Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-14-2014, 08:33 AM   #31
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
QuoteOriginally posted by pinholecam Quote
I replied this on another discussion. For me.... With a native lens with built in shutter. The following are possible : 1. Wide open operation even for aperture settings smaller than that (useful to get a clear image on the LCD). On the current adapters, the adapted lenses have closed apertures (often f8 for macro) and the LCD gains up, resulting in a noisy LCD image for focusing. 2. Easy daytime macro shooting with 1/250 external flash and 1/1000 internal flash sync speeds (that internal flash can also trigger external flash like the YN560II in S2 mode) 3. PTTL for the macros 4. Much lighter macro setup for hand holding 5. Maybe AF will be possible
Thanks!

QuoteOriginally posted by geomez Quote
Couldn't the same be said for the 06 telephoto zoom? I think Pentax would like to have a complete kit without the need for adapters. Also a complete kit offers more enticing and straight forward options for non-Pentaxians that may not already have a bunch of K mount glass.
Makes sense!

QuoteOriginally posted by lister6520 Quote
One of the big disadvantages of using adapted lenses on the Q series is that you lose the mechanical shutter (which exists only in the lenses) and have to use the lecetronic shutter instead which has some significant limitations such as 1/13 max sync speed for flash and 2 seconds slowest shutter speed. Flash operation is also crippled when using non Q lenses - a non-PTTL flash just won't work at all. The electronic shutter issue is of course something that cannot be fixed in firmware but the weird behaviour of manual flashes when using adapted lenses can and should be fixed ASAP in firmware,
The OEM adapter has a leaf shutter, I agree this is a problem for other adapters.

QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Image quality. I don't consider adapted lenses to have the same image quality as the 01 Q lens. Even with the Pentax shuttered adapter and DFA 100 macro. The only exception I have ran into, is the Pentax DA*300. A macro lens designed for the Q format should have killer IQ and may be the only Q lens to beat the 01. thanks barondla
The DFA100 I think does well for macro purposes, maybe not so good for standard use (purple edges are common.)

You've all given me something to think about - I am starting to get it now. Thanks!

02-14-2014, 10:06 AM   #32
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Montréal QC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,870
Sorry for the perhaps obvious question, but does the Pentax OEM K to Q adapter with a leaf shutter allow for wide open (manual) focusing, with the aperture only closing when you actually take the shot? Or are you stuck with stop-down focusing even with the OEM adapter?
02-14-2014, 10:37 AM   #33
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
QuoteOriginally posted by Doundounba Quote
Sorry for the perhaps obvious question, but does the Pentax OEM K to Q adapter with a leaf shutter allow for wide open (manual) focusing, with the aperture only closing when you actually take the shot? Or are you stuck with stop-down focusing even with the OEM adapter?
The aperture setting is manual on the adapter, so you could conceivably leave it wide open to focus then stop it down before you took the shot.
Depending on your application this may be a tedious task.
With the Q the lcd auto-gains the display so relative brightness is kept the same even if you stop down.
The Q has a point where diffraction sets in earlier than a larger sensor camera, so beyond f8 it could result in less sharp pictures.
02-14-2014, 05:09 PM   #34
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 22
some more photos from impress watch jp




02-14-2014, 05:16 PM   #35
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,612
All the important stuff is taped over!!
02-14-2014, 05:35 PM   #36
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
geomez's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Preskitt Arizona
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,696
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
All the important stuff is taped over!!
Seriously. I can only imaging the reason is because they haven't yet settled on specs.
02-14-2014, 09:59 PM   #37
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Montréal QC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,870
Yeah, the coded message seems to be: we're working on this lens, we might eventually release it, but please don't expect it any time soon...
02-14-2014, 10:43 PM   #38
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 188
QuoteOriginally posted by JanG Quote
And your comparison tells us exactly what? - Uhm, nothing?
There are lots of cheap and simple P&S cameras out there offering close up modes which are not that bad - just as a free add on feature of there lousy zooms. And you do not believe this (f/1.2 or f/1.4) was possible with a dedicated (and expensive) lens? Any substantial input beyond "ridiculous"?

show me the 1:1 p&s

have u ever seen a marcro lens ... faster then its "normal" (in this case the 01) prime counterpart?

i argue with reason ... you dream without any knowledge whatsoever ... kommaklar

02-15-2014, 01:14 AM   #39
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Berlin, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 151
QuoteOriginally posted by paranoia23 Quote
show me the 1:1 p&s

have u ever seen a marcro lens ... faster then its "normal" (in this case the 01) prime counterpart?

i argue with reason ... you dream without any knowledge whatsoever ... kommaklar
Thanks for your insults, indeed.
You have funny conceptions. What is the "normal" counterpart of a macro, please? Why should it be the 01?
And you do not argue at all. You are just claiming.
Any physical or engineering background to your claims?

Last edited by JanG; 02-15-2014 at 01:22 AM.
02-15-2014, 02:51 AM   #40
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Norway
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 385
Of course the specification is settled :-) They are taping this information because they don't want to give away this information to the competition.
02-15-2014, 04:12 AM   #41
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,612
QuoteOriginally posted by JanG Quote
What is the "normal" counterpart of a macro, please? Why should it be the 01?
FA50/2.8 Macro
FA50/1.7 (flat work)
FA50/1.4 (center sharpness)
02-15-2014, 04:18 AM   #42
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 364
QuoteOriginally posted by StigVidar Quote
Of course the specification is settled :-) ?... they don't want to give away this information to the competition.
Competiors in the Q-lens business? Now you made me Qurious.
02-15-2014, 04:26 AM   #43
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,816
I would be very surprised (but delighted) if this lens has a maximum aperture wider than f/2.8
True 1:1 (at the sensor) would be incredible - that would require extremely close focussing for a 20ish mm lens and would result in something like 5:1 with the Q's crop factor.
02-15-2014, 04:59 AM   #44
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 188
QuoteOriginally posted by JanG Quote
Thanks for your insults, indeed.
You have funny conceptions. What is the "normal" counterpart of a macro, please? Why should it be the 01?
And you do not argue at all. You are just claiming.
Any physical or engineering background to your claims?
stop begging for the insults
i got both backgrounds .. whats your reference ?!
do you have any understanding of physics or engineering at all ?!
02-15-2014, 06:02 AM   #45
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Berlin, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 151
QuoteOriginally posted by paranoia23 Quote
stop begging for the insults
i got both backgrounds .. whats your reference ?!
do you have any understanding of physics or engineering at all ?!
I should not have started a discussion with somebody of your user name... :-(
My fault.
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, cp, cp+, macro, mirrorless, model, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q10, q7, tele macro, telephoto, telephoto macro
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CP+ - Q Body Cap Lens Docrwm Pentax Q 28 02-03-2013 12:07 PM
Q Telephoto, DA 18-270, DFA 90mm Macro Leaked JPT Pentax News and Rumors 79 09-10-2012 01:53 PM
Prince Harry's Naked Ass to be shown in Sun Newspaper ihasa General Talk 5 08-24-2012 08:24 PM
Pentax 560mm F5.6 to be WR - CP+ Photos of front and back Adam Pentax News and Rumors 92 02-18-2012 06:45 AM
DA 50mm, DA 560mm, D-FA 645 90mm to be revealed at CP+ Adam Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 56 02-10-2012 08:56 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:58 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