great if you could add a linked index to the #1 post.
12-26-2012, 07:17 AM - 3 Likes   #22
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
baro-nite's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: North Carolina, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,372
DA* 60-250 f/4

All shots at full zoom. (I have made some notes on the effective reach of this lens.) Shots are uncropped and lens was (probably) wide open, unless otherwise indicated.


Moderate crop, handheld. I thought this would make a good test for purple fringing and longitudinal CA.


Extracted from 1080p video, shot at 1/30s.


As above.


26% crop (i.e., cropped to 90% [linear] of full size and resized for web).


Original shot in landscape orientation; slight crop on the vertical axis.


36% crop
12-26-2012, 10:25 AM   #23
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
Original Poster
Thanks for the contributions baro-nite.
QuoteOriginally posted by baro-nite Quote
Would be great if you could add a linked index to the #1 post.
I'd be happy to do this but I'm not sure what you mean exactly or how to accomplish, so could you walk a poor brother through it?

12-26-2012, 12:03 PM   #24
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
baro-nite's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: North Carolina, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,372
Here's a start; don't have time for more just this moment.

Primes:

Pentax DFA 100 WR Macro

Pentax DA*300

Pentax FA* 300 f4.5

Zooms:

Sigma 70-200 2.8 HSM II
12-26-2012, 12:39 PM   #25
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
Original Poster
Oh ok I get it
12-26-2012, 01:44 PM   #26
Veteran Member
stormtech's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In the boonies (NW Penna)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,670
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
Oh ok I get it
If you click on the actual post number in the upper left (this is post #26) and copy that link, when you click on the pasted link it brings you right to that certain post.
12-26-2012, 01:58 PM   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
02 Zoom + Oly TCon 17

Not really an adapted lens in the strict sense, but early on, I added the Olympus TCon 17 (a 1.7x front converter -- screws on the front of the lens). This makes the 83mm (35) EQ long end of the 02 Zoom 141mm (35EQ) and retains the max aperture of the lens since the front element of the TCon is considerably larger (about 70mm) so gathers more light to offset the longer FL.

This can be a questionable accessory for AF lenses that rotate and extend the front element when focusing as the extra weight of the TC can overstress the focusing motor, but on the Q, all of the AF lenses so far focus internally, so the only stress is on the mount, and after mounting some pretty big adapted K mounts, the added weight of the TCon is minimal in comparison. The mount can take it.

I'm guessing that this will be much better on the 06 Zoom as the tele zoom is sharper. The TCon 17 would make the 249mm (35 EQ) long end 423mm (35) EQ at f2.8, but I've yet to try this. You do need a 40.5 to 55mm step up ring (or some combination of rings) to use this, and AF does work.



This is at f6.3 (I don't know why -- I was just experimenting with the new Q) at 1/2000, -1.7 Ev comp, ISO 125. This is a 16x9 crop of a 3:2 original frame, and is sharpened and downsized for posting.

Scott
12-26-2012, 02:23 PM   #28
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
Hi guys I have been busy during the holidays and will be doing more travel over New Years weekend. I will add some lenses after that, for now I will just repost my past tests. That testing was indoors using a B&W resolution chart and PF'g may have influenced my results. I will be in Florida in January and hope to shoot in sunlight and update my testing of several lenses.

Here is what I found to be the sharpest aperture for my lenses when mounted to my Q

SMC-A 28 f2.8 is sharpest at f5.6
DA 35mm f2.4 is sharpest at f4
SMC-A 50mm f1.7 is sharpest at f4
SMC-M 135 f3.5 is sharpest at f5.6
Pentax Super Takumar 42mm thd. mount 200mm f4 is sharpest at f5.6
Tamron 70-300 f4-5.8 shot at 300 is sharpest at f5.6
DAL 55-300 is sharpest at f5.6

I will add a post for each lens with images later

Hans
12-26-2012, 04:47 PM - 1 Like   #29
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
D FA 100 f2.8 Macro

This is a very good lens for adapting to the Q. It's light, sharp wide open and a good size for handholding, especially now that we have SR available. On the Q, it's a 558mm 35EQ f2.8, and equivalent to 365mm f2.8 on a Pentax DSLR.
This post only uses this lens as a close focusing tele, and not at anywhere near the 1:1 macro magnification that it's capable of. All of the shots in this post were handheld, and before the v1.1 FW update, so no SR was available, and I was still struggling with MF to some degree before Focus Peaking. I am reasonably sure, except for the Hawk shot, that I pretty much nailed the focus on these though.

Q + D FA 100 f2.8 Macro, 1/100, f2.8, ISO 800. This is the same captive Screech Owl as in the FA 50/1.4 shot. The higher ISO and faster aperture were needed because this room is mainly lit by skylight, and it was an overcast day. The front of the lens is resting on the 1" square mesh to throw the mesh completely out of focus, and to stabilize the camera. Cropped to 8x10 from the sides only, sharpened and resized for the web.



Q + D FA 100 f2.8 Macro, 1/100, f2.8 , ISO 640, -1.3 Ev comp. This is a Map Turtle from the same exhibit as with the A110 70mm f2.8 from a previous post, but on a different day, and at a different angle. IMO, this is a better shot as I think that the D FA renders a bit better than the A110 70 + diopter, and the transition from focused areas to OOF areas is much smoother. In use, the dedicated macro is much easier to use because I have an infinite possibility of working distances and subject magnification vs an essentially fixed working distance and mag with the achromatic diopter -- there is a very limited range between MFD and ∞ focus. I used -1.3 Ev comp to get a higher shutter speed and brought up the exposure, sharpened, cropped to 8x10 from just the sides, and resized for posting in PP.



Q + D FA 100 f2.8 Macro, 1/100, f2.8, ISO 640, -1.7 Ev comp. Again, I used Ev comp to get at least a 1/100 shutter speed.



Q + D FA 100/2.8 Macro, f8, 1/160, ISO 125. I used f8 thinking DOF, but it might have done more harm than good because of diffraction. Focus was on the middle duck. In any case the fine detail on the wings feathers is still pretty good. Cropped to 16x9, sharpened, and resized for posting.



One last one, and this one required significant PP. This was right after getting the first of my K to Q adapters, Nov of 2011, late afternoon Q + D FA 100 f2.8 Macro, f2.8, 1/100, ISO 125, -1.7 Ev to get the shutter speed. Brightened, sharpened significantly, uncropped and resized for posting. Handheld with no SR.



This was an incredibly rare photo op for me -- the only time I've been able to get this close to a feeding Red Tailed Hawk. I only had the relatively new Q and the 100 macro, so I did what I could, shooting quickly and slowly stalking closer with no cover and no additional support. I would rather have had my K-5 and FA* 300 f4.5, but the Q did very well. I haven't experienced much subject sensitivity to shutter noise, but I have to think that the silent Q had something to do with my success here.

Any 100mm dedicated macro should do well on the Q -- a very versatile lens as a tele, and then there's macro. . .

Scott

Last edited by snostorm; 12-26-2012 at 07:00 PM.
12-27-2012, 10:56 AM   #30
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,254
Super Takumar 200mm f4 ~ 42mm mount

I had some time today and shot several images with the 200 at f4, f5.6, and f8 and found the f5.6 image the sharpest and best, some PF but that is to be expected with the old lens. It is a lot easier to hand hold than the 55-300. Leaving SR on always helped steady the lens for easier focusing. Added a little contrast and some sharpening. The images were shot through a window, the 2nd image with 01 prime for scale. The 3rd image is a combo the one on the left was shot with my KR and DAL 55-300 cropped to match the image shot with the Q and the 200, to my eyes the Q has a slight advantage

Hans
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-r  Photo 

Last edited by hnikesch; 12-27-2012 at 02:10 PM.
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 05:31 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