[ChopperCharles]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Curious about the Auto 110 lenses, and how they work on the Q. I understand there's an adapter for micro 4/3rds that has a built in aperture control. Wondering if such a thing exists for the Q, or if it's possible to use a 110->m 4/3 and then an m 4/3->Q adapter to get iris control if a Q one doesn't exist.

Also curious of the lenses are even worth my time. The 50mm sounds really interesting, as it's super tiny...

Charles.

---

Last edited by ChopperCharles; 01-21-2013 at 11:30 PM.

[Adam]

Curious about the Auto 110 lenses, and how they work on the Q. I understand there's an adapter for micro 4/3rds that has a built in aperture control. Wondering if such a thing exists for the Q, or if it's possible to use a 110->m 4/3 and then an m 4/3->Q adapter to get iris control if a Q one doesn't exist.

Also curious of the lenses are even worth my time. The 50mm sounds really interesting, as it's super tiny...

Charles.

Based on their size, I would say they're probably not worth your while. Q lenses are small enough to begin with, plus you get the leaf shutter Adapting bigger glass in another story.

[ChopperCharles]

I'm adapting my 50mm f1.7 now, and it has to be stopped down quite a bit to eliminate purple fringing. It's also huge. I'd trade it for a tiny f2.8 that has no purple fringing. I'm really only interested in hearing from people that have tried it though...

Charles.

[digital029art]

The Russian Industar 50mm/3.5 is nice, compact & no PF that I could see even wide open. I like the Auto 110 50mm lens, it's really sharp but has a little PF. It's a compact & lightweight setup!

[GibbyTheMole]

The Russian Industar 50mm/3.5 is nice, compact & no PF that I could see even wide open.

That's one I'm considering picking up for the Q. It looks promising. Are there any of the Industars I should steer clear of? Will the M39 Industars work on the Q with an adapter? (One seller says the M39 won't work on a MILC, but doesn't mention the Q specifically.)

[digital029art]

Today's your lucky day Gibby!

Amaze-on has the m39 to Q adapter for $5.91 : Amazon.com: Fotodiox Lens Mount Adapter, M39 (39mm x1 Leica thread mount) Lens to Pentax Q-Series Camera (type 2): Camera & Photo

also the m42 for $5.72 : Amazon.com: Fotodiox Lens Mount Adapter (Type 2), M42 (42mm x1 Thread Screw) Lens to Pentax Q-Series Camera: Camera & Photo

The m42 Industar 50-2 is already tiny, I bet the m39 is even smaller !

There's also a collapsible m39 version that looks really interesting. I wonder it it would retract into the m39 adapter fully??

Lens Industar 50 3 5 50mm M39 Fed Leica s N 68015585 | eBay

Industar-50 3.5/50mm collapsible lens in LTM mount [INDUSTAR-50] - $49.00 : RafCamera, Russian Cameras, Lenses, Microscopes, Accessories

[GibbyTheMole]

Thanks much for the info, digital029art! I'm gonna look around & see if I can't find one in the bargain basement range somewhere. Craigslist, etc. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool cheapskate.

[digital029art]

I hear you on that! I got my m42 copy in Prague when I was there for cheap .. would you believe an (generic) m42->PK ring was gonna cost 3x what the lens was!! Crazy overpriced - I told em it's like $5 on ebay .. lol
Pity I never got to use it there .. c'est la vie~

[cjfeola]

Curious about the Auto 110 lenses, and how they work on the Q. I understand there's an adapter for micro 4/3rds that has a built in aperture control. Wondering if such a thing exists for the Q, or if it's possible to use a 110->m 4/3 and then an m 4/3->Q adapter to get iris control if a Q one doesn't exist.

Also curious of the lenses are even worth my time. The 50mm sounds really interesting, as it's super tiny...

Charles.

Hi guy,

I've had a complete Auto 110 system since it was released in the 80s -- all the prime lenses, except the 18mm fixed focus, since I had the regular 18. Have had a Q for a year; bought an adopter immediately. The 50 is a pretty good lens on the Q; the 70 is very, very good, though. My Q kit is currently the 01 prime, 02 Zoom, 03 Fisheye, 06 Telephoto zoom, and the Auto 110 70mm.

The 70 is beautiful and sharp. It was a beyotch to hand hold before the latest firmware update added antishake; it's very long and very, very light.

Also just bought a K mount adapter; going to try out my 50 1.2 and 135 1.8 on the Q. Or the Q on them, given how big they are.

Picked up a second Q when I bought the 02 Zoom; kept the lens and gave the Q and an 03 Fisheye to my daughter for Christmas. She immediately stole my Auto 110 adapter and all the lenses, except the 70, which I wouldn't give up..

Hope that helps.

cjf

[fuent104]

The 70 is beautiful and shar

Can you share samples?

[baro-nite]

The 70 is beautiful and sharp. It was a beyotch to hand hold before the latest firmware update added antishake; it's very long and very, very light.

Hmm, I saw a 70 in a local shop -- just the build quality was almost enough to get me to buy it. I may have to pick it up.

[cjfeola]

Can you share samples?

Sorry for the delay; been crazy busy.

This is hand-held (braced) at Lone Star Park in Grand Prairie, before the firmware upgrade added antishake. Shot from the luxury boxes; it's been awhile, but probably around 200 yards for the first, 75 yards for the second.

cjf

[cerbay]

Converted for RAW
I have the 18mm and the 24mm lenses but 50mm is the sharpest one.

[echineon]

Hi everyone,

I'm new around here. Just recently got a set of all 4 lenses, 18, 24, 50 and 70mm. I just have a question though, are you supposed to use the actual focal length of the lens or is it supposed to be the 5.5 crop factor? I'm asking because I don't know what film it is for the Auto 110.

Thanks,
Jack.

[GibbyTheMole]

are you supposed to use the actual focal length of the lens or is it supposed to be the 5.5 crop factor?

Actual focal length. Focal length is always focal length...