Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

Blythman · 02-27-2013, 02:47 PM

Mat be of interest for this discussion. Here's an example of a Tamron SP300 f2.8, a Kenko 1.5x and a Pentax 1.7x. Taken with the K5. Autofocus worked too. It was a big lump to hold though

**baro-nite** · 02-27-2013, 03:34 PM

Originally posted by Blythman

Dunnock - Tamron SP300mm f2.8, Kenko 1.5x and Pentax 1,7xAF by Alan Wennington, on Flickr

That looks very good -- thanks for posting it. Handheld at 1/250? With no flash? Very good indeed.

Blythman · 02-28-2013, 12:52 AM

Originally posted by baro-nite

That looks very good -- thanks for posting it. Handheld at 1/250? With no flash? Very good indeed.

Yup - no flash

**crewl1** · 02-28-2013, 07:08 AM

Did I miss the reveal?

**baro-nite** · 02-28-2013, 07:48 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by crewl1

Did I miss the reveal?

No -- the Q is on the left, K-5 on the right.

Obviously way too small a sample and conditions too poorly controlled to make more than very tentative conclusions, but enough to warrant further tests. The K-5 + TCs has significant advantages in handling, and if IQ is about equal then it is generally a better choice for me, for this kind of shooting. Subject acquisition is much easier with the optical viewfinder. Partly that's because the angle of view is a bit wider, but mainly it's because sweeping is much better with optical vs. electronic view. Of course adding a reflex sight improves things on the Q, but there's still extra time going back and forth from sight to LCD. Shutter lag and frame rate are also of course much better on the K-5. The one area where the Q might have the edge is focusing -- with the focus this touchy I had a hard time getting it right in the viewfinder. Alan's very good results above are making me seriously consider the 1.7x AF adapter, but I'll be patient for a while longer yet and see if Pentax can ever produce the SDM TC.

audiobomber · 04-05-2013, 06:08 AM

Thanks baro-nite, your samples show exactly what I was looking for. I obsessed over the K-01 vs Q decision for a long time and chose the K-01, but the Q kept nagging at me for its supertelephoto abilities. It appears from your test that I should be able to do as well or better with my existing gear (K-01, DA*300, Kenko 1.5X, Pentax 2X-S). Hopefully a K-3 and Pentax 1.4X coming soon.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Q 01 prime VS Q 02 zoom image comparison	mamethot	Pentax Q	37	11-01-2013 09:40 AM
28mm showdown commences: Q vs GRD vs XPro vs DP1M	ndjedinak	Pentax Q	14	07-07-2013 07:01 PM
New to me Q/02/Q>K Converter Kit!!	monochrome	Pentax Q	25	01-31-2013 08:13 PM
Pentax Q / adapter K to Q / DA 35mm f2.4 AL	wax	Pentax Q	4	11-06-2012 02:55 AM
Q for the Q & DSLR users	jezza323	Pentax Q	6	02-05-2012 09:13 AM

02-27-2013, 02:47 PM	#16
Blythman Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Blyth, Northumberland Posts: 66	Mat be of interest for this discussion. Here's an example of a Tamron SP300 f2.8, a Kenko 1.5x and a Pentax 1.7x. Taken with the K5. Autofocus worked too. It was a big lump to hold though

02-27-2013, 03:34 PM	#17
baro-nite Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: North Carolina, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,295 Original Poster	Originally posted by Blythman Dunnock - Tamron SP300mm f2.8, Kenko 1.5x and Pentax 1,7xAF by Alan Wennington, on Flickr That looks very good -- thanks for posting it. Handheld at 1/250? With no flash? Very good indeed.

02-28-2013, 12:52 AM	#18
Blythman Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Blyth, Northumberland Posts: 66	Originally posted by baro-nite That looks very good -- thanks for posting it. Handheld at 1/250? With no flash? Very good indeed. Yup - no flash

02-28-2013, 07:08 AM	#19
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	Did I miss the reveal?

02-28-2013, 07:48 AM - 1 Like	#20
baro-nite Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: North Carolina, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,295 Original Poster	Originally posted by crewl1 Did I miss the reveal? No -- the Q is on the left, K-5 on the right. Obviously way too small a sample and conditions too poorly controlled to make more than very tentative conclusions, but enough to warrant further tests. The K-5 + TCs has significant advantages in handling, and if IQ is about equal then it is generally a better choice for me, for this kind of shooting. Subject acquisition is much easier with the optical viewfinder. Partly that's because the angle of view is a bit wider, but mainly it's because sweeping is much better with optical vs. electronic view. Of course adding a reflex sight improves things on the Q, but there's still extra time going back and forth from sight to LCD. Shutter lag and frame rate are also of course much better on the K-5. The one area where the Q might have the edge is focusing -- with the focus this touchy I had a hard time getting it right in the viewfinder. Alan's very good results above are making me seriously consider the 1.7x AF adapter, but I'll be patient for a while longer yet and see if Pentax can ever produce the SDM TC.

04-05-2013, 06:08 AM	#21
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Thanks baro-nite, your samples show exactly what I was looking for. I obsessed over the K-01 vs Q decision for a long time and chose the K-01, but the Q kept nagging at me for its supertelephoto abilities. It appears from your test that I should be able to do as well or better with my existing gear (K-01, DA*300, Kenko 1.5X, Pentax 2X-S). Hopefully a K-3 and Pentax 1.4X coming soon.

Q heresy: Q vs. TC smackdown

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!