Adapted lenses tested on the Q : the reference thread

vonBaloney · 05-03-2015, 11:38 AM - **1 Like**

600/5.6 on Q7 w/ OEM Pentax K adapter

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

View Picture EXIF

**GUB** · 05-10-2015, 02:50 AM - **3 Likes**

We were discussing the possibilities of stopping down the 110 70mm lens with a disc on the front in another thread.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/294184-pentax-auto-110-lenses-q-2.html
So I thought I would have a go.
The disc is black paper cut to fit in the 49mm filter thread of the lens and held in place by the lens hood.
I used a cheap panel steel circle cutter in my drillpress.
I removed one of the blades and sharpened up the other.
And clamped the black paper on top of a cutting board onto the base of the drill.
Cut the centre first and cut the outer ring without moving the paper.
I suspected that even wide open the lens used only the centre 25mm of the front lens.
So I cut one disc with a 25 mm aperture and the other as small as the cutter would go which was about 19 mm and should be about one stop slower than 25mm.
Test image is a ruler placed on mattboards-- one light grey -- one dark grey.
the camera is at about 45 degrees to the subject to display DOF on the ruler.
The 2 tones of grey was to create a 2 spiked histogram to compare exposure.
The results are screenshots with histogram included and turned on their side to better fit the format here.
The result show no difference in exposure between the 25mm disc and the lens wide open, confirming my suspicions the lens doesn't use the outer glass.
The 19mm disc is indeed one stop slower but only slightly sharper.
I will leave the 25mm disc permanently there to keep light from scattering off the unneccessary extra glass.
The last image is there to remind us that the lens can not make a decent image unless it is attached to a camera and used!

Piotrek K · 05-19-2015, 02:18 AM

Made with the original Q on monopod, developed from RAW - moderate crop, sharpened after web resize. Light and settings were not ideal so I'm sure this could be a little bit sharper (1/320 and 1/500 at ISO 160).
This lens seems really capable. Some abberations are present, but not the worst I've seen.

Piotrek K · 05-22-2015, 02:43 PM - **1 Like**

Today I tested my 23A lens with the original Q supported by the tripod. Sorry for the boring subjects, but I really had no time. All photos wide open at 300 mm. All were developed from raw. These are just test images, but I applied standard PP which I use for wildlife photos (including some abberation removal, simulation of Velvia slide film, use of Topaz Detail and sharpening after resampling to the web size).

... and 2 100% crops from the image above

Last edited by Piotrek K; 05-22-2015 at 03:04 PM.

**crewl1** · 05-26-2015, 03:17 PM

Index updated with latest contributions.
Thanks, and send me a note if you spot any errors.

Pentaxians · 05-26-2015, 08:59 PM

Thanks for the update crewl1...good works!

xerxal · 05-28-2015, 06:37 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxians

Thanks for the update crewl1...good works!

what glue is safe to use for adapting? say m42 body cap to d-mount adapter that wont leak fumes inside the lens.

**pacerr** · 05-28-2015, 07:58 PM

Super Glue or epoxy works -- just let it set til it's hard. If the instructions say to thin or clean it with a volatile fluid be careful.

**crewl1** · 05-28-2015, 11:45 PM

Originally posted by xerxal

what glue is safe to use for adapting? say m42 body cap to d-mount adapter that wont leak fumes inside the lens.

Personally I find super glue can produce a white fog residue, so I don't use it near lenses.
Two part epoxy or the specialized epoxy for plastic (like Plastic Welder by Devcon) works great.

**pacerr** · 05-29-2015, 08:57 AM - **1 Like**

Re: Super Glue. while it's possible to experience a residue under certain circumstances, IME it's only an issue during a phase when cyanoacrylates are capable of out-gassing and when other needed components are present.

I've never had an issue with this - especially when using the tiny amount necessary for temporarily tacking small parts for trial fitting. An accessory component left to "season" a bit in sunlight and/or over time has never been a problem either.

Do a search on "super glue fingerprinting" for instance to better understand the chemical and physical processes and let your own experience be your guide.

Like radioactive lenses, I consider this a non-issue for any practical uses.

vonBaloney · 05-29-2015, 11:01 AM

I've glued the aperture pin down on several m42 lenses with gel-type superglue, never had fogging. I have gotten a whitish haze appear on internal elements on some lenses for no apparent reason (that did wipe off if I was able to get to the element) -- possibly certain kinds of foam that might be off-gassing shouldn't in airtight cases for storage, that's my working theory....

**crewl1** · 06-05-2015, 09:11 AM

Originally posted by Professor Batty

Nice little lens. 1/350th of a second @ f4, ISO 100 on Pentax Q-S1. I removed the filter ring adapter, it made an unattractive vignette.

This has that 'door peephole' effect.

Mothballs · 06-15-2015, 09:12 PM

Okay, a request here. I've been eyeballing a few old Tamrons, in particular the 300mm f2.8 SP Adaptall2 lenses, and was wondering if anyone had one to test? Apparently those lenses where very sharp for long, fast telephotos (We're talking, like, around 45-50 lpm wide open apparently) and I was wondering how they held up on the Q.

Probably going to hunt one down reguardless, but still, Hoping someone has one to show off.

vonBaloney · 06-15-2015, 09:43 PM

Originally posted by Mothballs

Okay, a request here. I've been eyeballing a few old Tamrons, in particular the 300mm f2.8 SP Adaptall2 lenses, and was wondering if anyone had one to test? Apparently those lenses where very sharp for long, fast telephotos (We're talking, like, around 45-50 lpm wide open apparently) and I was wondering how they held up on the Q.

Probably going to hunt one down reguardless, but still, Hoping someone has one to show off.

I had the Tamron SP 400/4 65B for a year or two, which by all accounts is a very similar performer to the 60B 300/2.8. It was very sharp, but also prone to fringing. Constrast could be lowish wide-open. If you can get a good price, they are good values. Nice lenses, but then I got the Pentax-A* 300/2.8 and it blows the Tamrons out of the water (and cost $1000 more). I did use the Tamron on the original Q some -- very challening but got some ok pics after processing (expect to have to deal with purple). I'm sure it would have been a little easier on one of the newer Q's with bigger sensor, and the faster 2.8 lens will give more leeway to stop down from wide-open...

**pacerr** · 06-16-2015, 09:35 PM

As a long-time, satisfied user of the AD-2 SP lenses including the SP 300F/2.8 360A, 63B and 30A I'm gonna state that those lenses are as good as your technique with long FL lenses.

Yes, there's potentially more PF than some more modern DA* lenses -- but nearly all of that can be solved in post processing today. If you can shoot with one of the Adaptall SP tele's you can shoot with anything but there's a learning curve.

The good news is it's one you need for ANY tele lens. They'll humble you on the high MPS DSLRs until you learn to use 'em but then you'll have lessons that'll serve you well into the future -- but at 1/3rd the price.

05-19-2015, 02:18 AM	#993
Piotrek K Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,384	Super Takumar 150/4 at 5.6 Made with the original Q on monopod, developed from RAW - moderate crop, sharpened after web resize. Light and settings were not ideal so I'm sure this could be a little bit sharper (1/320 and 1/500 at ISO 160). This lens seems really capable. Some abberations are present, but not the worst I've seen.

05-22-2015, 02:43 PM - 1 Like	#994
Piotrek K Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,384	Tamron SP Adaptall 60 - 300 23A (3.8 - 5.4) at 300/5.4 Today I tested my 23A lens with the original Q supported by the tripod. Sorry for the boring subjects, but I really had no time. All photos wide open at 300 mm. All were developed from raw. These are just test images, but I applied standard PP which I use for wildlife photos (including some abberation removal, simulation of Velvia slide film, use of Topaz Detail and sharpening after resampling to the web size). ... and 2 100% crops from the image above Last edited by Piotrek K; 05-22-2015 at 03:04 PM.

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

05-26-2015, 03:17 PM	#995
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807 Original Poster	Index updated with latest contributions. Thanks, and send me a note if you spot any errors.

05-26-2015, 08:59 PM	#996
Pentaxians Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 733	Thanks for the update crewl1...good works!

05-28-2015, 06:37 PM	#997
xerxal New Member Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 23	Originally posted by Pentaxians Thanks for the update crewl1...good works! what glue is safe to use for adapting? say m42 body cap to d-mount adapter that wont leak fumes inside the lens.

05-28-2015, 07:58 PM	#998
pacerr Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Paris, TN Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,349	Super Glue or epoxy works -- just let it set til it's hard. If the instructions say to thin or clean it with a volatile fluid be careful.

05-28-2015, 11:45 PM	#999
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807 Original Poster	Originally posted by xerxal what glue is safe to use for adapting? say m42 body cap to d-mount adapter that wont leak fumes inside the lens. Personally I find super glue can produce a white fog residue, so I don't use it near lenses. Two part epoxy or the specialized epoxy for plastic (like Plastic Welder by Devcon) works great.

05-29-2015, 08:57 AM - 1 Like	#1000
pacerr Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Paris, TN Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,349	Re: Super Glue. while it's possible to experience a residue under certain circumstances, IME it's only an issue during a phase when cyanoacrylates are capable of out-gassing and when other needed components are present. I've never had an issue with this - especially when using the tiny amount necessary for temporarily tacking small parts for trial fitting. An accessory component left to "season" a bit in sunlight and/or over time has never been a problem either. Do a search on "super glue fingerprinting" for instance to better understand the chemical and physical processes and let your own experience be your guide. Like radioactive lenses, I consider this a non-issue for any practical uses.

05-29-2015, 11:01 AM	#1001
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	I've glued the aperture pin down on several m42 lenses with gel-type superglue, never had fogging. I have gotten a whitish haze appear on internal elements on some lenses for no apparent reason (that did wipe off if I was able to get to the element) -- possibly certain kinds of foam that might be off-gassing shouldn't in airtight cases for storage, that's my working theory....

06-05-2015, 09:11 AM	#1002
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807 Original Poster	Originally posted by Professor Batty Nice little lens. 1/350th of a second @ f4, ISO 100 on Pentax Q-S1. I removed the filter ring adapter, it made an unattractive vignette. This has that 'door peephole' effect.

06-15-2015, 09:12 PM	#1003
Mothballs Senior Member Join Date: May 2015 Posts: 275	Okay, a request here. I've been eyeballing a few old Tamrons, in particular the 300mm f2.8 SP Adaptall2 lenses, and was wondering if anyone had one to test? Apparently those lenses where very sharp for long, fast telephotos (We're talking, like, around 45-50 lpm wide open apparently) and I was wondering how they held up on the Q. Probably going to hunt one down reguardless, but still, Hoping someone has one to show off.

06-15-2015, 09:43 PM	#1004
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	Originally posted by Mothballs Okay, a request here. I've been eyeballing a few old Tamrons, in particular the 300mm f2.8 SP Adaptall2 lenses, and was wondering if anyone had one to test? Apparently those lenses where very sharp for long, fast telephotos (We're talking, like, around 45-50 lpm wide open apparently) and I was wondering how they held up on the Q. Probably going to hunt one down reguardless, but still, Hoping someone has one to show off. I had the Tamron SP 400/4 65B for a year or two, which by all accounts is a very similar performer to the 60B 300/2.8. It was very sharp, but also prone to fringing. Constrast could be lowish wide-open. If you can get a good price, they are good values. Nice lenses, but then I got the Pentax-A* 300/2.8 and it blows the Tamrons out of the water (and cost $1000 more). I did use the Tamron on the original Q some -- very challening but got some ok pics after processing (expect to have to deal with purple). I'm sure it would have been a little easier on one of the newer Q's with bigger sensor, and the faster 2.8 lens will give more leeway to stop down from wide-open...

06-16-2015, 09:35 PM	#1005
pacerr Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Paris, TN Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,349	As a long-time, satisfied user of the AD-2 SP lenses including the SP 300F/2.8 360A, 63B and 30A I'm gonna state that those lenses are as good as your technique with long FL lenses. Yes, there's potentially more PF than some more modern DA* lenses -- but nearly all of that can be solved in post processing today. If you can shoot with one of the Adaptall SP tele's you can shoot with anything but there's a learning curve. The good news is it's one you need for ANY tele lens. They'll humble you on the high MPS DSLRs until you learn to use 'em but then you'll have lessons that'll serve you well into the future -- but at 1/3rd the price.