[paranoia23]

i'm sorry to rise this again but ... i read through the threads and can't spend the next 3 days do figure out what i wanna know ... sorry :\

i will buy a q and i want to buy and adapter .. i'm also thinking about spending the insane amount of money for the original adapter!!!
BUT .... do i get the thing from the DA* lenses that mounts the adapter to a tripod as a single unit ?! i read that pentax intended to release it, but i dont even know what to search for.

i would buy the fotodiox adapter but as i understand it can't be mounted ... i think i dont need the flash sync features and dont understand the jello effect problem ... so spending one fifth of the money would be great but sensless if u can't mount the thing

so again ... is the plastik ring that mounts the original adapter availible?
or is there another alternative ?!


thanks for not killing me

[Adam]

BUT .... do i get the thing from the DA* lenses that mounts the adapter to a tripod as a single unit ?! i read that pentax intended to release it, but i dont even know what to search for.

It is not included by default. It is available for purchase separately in Japan only at this time.

[Ishpuini]

If you don't want to order the tripod foot from Japan, there's an excellent alternative available from Fanotec.

See the thread in the marketplace: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographic-equipment-sale/231003-sale-...apter-q-k.html

Wim

[paranoia23]

does it only fit onto the original adapter ?!

[LaurenOE]

i'm sorry to rise this again but ... i read through the threads and can't spend the next 3 days do figure out what i wanna know ... sorry :\

i will buy a q and i want to buy and adapter .. i'm also thinking about spending the insane amount of money for the original adapter!!!
BUT .... do i get the thing from the DA* lenses that mounts the adapter to a tripod as a single unit ?! i read that pentax intended to release it, but i dont even know what to search for.

i would buy the fotodiox adapter but as i understand it can't be mounted ... i think i dont need the flash sync features and dont understand the jello effect problem ... so spending one fifth of the money would be great but sensless if u can't mount the thing

so again ... is the plastik ring that mounts the original adapter availible?
or is there another alternative ?!


thanks for not killing me

A couple of things.

Buy the Pentax version of the K to Q adapter as the quality and features are the best.
As for the Tripod foot, the Fanotec one is better and is available through our marketplace here, but if you want the Pentax version, it *is* available on the PentaxWebStore (ugh.)

PentaxWebstore.com:Tripod Mount for DA*300MM/Q Adapter Tripod Mount for DA*300MM/Q Adapter

[paranoia23]

the fanotec looks good ... since i dont own a arca swiss compatible mount ... but i would buy the adapter with the plate to be futureproof ... whats the feature of the different length ?!

[snostorm]

It is not included by default. It is available for purchase separately in Japan only at this time.

I believe you're wrong -- It shows in stock at the Ricoh Imaging Store (or is it still the Pentax Web Store???) online.

PentaxWebstore.com:Tripod Mount for DA*300MM/Q Adapter Tripod Mount for DA*300MM/Q Adapter.

Edit-- Lauren was just too quick. . .

In any case, either this one or the Fanotec (which I have and heartily recommend) linked to above will only fit the Pentax OEM adapter (or a DA* 300 or DA* 60-250 lens). The new style Fotodiox adapter looks to have enough room to mount a tripod ring, but I don't know the diameter or if any of the relatively easily available and inexpensive Canon/Nikon knockoff rings could be easily adapted. crewl1 has one of these, and might have more information.

The jello effect is also called the Rolling Shutter Effect, and shows up when there is horizontal movement while the sensor is still scanning. This problem occurs because CMOS sensors are set up to refresh and scan rows of pixels in sequential order (in the case of the Q, from top to bottom), so any electronic shutter for this type of sensor takes essentially 1/13 sec to complete the scan. This is not to say that the max shutter speed is 1/13, since at 1/8000, each pixel is exposed for the set shutter speed, but there are 3000 rows of pixels that need to scan, one at a time, and a total scan takes about 1/13 sec to finish. I know this is confusing -- try searching for "rolling shutter effect" on the web, and you can read articles that explain the phenomenon. I've read a bunch, and am still confused. . .

Practically, this doesn't occur often when shooting with 3rd party adapters and using the electronic shutter. I've shot thousands of shots of birds and squirrels and have only seen it a few times, but if you try panning to follow a moving subject, you'll most likely see the tilt in the foreground. Instead of just blur, there's a horizontal displacement for every succeeding row, so something that would normally be just blurred with a mechanical shutter CMOS camera will appear tilted, with the lower rows of the image frame displaced in the direction of the panning motion. Also, very fast moving rotating subjects, like airplane and helicopter propellers and rotors will look bowed or at least very odd. Swinging baseball bats will look like they are made of rubber, etc.

I have the Pentax adapter, but still use an early JR adapter if I want the camera to be totally silent. I have no qualms about using the electronic shutter since I shoot mostly subjects that are essentially stationary. It takes a very quick movement to cause the effect, and if it's quick enough to cause jello, it's probably quick enough to cause blur at whatever shutter speed, so in many cases, the shot would have been ruined anyway. I just realize it can happen, and if a shot is ruined by jello, then c'est la vie. . .

Most who have the Pentax adapter probably bought a 3rd party adapter first, then discovered that they needed the leaf shutter in the Pentax adapter for what they were shooting, like macro with flash, sports, race cars or bikes, etc. Since the 3rd party adapters are generally relatively inexpensive, I'd get one of these first, and see if shooting adapted lenses suits you and what you like to shoot. At some point, you'll discover if you need the leaf shutter for a decent portion of the work that you want to do with adapted lenses, and the Pentax adapter, while still expensive, will seem less outrageous.

For me, shooting birds at over 1600mm EQ, I can get "reach" at apertures that I cannot get with my DSLR despite thousands of dollars invested in premium ultra tele lenses, and for shooting macros with flash, the Q and adapted dedicated macro lenses gives me a super lightweight, high apparent magnification kit, so the Pentax adapter was easily perceived by me as a relatively cheap alternative. I'm sure for others, it is perceived as a waste of money. . .

Scott

[paranoia23]

i know what rolling shutter is but i didn't knew that the kq adapter had a shutter innit ... thanks for the advice !!

maybe i really should by a 3rd party adapter first ... i read things about "cant focus to infinity" and "flange focal distance isnt accurate" or whatever the english term is

[hnikesch]

i know what rolling shutter is but i didn't knew that the kq adapter had a shutter innit ... thanks for the advice !!

maybe i really should by a 3rd party adapter first ... i read things about "cant focus to infinity" and "flange focal distance isnt accurate" or whatever the english term is

I have both the Pentax and Fotodiox adapters they do not have a problem with infinity focus, You would be safe with the Fotodiox to start, Like Scott said you will discover if you need the Pentax adapter. As for the tripod mount after you get the latest Fotodiox you can measure the diameter and search for an tripod ring to fit. Larry (crewl1) has one maybe he can measure it or knows what ring to get.

Hans

[crewl1]

Hi paranoia I am out of town at the moment and do not have the fotodiox adapter with me.
There may be a spot where you can attach a third party tripod ring but the overall diameter is smaller than the typical one sold for Canon 70-200.
I will measure it this weekend.
If you have a preferred lens you want to use with the Q you may want to check if a tripod can be attached to it.

[snostorm]

the fanotec looks good ... since i dont own a arca swiss compatible mount ... but i would buy the adapter with the plate to be futureproof ... whats the feature of the different length ?!

Hi paranoia,

IMO, it's a good idea to start with Arca Swiss compatible plates and clamps on the tripod heads since they are the most "universal" for top rated support gear. I started with Manfrotto RC2 QRs because they were the most easily available (with cheaper plates than any of the Arca compatible plates available at the time). Now there are tons of inexpensive heads with Arca clamps (beware of heads with clamps that look like the A/S dovetail, but don't specify they are truly A/S compatible) and very inexpensive, but good Arca compatible plates in all flavors available, mostly from Chinese mfgs. If you ever plan to get something like a gimba head, for example, just about all of them use Arca plates.

The different lengths are for balancing the lens on any head (gimbals especially). Longer, faster tele lenses are very front heavy, so you need a longer plate to properly balance the lens. Balance makes a huge difference in ease of handling, even on a ballhead, when working with long heavy glass. Some users like long plates, even if the length is not really needed for that particular lens, just so they have a convenient handle to carry the lens (or camera/lens combo) by.

Scott

[GibbyTheMole]

I've got the cheap $30 Fotodiox adapter & it works fine. Sure, I'd love to have a mechanical shutter, but I can't justify spending $250 to get it. That's more than I spent on the Q & 02 lens.

I'd try the Fotodiox adapter first. Just make sure you get the one with the aperture control ring. The cheaper $20 version doesn't have the aperture ring and won't work with lenses that don't have their own aperture ring, like the DA lenses. Later, if you decide the shutter is worth it, you can drop $250 on the Pentax adapter.

Good luck & have fun!
Bob :-)

[lifepix1]

FYI: B&H shows Pentax QK adapter for $209

[Lowell Goudge]

i bought the original adapter because I wanted the shutter and other support features. I did not get the tripod foot, but purchased a metal tripod mount for the canon 100/2.8 macro, and lined it with thick leather, so that it could be tightened to the adapter. It works fine for lenses up to about 1 kilo, and allows rotation of the lens, which the pentax foot does not allow. the third party ring cost about $15US

[monochrome]

I got my first Q used for $100 and my 01 for $50. I have almost exclusively K Series manual foucs prime lenses (including the 200/2.5 that weighs almost a kilo), so I spent the money for the OEM K>Q adapter and tripod foot. I'm still in for less than the Q/01 kit was when it was list price.

For my purposes, with the lenses I have, the shutter and tripod foot, extreme over-engineering and general quality of the OEM adapter was worth the money.

YMMV