[ephophex]

In my particular case, I had an interest in fast, long, compact telephoto lenses for concert photography. So I now have access to a 391mm f/1.4, and a tiny 322mm f/2.4 by virtue of owning a Rokinon 85mm and the DA 70mm. Those two are hard to beat with anything on the market right now...

[oscaletrains]

Good to hear that you found something of interest on my WEB page. Using the Q series camera's for our type of model shooting is almost opposite what most photographers are doing. We get in close and expect to have a good depth of field. We care more about the smallest aperture than the largest and our shots are seldom done at anything less than the smallest aperture.

Though I have been a Pentax user since the mid 1970's I actually discovered the Q series when I was doing research on that small Crystar camera I showed in my 07/07/2014 blog. While I experimented with the original Q, and it performed well, I immediately updated to the Q10 and in the 07/16/2014 blog you saw some of the images I took with it in existing light conditions. For all of those shots I used the same settings as I described in my Photographing Models page. I have again upgraded, this time to a a Q7 and it gives better detail. You should get some fantastic shots of your O scale equipment and I look forward to seeing some.
Denny

I will probably get a Q7 when the price comes down far enough I can resist, but I am perfectly happy with the Q and the 10 for now. Shot a few through the just acquired jfinance adapter last night with a SMC 50mm macro to see how it worked. First impression was that I need a tripod because hand held is a little iffy. I have lots of lenses try on it yet though.

My first Pentax was a ME Super SE in the very early 80's, then a K1000 to try to learn manual, been a Pentax fan ever since.

I am mainly an O Scale builder, painter, etc...brass engine kits, freight cars, whatever. I don't have the artistic talent it takes to make scenery.

[oscaletrains]

Ok, this is the Q quick and dirty on the floor...


1) 01 Prime as close as I could focus on it.
2) Jfinance adapter / SMC 50 f/2 at f/8 far focus
3) Jfinance adapter / SMC 50 f/2 at f/8 as close as I could focus
4) Jfinance adapter / Panagor Macro Converter / SMC 50 f/2 at f/8 as far as close as I could focus


And that's not even a macro lens yet!

---------- Post added 07-31-14 at 04:52 PM ----------

Ooops, I screwed up, that was a SMC 50 f1.4 lens, not a f2...

[monochrome]

You have such a beautiful model !!

[oscaletrains]

You have such a beautiful model !!

It's not female though...

[monochrome]

Yeah, she'd be cold as ice. Better if she was 1:1 Scale, too.

[pinholecam]

Adapted lenses?

For these, without a need to crop or to crop just a little bit to get even 'nearer'
No need to hassle with some clunky clip on adapter that limits focus distance.

[jethro10]

Ok, I understand a bit more now.
I've never been one to do what, 'arty' photos, all I've ever wanted were better memories from places I go, this has probably all passed me by.
I certainly see the macro bit though with the bigger depth of field, it's got my wife interested!
J

[Biro]

I sold off my original Q along with the 01, 02 and 06 lenses earlier this year. Although I really liked it, it was never my first choice for anything. However, I've hung onto my Q-to-K converter just in case I have a change of heart. I could see picking up either a Q7 body on closeout or perhaps the new Q-S1 to get back into just the kind of photography seen above. But I'd probably limit my actual Q-mount lenses to the 01 prime this time around.

[oscaletrains]

So when do the Q7 fire sales start???

[oscaletrains]

A little dark, need to put the ring light on it, but photo 1 is Jfinance adapter and SMC M 50mm macro at f/8 focused as far focused as possible (about 10' distance) but not focused very well, photo 2 is the same near focused as close as possible (about 4"), and photo 3 is with the Panagor macro converter added which moved out the working distance to about 6" away but greatly magnified the image. I don't know what the magnification is, but that rivet in photo 3 is about .040" diameter.


Nope, I looked and my photo 1 is perfectly focused on my computer screen, but when I upload it, it changed to out of focus...why?

[CWRailman]

IMHO You do not need more light. You need much longer exposures. Your exposure on the last photo was about 1/8. When I take such shots my exposures are between 1/2 and 2.5 seconds at f8 with some requiring as much as 4 seconds at f32 (with the K-5) depending on the lighting conditions. Of course using the self timer and AV settings with the lens set to the smallest aperture. The shot of the HO scale Drovers Caboose I recently posted in the https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/172196-lets-share-shots-q-269.html thread was captured with a 1/2 second exposure at f8 and that model was about 20 inches away from the overhead ambient light source.

I took the liberty of applying some basic brightening to your image which would represent a longer exposure.

Denny

[oscaletrains]

IMHO You do not need more light. You need much longer exposures. Your exposure on the last photo was about 1/8. When I take such shots my exposures are between 1/2 and 2.5 seconds at f8 with some requiring as much as 4 seconds at f32 (with the K-5) depending on the lighting conditions. Of course using the self timer and AV settings with the lens set to the smallest aperture. The shot of the HO scale Drovers Caboose I recently posted in the https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/136-pentax-q/172196-lets-share-shots-q-269.html thread was captured with a 1/2 second exposure at f8 and that model was about 20 inches away from the overhead ambient light source.

Denny

Yep, you are right, that would work too. I still don't understand why the 1st photo goes blurry on upload, that's pretty strange.

Another thing I thought of about your original question as to why so much interest in putting odd lenses on the Q is that for me, once I got a K100 and a K10, other than the occasional M 100 macro going on the K10, all my other lenses just sat doing nothing. Some of them I even had stored away, probably never to need or want to use them again. The Q has given them a new lease on life so to speak and it is great to get them out after years and years and play with them again.

[CWRailman]

The same happened to me. Those old K lenses became dust collectors. However that was because while all my full bodied Pentax camera’s could use the old K series lenses that I owned, in testing I found that those old lenses could not produce the sharpness I was looking to get and in most respects were not as good as the kit lens that came with my first DSLR’s.

Denny

[oscaletrains]

The same happened to me. Those old K lenses became dust collectors. However that was because while all my full bodied Pentax camera’s could use the old K series lenses that I owned, in testing I found that those old lenses could not produce the sharpness I was looking to get and in most respects were not as good as the kit lens that came with my first DSLR’s.

Denny

At least you tried to use them, I just put them away, except for the prime macros, and hardly ever used them either because of the hassle of setting the camera up for that and then setting it back after. This way, my wife can use the Q10 to her hearts content, I can set up the Q for manual lenses and leave it that way. Now I bet the K10 and K100 sit much of the time...