[GibbyTheMole]

My first impression when looking at the full frame shot is that the lens is pretty sharp, but there's camera shake going on here. Not a lot, or we'd see more evidence of double or multiple edges in one or more directions -- just enough to make the image look, as you said "dodgy". Maybe you might be able to see it looking at the brand name stamps or on the rusty, non reflective screw head grooves at high magnification on the originals.

Yeah, I actually wondered about that myself after I looked at the photo closer. It got pretty windy that day late in the testing phase when I tested the Tair... It's a fat lens, so it could've blown it around a bit.

I did use the hood. Always do with the mirror lens. After I get over this bronchitis crud, I'll go out & try it again during a calm day & report back if I get different results. Maybe I'll use a newspaper next time for a target.

Cheers,
Bobbo :-)

[mgbirder]

This lens has a 100mm front filter. The lens barrell then rapidly tapers down to about 60mm. Like all OM lenses it has an aperture ring. So there is no special mechanisms needed on the adapter. This adapter was before RJ made them. Snostorm provided the original link - I think it was camera plus? It takes two adapters to make this work. An OM-C (Japan) and Q-C (Poland from ebay). There is no tripod foot on adapter.

WOW that is an impressive performance!!! I am honestly a little envious You will have a blast using it when winter passes.

[crewl1]

I feel a big thank you is in order to crewl1 for his time and effort organizing this reference thread - without this there would be no easy way to compare any of our long lenses on the Q.

Hear, hear! The system keeps stopping me from giving him more +'s though

I'll second that stormtech. Thank's for the effort crewI1. Best Regards Ted Hinsch

I couldn't agree more, and also thanks to everybody that is contributing to these 2 threads The Q is my new favourite photo accessory (super teleconverter), a Birders Dream come true Thanks to this thread in particular I noticed its potential.

I'll add my thanks as well, even though my Q has not arrived yet. Seeing what this little wonder can do is amazing! Credit where it's due too for contributing members posting trials and errors.

Wow, thanks guys.
I just had an idea, but all the contributors have added the real value to this thread.
Keep up the good work, and thanks to all those that have contributed to date.

[snostorm]

Hi barondla,

Superb shots!!!

Wow! a 100mm front filter -- that puts it pretty close to a 300 f2.8 in size they most commonly have 113mm filter threads. I've never seen one of these.

I originally had hopes that I might be able to obtain some older Zuikos at a bargain price, but the good stuff is still expensive, now that there are no more truly obsolete mounts with all of these adapters for MILCs . . . and Pentax was late to this game. I have three lenses that might come close to competing with this lens. . . might, but probably won't -- Tamron SP 180 f2.5 A2, Pentax A* 200 f2.8, and Sigma 180 f3.5 Macro, but my SP 180 is unfortunately broken -- not fatally, the front element group barrel has chosen to loosen up and now unscrews from the rest of the lens -- I need to send this one off to reset it. This lens has some promise for use with the Q. . . I've finally figured out a good support system for the A*200, so that one's in the "Que" to be tested, as well as the Sigma, which is a beast (about the size and weight of an average 300 f4), but my best lens for CA/PF control.

We should call this the QLBA thread -- so many more possible lenses to consider and ultimately want. . .

Scott

[crewl1]

Hi, I just got mine Q today. And a Chinese EOS->Q-adapter.
Sorry about unsharp fotos. It's dark and old firmware. Couldn't have a decent light today, but I just had to play around.

1st: Tamron 70-200 f2,8 @70mm(385mm) @ f3,5 ISO400
2nd: Same @150mm(825mm) @ f3,5 ISO400
3rd: Tokina 100mm(550mm) f2,8 Macro @ f4 ISO125
4th: Same @f4 ISO125 + flash
5th: Tomioka(Ricoh) 55mm(302mm) f1,4 @ f1,4 ISO125 + flash

K9 I noticed your images are removed, will you be doing a separate review of each lens?
I think the feedback on the lenses for the rest of us will be helpful.
Having a separate post for each lens will make it easier to index.
Thanks!

[VisualDarkness]

I hoped to review the C-mount Schneider Kreuznach Cinegon 11.5/1.9 today but found out why it didn't work correctly. It screws quite a bit too close to the sensor so either it's the adapter or the lens (or a combination) that is badly optimized, as many c-mounts are. I have to make a shim as simply screwing it out that much makes it too wobbly to review. Though it looks promising so far!

[K9-K5]

K9 I noticed your images are removed, will you be doing a separate review of each lens?
I think the feedback on the lenses for the rest of us will be helpful.
Having a separate post for each lens will make it easier to index.
Thanks!

Yes, I'll do when I have time soon. I'll post new pictures and references from tripod.
I have used my attachment quota almost, but I'll get around it somehow.

[crewl1]

Yes, I'll do when I have time soon. I'll post new pictures and references from tripod.
I have used my attachment quota almost, but I'll get around it somehow.

Get a free Photobucket.com or Flickr.com account.
You can upload your pictures there and link to them using the IMG tags.

[barondla]

Great job starting this thread crewl1! The index makes it a very useful reference guide to match lenses with the Q. So many lenss
to test. This reminds me of a community garden project. The more lenses and people the better.

thanks
barondla

[mgbirder]

Look forward to the shots MG. Just edit your post and I will add it to the index at the front once the samples are added. Thanks!

Hi, i posted some reference shots in my original post.

[crewl1]

Hi, i posted some reference shots in my original post.

Thanks, I added it to the index. That one looks like a winner on the Q.

[VisualDarkness]

This lens has a 100mm front filter. The lens barrell then rapidly tapers down to about 60mm. Like all OM lenses it has an aperture ring. So there is no special mechanisms needed on the adapter. This adapter was before RJ made them. Snostorm provided the original link - I think it was camera plus? It takes two adapters to make this work. An OM-C (Japan) and Q-C (Poland from ebay). There is no tripod foot on adapter.

Turtle Dove. F2 1/60 ISO 125 Raw.The lens is very sharp. Usable wide open at f2 it shows some fringing on subject and more on out of focus background. No effort was made to edit this out.

Male Cardinal (red). F2.8 1/50 ISO 125 Raw. Eliminates most of the fringing ( maybe all) on subject. Still a little in background. Great performance. Could live with this any time.

Female Cardinal (tan) F4 1/320 ISO 125. Don't see fringing any where. Sharp.

Somewhere between F2.8 - F4 this lens appears to be good competition for the Pentax DA*300. Only tele I have tested that compares to the Pentax for lack of fringing at F4. The lens is sharp!

Test procedure: All shot thru a glass window pane from indoors. Camera on Gitzo Studex tripod and Arca Swiss monoball. Setup weighs ~10lbs. Pentax red dot scope RD10. No remote used.

All images shot in Raw and converted in Silkypix using my normal sharpening. Some level adjustments made in PSE 11. Resized in one step.

Jazzed about this lens.
thanks
barondla

Test

Wow, that set is just wonderful, amazing result! Interesting that an older lens can be that sharp already from F2 (though with some fringing) and stopped down you can see every small details on the birds.

[crewl1]

Great job starting this thread crewl1! The index makes it a very useful reference guide to match lenses with the Q. So many lenss to test. This reminds me of a community garden project. The more lenses and people the better. thanks barondla

Thanks Barondla. That 180mm Olympus looks like the answer to our +-200mm wishes

[barondla]

Hi barondla,

Superb shots!!!

Wow! a 100mm front filter -- that puts it pretty close to a 300 f2.8 in size they most commonly have 113mm filter threads. I've never seen one of these.

I originally had hopes that I might be able to obtain some older Zuikos at a bargain price, but the good stuff is still expensive, now that there are no more truly obsolete mounts with all of these adapters for MILCs . . . and Pentax was late to this game. I have three lenses that might come close to competing with this lens. . . might, but probably won't -- Tamron SP 180 f2.5 A2, Pentax A* 200 f2.8, and Sigma 180 f3.5 Macro, but my SP 180 is unfortunately broken -- not fatally, the front element group barrel has chosen to loosen up and now unscrews from the rest of the lens -- I need to send this one off to reset it. This lens has some promise for use with the Q. . . I've finally figured out a good support system for the A*200, so that one's in the "Que" to be tested, as well as the Sigma, which is a beast (about the size and weight of an average 300 f4), but my best lens for CA/PF control.

We should call this the QLBA thread -- so many more possible lenses to consider and ultimately want. . .

Scott

Thanks. Held a friend's Pentax A*200. Beautiful lens. A different friend has the Sigma 180 F3.5. It is a large lens that dwarfs the size of my pentax A*200 macro. It approaches the size of the Pentax DA*300. Beautiful lens. Tried to buy one and they were unobtainable in PKA mount.

Have never seen the Tamron 180 F2.5. Did see a Pentax 200F2.5 once. Bet all your lenses can be very good on the Q.
thanks
barondla

[crewl1]

so that one's in the "Que" to be tested

Ha ha, I see what you did there