[crewl1]

Stan,
one more hint, try turning the SR OFF while using tripod (in case you have forgotten to switch it off)

Lucky for me the 2 sec timer does that automagically as I'm sure I would forget otherwise.

[LaurenOE]

Lauren - I shoot 300+ lenses all the time - and do have 2 gimbal heads.

Oooops. I forgot about that.

[stormtech]

Stan,
one more hint, try turning the SR OFF while using tripod (in case you have forgotten to switch it off)

I did remember this time, plus as Larry said, it turns off with the 2 second timer. My biggest problem, also with my K-5, is to remember to turn the SR back on later. I actually did this when I put the M150 back on after the FA*300 - it didn't take me long to realize it was of though as I was missing the constant buzzing sound of the SR at work.

[stormtech]

Looking back at my two sets of images, I now need to figure out what the actual differences are. I am thrilled with the FA*300 pics, but not so with the M150's. Hard to make a fair comparison, but am going to try to narrow it down.

FA*300 pics - on a tripod using 2 second timer.
M150 pics hand held with SR on.

I need to know if I can push the M150 to get close to those images of the FA*300 - but I don't have a way to mount that set on a tripod to make a fair comparison.

I bought the M150 in hopes of hand holding, but it looks like that isn't going to work out. It is a little frustrating seeing the great pics I've seen here with the Q and long lenses hand held, but I have to remind myself that I can't hold anything steady anymore.

And Larry - thanks for your input on the genuine adapter. The one thing that still pulls me toward it is being able to use a tripod foot on it. I will see if I can somehow use my generic tripod ring from my FA*300 tomorrow.

[monochrome]

Stan: If it is any consolation I've been pig-headedly determined to get a sharp shot with a K105/2.8 and the Pentax Converter hand-held but I'm just not good enough. I've never shot super-tele before (I had a Takumar 500/4.5 for about 6 months and just gave up on the idea), so in addition to learning Q, Leaf shutter in converter and peaking zoomed, I have to learn to brace and breathe.

I'm getting better with the tripod and ball head (I don't have a gimbal head). Heaven knows what will happen when I mount the 200.

[stormtech]

Stan: If it is any consolation I've been pig-headedly determined to get a sharp shot with a K105/2.8 and the Pentax Converter hand-held but I'm just not good enough. I've never shot super-tele before (I had a Takumar 500/4.5 for about 6 months and just gave up on the idea), so in addition to learning Q, Leaf shutter in converter and peaking zoomed, I have to learn to brace and breathe.

I'm getting better with the tripod and ball head (I don't have a gimbal head). Heaven knows what will happen when I mount the 200.

Thanks - I need a little consolation now - nice to know I'm not alone.

And I should know better - my disease (RA) is progressively getting worse but had a day today that I thought it wasn't there I guess. I actually do use a tripod 90% of the time with my K-5, so it's no wonder I need it trying to shoot @ 825mm equivalent. At least I got some good images with the tripod today so my hope in the Q isn't totally lost.

[hnikesch]

Stan I know Larry said it in a post above but in your response it seems you may have missed it, Paint the inside of the adapter it will eliminate the haze and tape up the holes.

I find that hand held the Pentax adapter really sharpened up my images. I believe at fast shutter speeds it's because the 1/13th of a second sensor scan time when using the electronic shutter. It does a scan time based microscopic miss-alignment of the image lines and causes some softness. I have no proof of this and no one else has come up with this in any other posts it's just my belief. From what I understand if you set a 1/500 shutter speed each line of the sensor is exposed for 1/500 sec. but it still takes 1/13th of a sec. to scan all of the sensor lines so a time gap between line scans must exist. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

Also I agree with Lowell Goudge that the SR does perform better when a lower value is entered. When using all 3 of my 135's and my ST 150 I found them sharper at 105 and 135 respectively.

Hans

---

Last edited by hnikesch; 05-07-2013 at 05:26 PM. Reason: update

[stormtech]

Stan I know Larry said it in a post above but in your response it seems you may have missed it, Paint the inside of the adapter it will eliminate the haze and tape up the holes.

I find that hand held the Pentax adapter really sharpened up my images. I believe at fast shutter speeds it's because the 1/13th of a second sensor scan time when using the electronic shutter. It does a scan time based microscopic miss-alignment of the image lines and causes some softness. I have no proof of this any none else has come up with this in any other posts it's just my belief. From what I understand if you set a 1/500 shutter speed each line of the sensor is exposed for 1/500 sec. but it still takes 1/13th of a sec to scan all of the sensor lines so a time gap between line scans must exist. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

Also I agree with Lowell Goudge that the SR does perform better when a lower value is entered. When using all 3 of my 135's and my ST 150 I found them sharper at 105 and 135 respectively.

Hans

Thank you for that Hans - this is exactly what I am trying to figure out. I will admit to not knowing how the electronic shutter works or how any difference affects our images. What you say about it is making sense to me.

Just from my quick testing today, it looks like being mounted on a tripod helps a lot. This makes your explanation of how the electronic shutter works valid in that the camera is rock steady while the shutter scan takes place. Now the wanna-be scientist in me wants to get a genuine adapter and do some side by side testing.

[robtcorl]

Stan,
Thanks for starting this thread, and thanks to all for the helpful responses.

I've been like you, trying to get near the results others have achieved.
And, like you, have a tough time parting with the money for an OEM, and then trying to run down a tripod foot.
For now I'll stick with my Fotodiox adapter, and plug along with you.

[stormtech]

Stan,
Thanks for starting this thread, and thanks to all for the helpful responses.

I've been like you, trying to get near the results others have achieved.
And, like you, have a tough time parting with the money for an OEM, and then trying to run down a tripod foot.
For now I'll stick with my Fotodiox adapter, and plug along with you.

I've decided the same Bob - just going to stick with the generic adapter. I do need to paint it and plug the holes. If nothing else, it presents a challenge that I certainly embrace. I am on a mission of sorts now to get some good images with that M150!

[monochrome]

I've decided the same Bob - just going to stick with the generic adapter. I do need to paint it and plug the holes. If nothing else, it presents a challenge that I certainly embrace. I am on a mission of sorts now to get some good images with that M150!

I'll see your M150 and raise you an M75~150 (with the OEM and Foot).

[M.Zein]

And Larry - thanks for your input on the genuine adapter. The one thing that still pulls me toward it is being able to use a tripod foot on it. I will see if I can somehow use my generic tripod ring from my FA*300 tomorrow.

The photodiox adapter has a removable tripod foot... I ordered one two days ago for 25.97

Good luck with your mission guys

[stormtech]

The photodiox adapter has a removable tripod foot...

Yes it does. But once I saw how fragile that mount is, I removed it. Take a look at how much bite the attaching tiny screws have - would never trust anything on it.

[M.Zein]

Hopefully the one with aperture dial will be a better built

[crewl1]

Hopefully the one with aperture dial will be a better built

Nope, Stan's is the same one.
Someone has modified this unit by replacing with longer screws and jbweld on the inside.
Can't recall who that was.