Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-08-2013, 08:17 PM   #1
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,921
06 Zoom and macro

I'm planning to get a Q7, and with it the chance to get the 2 lens kit with 06 zoom.
However, I know I don't use the long lens much, since I'd usually go extreme and snap on a FA*80-200 or F*300 for the reach.
So I have some questions regarding the 06 that I need help on.

1. How good is the IQ vs the 01? (I'm under the impression that its softer than the 01 but better than the 02)

2. More importantly, does anyone use the 06 with close up lenses for macro? And can you share some samples?


Thx

(If I can decide on the 06, I'd probably just go for a Q7 body only)

07-09-2013, 05:17 AM   #2
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,649
i don't know how close you are looking for when you say macro...my flickr site has a set with just the 06 lens and the q and shows a variety of different types of pictures including some close up...imo i think it is an excellent lens

Pentax Q with 06 Lens - a set on Flickr
07-09-2013, 07:58 AM - 1 Like   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,921
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by pearsaab Quote
i don't know how close you are looking for when you say macro...my flickr site has a set with just the 06 lens and the q and shows a variety of different types of pictures including some close up...imo i think it is an excellent lens

Pentax Q with 06 Lens - a set on Flickr
Thanks for you reply.
I'm looking for samples of the 06+close up diopter/lens.
The purpose is for extreme macro.

I currently use the K-adapter with macro lenses, but the 06+close up lens has the advantage of AF (if it works at such shallow DOF) and flash sync speed 1/250 and higher (with electronic shutter), as well as size/weight of setup.
I'd loose the advantage of mfd - infinity focusing compared to a adapter+macro lens setup, but I'm interested to explore this option.

Here is an example of what I intend to use it for.
07-09-2013, 08:24 AM   #4
Senior Member
Guakala's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 147
QuoteOriginally posted by pinholecam Quote
Here is an example of what I intend to use it for.
I love your macro shots, how do you always capture these spiders so properly framed? Do you pay them and have them pose for you as insect models? What's your secret?!

07-09-2013, 07:56 PM - 1 Like   #5
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,921
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Guakala Quote
I love your macro shots, how do you always capture these spiders so properly framed? Do you pay them and have them pose for you as insect models? What's your secret?!
Thanks.

There's no secret.
The Q with macro lens allows focusing from minimum focus distance to infinity so, framing isn't as hard as a extension tube or close up filter setup which limits the focus distance.
Its one of the strengths of the Q imo.

Other than that, its just a matter of trying and taking enough shots and choosing the best.
07-09-2013, 10:43 PM   #6
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
Hi pinholecam,

First of all, great Jumping Spider shot! They're easily my favorite critters to shoot in macro.

Magnification is a bit unpredictable with diopters. I actually hadn't tried this with the 06 yet, so you got my curiosity up.

I had thought that the relatively low native magnification of the 06 (0.05x) lens would not really produce enough mag for good results with the 06, but it turns out that with the crop, the 06 at 45mm and MFD with a Raynox DCR 250 (@ +8 diopter) gives a FOV of a little over 14mm at MFD -- which is a little better than 1:1 on an APS-C for apparent magnification relative to the image frame.

I shot the first sample with the 06 and DCR 250 handheld with the popup flash. The Raynox was mounted directly to the lens using a 40.5mm to 43mm step up ring, and I used MF to focus (which allowed me to easily keep the lens at MFD on the horizontal line, which in AF mode was difficult handheld since the Q system lenses focus by wire). I guesstimated the working distance at around 4" (from the front element of the Raynox and used the popup flash in its extended position without any modifiers -- the lens did not get in the way (I didn't mount the hood). This is at f 2.8.

The second example is using AF at f5.6 to give an idea of DOF stopped down. Notice that I could not get max magnification -- I just couldn't get the lens to focus closer -- maybe this will come with more ambient light to focus with or more practice. . . I focused on the double line above the "80" for this one.

I found both AF and MF with focus peaking easy to use. The field that was in focus was very apparent on the LCD and as I turned the focus ring, I could easily see it move across the frame.

The whole setup is very compact, and though heavy compared to the Q with 01 as I carry it every day, it's very easy to hold and shoot for me.

I hope this is at least something of what you were looking for. . .

Scott
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo   

Last edited by snostorm; 07-09-2013 at 10:53 PM.
07-11-2013, 12:10 AM   #7
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,921
Original Poster
snostorm, thanks for you inputs.
Your evaluation seems promising, as I was told by a user (who I did not know previously) during one of the local Pentax outings that the combo vignetted badly.
I certainly don't see any of that from your samples, and I might suspect user error from the user who told me about the vignetting.

Hopefully someone has tried out this combo.
The flash sync and small size would be worth it.
07-11-2013, 02:51 AM   #8
Pentaxian
carrrlangas's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Joensuu (Finland)
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,750
Sounds really good

07-11-2013, 09:38 AM   #9
New Member




Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 6
QuoteOriginally posted by pinholecam Quote
snostorm, thanks for you inputs.
Your evaluation seems promising, as I was told by a user (who I did not know previously) during one of the local Pentax outings that the combo vignetted badly.
I certainly don't see any of that from your samples, and I might suspect user error from the user who told me about the vignetting.

Hopefully someone has tried out this combo.
The flash sync and small size would be worth it.
Some samples of the 06 and raynox 250. It doesn't vignette and the combo is very sharp. The flash of the Q is also very usefull with or without a diffusor made of a paper tissue







07-11-2013, 10:03 AM   #10
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
QuoteOriginally posted by pinholecam Quote
I was told by a user (who I did not know previously) during one of the local Pentax outings that the combo vignetted badly.
I certainly don't see any of that from your samples, and I might suspect user error from the user who told me about the vignetting.

Hopefully someone has tried out this combo.
The flash sync and small size would be worth it.
Hi pinholecam,

The difference might be how the diopter was mounted. the Raynox achromats, have a "universal adapter" that fits any filter sizes between 52 and 62mm IIRC, and the user might have used a combination of step up rings to get to this size so he could use the adapter. Extra distance between the lens and diopter might have caused the vignetting. The DCR 250 mounts to its adapter with 43mm male threads, so I mounted it directly with a single 40.5 to 43mm step up which puts it much closer to the lens. The rear element of the Raynox is actually larger than the front element of the 06, and it magnifies, so uses only the central portion of the lens it's mounted on. I never expected vignetting to be a problem.

Flash works as expected with a Q system lens mounted, and the popup doesn't even work up a sweat since the distance is so short. The popup can be used to trigger remote digital optical slaves that fire on the second flash, so much more powerful flash could be possible to take advantage of the very fast shutter sync capabilities of the Q while still maintaining a very small light setup.

Scott
07-11-2013, 10:52 AM   #11
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,684
QuoteOriginally posted by snostorm Quote
The second example is using AF at f5.6 to give an idea of DOF stopped down. Notice that I could not get max magnification -- I just couldn't get the lens to focus closer -- maybe this will come with more ambient light to focus with or more practice. . . I focused on the double line above the "80" for this one.
The reason that focussing closer didn't increase magnification is that the 15-45mm is an internal focus lens. With an IF lens, the focal length decreases more and more as you focus closer than infinity. A diopter gives greater magnification with longer focal lengths. As a result, these two effects fight one another. You're focussing closer, which should increase magnification, but the focal length is dropping, which reduces magnification. With the DA 18-250, the effect is very pronounced. Set for minimum focus and 250mm gives you about half the magnification of 250mm with infinity focus.

QuoteOriginally posted by snostorm Quote
I found both AF and MF with focus peaking easy to use. The field that was in focus was very apparent on the LCD and as I turned the focus ring, I could easily see it move across the frame.

The whole setup is very compact, and though heavy compared to the Q with 01 as I carry it every day, it's very easy to hold and shoot for me.
I'm not a fan of focus peaking for macro. I find that, with FP turned on, and clipping warning activated all the flashing and lights are too confusing. I rely on clip warnings to set exposure, and this is more important to me than FP, especially since I also find Focus Assist (4X magnified view), much more accurate than FP.

I did some tests a while ago by holding a Raynox 250 to the front of the 01 prime and 06 zoom. I have since purchased a 40-43mm step-up adapter which I've used on the 01 prime, but not on the 06 zoom. You mention the weight. The Raynox is a bit of a solid chunk, and the 06 zoom construction is a bit flimsy. I worry that the Raynox on the end could harm the lens, especially since the 06 barrel is always extended in use. I have lots of other macro options, so I don't need to take a chance with the 06 and Raynox.

https://picasaweb.google.com/bonhommed/QMacro?authkey=Gv1sRgCP-ZmZjTy6TtZA#

Last edited by audiobomber; 07-11-2013 at 12:47 PM.
07-11-2013, 12:19 PM   #12
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
The reason that focussing closer didn't increase magnification is that the 15-45mm is an internal focus lens. With an IF lens, the focal length decreases more and more as you focus closer than infinity. A diopter gives greater magnification with longer focal lengths. As a result, these two effects fight one another. You're focussing closer, which should increase magnification, but the focal length is dropping, which reduces magnification. With the DA 18-250, the effect is very pronounced. Set for minimum focus and 250mm gives you about half the magnification of 250mm with infinity focus.
Hi Dan,

That's not the point I was making. Using MF I could get about a 14mm horizontal FOV, with AF, about the best I could do was 16mm -- that's all I was saying

QuoteQuote:
I'm not a fan of focus peaking for macro. I find that, with FP turned on, and clipping warning activated all the flashing and lights are too confusing. I rely on clip warnings to set exposure, and this is more important to me than FP, especially since I also find Focus Assist (4X magnified view), much more accurate than FP.

I did some tests a while ago by holding a Raynox 250 to the front of the 01 prime and 06 zoom. I have since purchased a 40-43mm step-up adapter which I've used on the 01 prime, but not on the 06 zoom. You mention the weight. The Raynox is a bit of a solid chunk, and the 06 zoom construction is a bit flimsy. I worry that the Raynox on the end could harm the lens, especially since the 06 barrel is always extended in use. I have lots of other macro options, so I don't need to take a chance with the 06 and Raynox.
I use FP for both macro and super tele shooting because I want the speed, especially because I mainly shoot handheld and I need the speed. I don't use over/under warnings because I find them too distracting. I also use AF for the bulk of my macro shooting with a DSLR, one of three dedicated macro lenses and the F 1.7x AFA. If I normally shot static subjects from a tripod, I'd use the magnified focus aid, but with handheld shots at both ends of the spectrum (macro and super tele), this is really not practical because of camera shake and the moving subjects I like to shoot. I miss shots because of misfocus, but that's part of the game, and I accept that. With a lot of practice, I get a higher percentage of usable shots my way than with the traditional techniques, and I have a lot more fun and get a lot more satisfaction doing it my way. Different strokes. . .

There's only one case of 06 mechanical failure that I've seen on the forums, and that was brandrx on DPR. He was experimenting with some high end add on TCs on his, and the weights were many times the weight of the DCR 250. Ron was trying his selection of high grade add on TCs with the Q and 06. One of these was the Sony VCL-HGD1758 1.7x which weighs almost 1.5 lbs. He also tried a 5x which looks like a small telescope. Most of the others weighed at least 10 oz. I'm very aware of this because I corresponded with Ron about a lot of the possibilities while he was doing this as I own quite a few of these TCs myself. The Raynox DCR 250 weighs about 2.4 oz. There is really no comparison in the amount of stress put on the lens.

The only external movement in the 06 is the extension to working length since it both focuses and zooms internally. I could be proved wrong, but I'll use this combo for its benefits, without much concern about damaging the lens. If it fails, I'd have been warned, and the fault will be mine -- and I'll buy another 06, this time, lesson learned. This is a valid point though, as adding weight to the end of a lens should be considered, but the circumstance where an actual lens has been damaged was significantly different.

Scott
07-12-2013, 01:30 AM   #13
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,921
Original Poster
@repuik thanks for your samples, they look good.
I'm pretty convinced that its going to do what I intended.

@Scott thanks for all your info and usage tips. I'm sure thy will be very helpful when I get the setup.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, lens, macro, mirrorless, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q10, q7
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
06 Tele Zoom hood clone. . . snostorm Pentax Q 17 06-25-2013 10:13 PM
06 Zoom full-size samples audiobomber Pentax Q 6 05-31-2013 10:44 AM
Q and 06 zoom pbancr Pentax Q 17 03-07-2013 01:57 PM
06 Zoom in Australia Paul Ewins Pentax Q 6 10-20-2012 12:29 PM
New 06 tele zoom barondla Pentax Q 16 09-12-2012 03:55 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:23 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top