[wildman]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

I use a 300mm lens primarily and still find it a challenge, I can only imagine what a 560mm scope must bring since now you are shooting at 3080mm effective focal length.

I'll think further on what you said. There are times when I monitor nesting birds at a great distance where the Q might come into it's own.

A rather bad shot of my present birding setup - all I would have to do is replace the K5 with the Q+adapter, simple enough.

---

Last edited by wildman; 10-06-2014 at 04:58 AM.

[crewl1]

I'll think further on what you said. There are times when I monitor nesting birds at a great distance where the Q might come into it's own.

A rather bad shot of my present birding setup - all I would have to do is replace the K5 with the Q+adapter, simple enough.

Looks great, you are all set! Your balance point is going to shift with the Q
I use this loupe to help with focus. it is made for a Nikon 1 so the tripod hole on the bracket needs to be shifted a slightly with Dremel or a file.
LCD Viewfinder Loupes Magnifier Eyecup Extender V5 Hood for Nikon 1 J1 DSLR | eBay

[barondla]

The Pentax Rd10 red dot scope makes a huge difference. 10 seconds would be do able for me with a decent keeper rate. I don't use lcd magnification, or focus peaking when trying to shoot fast moving subjects. no hood lupe either.

What scope do you have? Can you post a pic of it? I use a good size Gitzo tripod with large Arca Swiss ball head. This combo weighs a little more than 10lbs. Crewl1 uses a gimbal head that is designed for tracking moving critters. We both use the Pentax DA*300. It has very quick internal focus. For moving subjects, you will find the Pentax made Q-PK adapter a must have. Using other adapters forces the Q to use it's slow electronic shutter. See Crewl1's post showing the distortion of moving fan blades. All of this makes a difference. Some of my Q friends never got the hang of ultra tele shooting on the Q. Most have. Practice.

The Q is a fun, and mighty camera.
thanks
barondla

You posted a pic of your rig as I was posting. Looks good. Not sure if the draw tube focus would be easy or not. It should focus easier without all the DSLR weight hanging off it.

[wildman]

Not sure if the draw tube focus would be easy or not.

If you are referring to the black part with the set screws between the camera and the back end of the scope that is only for moving focus point in closer and losing infinity focus.
The way it's set up in the pic I was shooting down to about 12 feet. You determine what range you will be shooting at,set it and forget it for the rest of the day. Sometimes I don't use it at all.
It's not really a focus device the way I use it. The focus is done with two knobs on each side of the main body of the scope and can instantly switch between fast and very slow fine focus (1:11).

It was taken close up with a wide angle PS so it makes the K5 appear much larger relative to the rest of the gear then it really is.

[wildman]

These are the types of discussions we have in the reach thread.
Personally, I find assistive devices including a red dot scope for targeting and a loupe for focusing on the magnified image along with a steady tripod very helpful.
I use a 300mm lens primarily and still find it a challenge, I can only imagine what a 560mm scope must bring since now you are shooting at 3080mm effective focal length.
Using the Q with long lenses takes time and a methodical approach.
Active subjects that only stay in one spot for a few seconds is an exercise in frustration, so I stick to static objects or those with focused activity, say feeding or at a nest.
When it all comes together the results can be very satisfying.

OK ordered it with the T mount and K mount (with aperture control) adapters.
I have a lot of reservations about it but for the price of a kit lens why not see what it can do.

I like to think in terms of magnification not FL so I did some calculations:

Assuming that for any given sensor the "normal" FL (neither wide nor tele - a magnification factor of one) for that sensor would be the diagonal of that sensor - In the case of the Q - 7.66mm.
Thus FL/7.66=magnification factor.

So given that I came up with the following at prime focus:
1000mm = 130x (APS-C 36x)
560mm = 73x (APS-C 20x)
500mm = 65x (APS-C 18x)
300mm = 39x
200mm = 26x
100mm = 13x
50mm = 6.5x
35mm = 4.57x
18mm = 2.35x

I have all these FLs so I should be able to find something that works.
BTW under actual use I have found the 1000mm with the K5 at 36x, about ideal for small birds but of course impractical for field use.
So maybe with the Q and about a 275mm glass I should be good to go.

Time will tell and in any case it should be fun just fussing about with the Q.
Thanks everyone for the help it's been very useful.

Wildman

[wildman]

It'll be interesting to see your results. I've found the Q more useful for macro than tele work - the camera is just so small and light and the photosites so small (not to mention the other considerations discussed above) thatstability and sharpness have been very tough to come by. However, you might be able to overcome this with a nice solid gimble-headed tripod like the one pictured.

BTW, nice Leica binocs...

Interesting thought.
I have the Sigma 105 macro - the old one with it's own aperture ring so it should be ideal with the Q.


The Bins are my Wife's. She got them in about 1992. They have been to the deserts of N. Africa, the Danube delta in Romania, Far Eastern Siberia, the Amazon Rainforest etc etc and they have never missed a beat. They are 8x32s. She also has a pair of Zeiss classic 7x42s (the ones that look like Rommel's tank commanders had in N. Africa). She favors the Zeiss for it's wide FOV, sharpness, brightness and easy view. The Zeiss are just better for birding but the Leicas are sealed and smaller and that can make all the difference depending upon where you are going.

As soon as I get up and running with the Q I'll post some pics when I get something decent.

[wildman]

Just got the q to T mount adapter. Fits well and seems tight without to much resistance.

My first clumsy attempts with the Q and the 560mm at about 60 feet (about 70x mag).
Didn't use remote just shot in burst mode by hand.

---

Last edited by wildman; 10-10-2014 at 06:07 AM.

[crewl1]

Just got the q to T mount adapter. Fits well and seems tight without to much resistance.

My first clumsy attempts with the Q and the 560mm at about 60 feet (about 70x mag).
Didn't use remote just shot in burst mode by hand.

Great results.
One thing I've found is the Q meter tends to run a little over exposed so I run in manual and look for a slight - ev.
This lets me use a slightly faster shutter than the camera would choose on its own.

[wildman]

Q and the 560mm at about 80? feet - I was just sitting at my kitchen table with the glass removed from the storm door drinking coffee.
So far I've found it best just to go to full manual mode unlike the k5 which is best at Av.
It's really hit or miss with this sucker. Will take some real skill to master this little beast. Damn it's hard on batteries after I turned off power saver.
To bad it's so slow in RAW - that little sensor needs all the help it can get.

Time will tell