Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-16-2013, 12:55 AM   #16
Pentaxian
geomez's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Preskitt Arizona
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,612
QuoteOriginally posted by RobA_Oz Quote
Not all of us wear cargo pants, you know. Some of us like to carry their Qs in shirt pockets, or light jacket pockets. Even with the 01 lens mounted, that makes for a bulky package. Every now and then, it'd be nice to be able to take the Q out of your pocket and just use it like a p&s, which you can't do if you're carrying the body (with plain cap) in one pocket, and the lens(es) in the other, as I do.
I agree. Personally I'd spend $70 on a cheap P&S or just use my phone (free) if I wanted something that could fit in a tight pocket. Both options will garner much better image quality, and with a P&S at the same price, you might even get a zoom lens built in.
I feel like more people would buy this lens or at least take it seriously if it were twice the thickness and had more elements, MF, and better IQ like the Olympus body cap lens. A body cap lens twice the thickness would still be far more pocketable than having any of the other Q lenses mounted. Pentax could have gone that route but unfortunately I think they were going for a headline grabber like "worlds smallest and thinnest interchangeable lens", instead of something to be taken seriously.

07-16-2013, 07:42 AM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,983
I wonder whether the lens is something cobbled out from a different device or just leftovers from long-outmoded smartphone supplies.
07-16-2013, 07:59 AM   #18
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,252
This will be interesting. Probably channeling the 60's Instamatic picture look. Must sell well in Japan since Olympus had one first.

I wish they would come out with a serious 40 Limited pancake equivalent. With AF, adjustable aperture, etc. Maybe the wide will do it (different field of view, of course). Basically a flat Q, with KILLER image Quality, would be so special. Hope the Mount ShHield lens doen't detract from this.
thanks
barondla
07-16-2013, 08:00 AM   #19
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
This will be interesting. Probably channeling the 60's Instamatic picture look. Must sell well in Japan since Olympus had one first.

I wish they would come out with a serious 40 Limited pancake equivalent. With AF, adjustable aperture, etc. Maybe the wide will do it (different field of view, of course). Basically a flat Q, with KILLER image Quality, would be so special. Hope the Mount ShHield lens doen't detract from this.
thanks
barondla
That would be nice but even something that emulates the Oly lens would be welcome.

07-16-2013, 08:55 AM - 2 Likes   #20
Loyal Site Supporter
drougge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Malmö
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 787
QuoteOriginally posted by RobA_Oz Quote
Not all of us wear cargo pants, you know. Some of us like to carry their Qs in shirt pockets, or light jacket pockets. Even with the 01 lens mounted, that makes for a bulky package. Every now and then, it'd be nice to be able to take the Q out of your pocket and just use it like a p&s, which you can't do if you're carrying the body (with plain cap) in one pocket, and the lens(es) in the other, as I do. That's why they bothered to do this. And how do you know how much time and effort Pentax put into developing this? If the verdict is correct, the answer may well be: "Not very much". I think I'll wait for a few user reviews before passing judgment. The Q's previously been well and truly worked over by several people in PF who didn't appreciate its value, along with some other products, like the DA18-135, for example. Need I say more?
If you don't mind making it yourself, making a hole in a body cap (one that latches on, not the crap they give you with the camera) and gluing a thin CS lens to it gives better images than this, and is quite a bit thinner than the 01. A bit thinner than the 05 (toy tele) too.



The one on the left is 2.8mm f/2. Cheap enough to use as a body cap lens too. (Around $6 IIRC.) It doesn't quite cover the sensor, but works well in square format. Here's a shot with it:



Ok, maybe "well" was overstating it. At least it has adjustable focus. (And at 2.8mm you have a much easier time of using it hyperfocal.)
07-16-2013, 09:00 AM   #21
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,983
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
I wish they would come out with a serious 40 Limited pancake equivalent. With AF, adjustable aperture, etc. Maybe the wide will do it (different field of view, of course). Basically a flat Q, with KILLER image Quality, would be so special. /snip/. thanks barondla
We are well and truly lunatics, but I agree.
07-16-2013, 06:25 PM   #22
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 29
Thanks for saving me $79, er eh the review. Maybe I can get one of those Olympus body cap lenses and cut the mount down to fit.
07-16-2013, 06:29 PM   #23
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by lenshoarder Quote
Thanks for saving me $79, er eh the review. Maybe I can get one of those Olympus body cap lenses and cut the mount down to fit.
I'll pay you $79 for one!

07-16-2013, 06:57 PM   #24
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,868
I don't get it, but since youngsters are having fun with Fuji Instax, it might appeal with the throw away generation.

I'd rather they focus on modifying their cctv lenses to the Q7 since its more 'forgiving' now with the looser pixel pitch.
07-16-2013, 07:09 PM   #25
Pentaxian
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,264
QuoteOriginally posted by drougge Quote
If you don't mind making it yourself, making a hole in a body cap (one that latches on, not the crap they give you with the camera) and gluing a thin CS lens to it gives better images than this, and is quite a bit thinner than the 01. A bit thinner than the 05 (toy tele) too.



The one on the left is 2.8mm f/2. Cheap enough to use as a body cap lens too. (Around $6 IIRC.) It doesn't quite cover the sensor, but works well in square format. Here's a shot with it:



Ok, maybe "well" was overstating it. At least it has adjustable focus. (And at 2.8mm you have a much easier time of using it hyperfocal.)
Nice! I'd be equally happy with the folding front lens grafted off myMinox 35, but that'd be more of a challenge! Come to think of it, the viewfinder would be good, too...
07-20-2013, 05:42 AM   #26
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,248
QuoteOriginally posted by drougge Quote
If you don't mind making it yourself,
Great Idea, I was thinking the same thing. My 2.5mm CS lens is too large but I like the look of your 2.8mm, can you PM me or post the lens info. I altered a D adapter, it's metal and I think that would work for your 2.8 also

Hans
07-20-2013, 11:43 AM   #27
Pentaxian
Cambo's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 846
Nice!

QuoteOriginally posted by scratchpaddy Quote
Whatever, it ain't got nothin' on my TP Special!



You want the worst lens ever, I can beat you every time.
You should send some of your lens design work to Sigma...they need some help on their build quality...



Beautiful, man!

Cheers,
Cameron
07-25-2013, 01:39 PM   #28
Loyal Site Supporter
drougge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Malmö
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 787
QuoteOriginally posted by hnikesch Quote
Great Idea, I was thinking the same thing. My 2.5mm CS lens is too large but I like the look of your 2.8mm, can you PM me or post the lens info. I altered a D adapter, it's metal and I think that would work for your 2.8 also
The lens is actually a "board mount" lens (M-12?) in a CS adapter. This is better than just buying such a lens, because you can glue the adapter somewhere and still focus. (Such lenses are not made to focus.) Of course using a metal mount should be better (or at least no worse).

Another fine feature with lenses like these is that they don't really target the discerning consumer, so you might not get the same lens as me just because it looks the same and is labeled the same. And it will certainly be sold under several different names. It was called 1/3" F2.0 2.8mm CS Lens for CCTV Box Camera 110 Degree when I bought it.
07-25-2013, 02:12 PM   #29
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,440
QuoteOriginally posted by drougge Quote
If you don't mind making it yourself, making a hole in a body cap (one that latches on, not the crap they give you with the camera) and gluing a thin CS lens to it gives better images than this, and is quite a bit thinner than the 01. A bit thinner than the 05 (toy tele) too.



The one on the left is 2.8mm f/2. Cheap enough to use as a body cap lens too. (Around $6 IIRC.) It doesn't quite cover the sensor, but works well in square format. Here's a shot with it:



Ok, maybe "well" was overstating it. At least it has adjustable focus. (And at 2.8mm you have a much easier time of using it hyperfocal.)
You should start glueing and selling a bunch, there should be a market for it!
07-25-2013, 05:22 PM   #30
Pentaxian
hnikesch's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,248
QuoteOriginally posted by drougge Quote
The lens is actually a "board mount" lens (M-12?) in a CS adapter. This is better than just buying such a lens, because you can glue the adapter somewhere and still focus. (Such lenses are not made to focus.) Of course using a metal mount should be better (or at least no worse).

Another fine feature with lenses like these is that they don't really target the discerning consumer, so you might not get the same lens as me just because it looks the same and is labeled the same. And it will certainly be sold under several different names. It was called 1/3" F2.0 2.8mm CS Lens for CCTV Box Camera 110 Degree when I bought it.
Thanks I found one on ebay that looks like yours, also 2.8mm f2, got my D mount adapter today, I plan on opening the thread up to fit the lens when it arrives. Then I too will almost have a body cap lens but for under $20

Hans
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, 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
For Sale - Sold: Pentax-Q body ,04 Toy Lens Wide Sliver-Surfer Sold Items 7 05-12-2013 08:04 AM
CP+ - Q Body Cap Lens Docrwm Pentax Q 28 02-03-2013 12:07 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax 67II body, body cap,strap, Wood handle amusingmia Sold Items 3 03-25-2012 03:15 PM
For Sale - Sold: (reduce Price)pentax da 55-300 ed lens.with end cap,rear cap and hood jon pafford Sold Items 2 11-12-2011 06:56 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:51 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