Is the original Q/Q10 worth it just for the crop factor?

ZombieArmy · 10-30-2014, 01:17 PM

I've been thinking of getting a Q just for the extreme telephoto effect on the k-mount lenses for mostly astronomy projects. Plus I guess it would be nice to have such a small system for on the go.

I'm just thinking is the crop factor alone worth it for the Q? Or should I hold out for the IQ increase of the Q7?

Adam · 10-30-2014, 01:23 PM

You'd be better off with the Q7 IMO. But when it comes to astrophotography, I think traditional DSLRs are much easier to work work, as the larger sensor size really helps to bring out that detail while keeping noise under control.

ZombieArmy · 10-30-2014, 01:24 PM

Originally posted by Adam

You'd be better off with the Q7 IMO. But when it comes to astrophotography, I think traditional DSLRs are much easier to work work, as the larger sensor size really helps to bring out that detail while keeping noise under control.

The larger sensor only serves as a hindrance in certain situations, such as planetary photography.

murrelet · 10-30-2014, 02:15 PM

Unfortunately it's too cloudy where I live to test. I have a Q and Q7. I will try to test both with a Tele-Takumar 200 mm f/5.6 at a color target this weekend and post to this thread. Hopefully that will give you some idea for your needs.

ZombieArmy · 10-30-2014, 02:49 PM

Originally posted by murrelet

Unfortunately it's too cloudy where I live to test. I have a Q and Q7. I will try to test both with a Tele-Takumar 200 mm f/5.6 at a color target this weekend and post to this thread. Hopefully that will give you some idea for your needs.

Would be great, thanks.

Na Horuk · 10-30-2014, 04:46 PM

You would need to use a tripod that has a rotating rig, so it follows the movement of the stars across the sky. And then you would also have to take dark frame photos for some noise reduction.
Buying the O GPS attachment for your DSLR might be a better choice, and then just crop in post production. But make sure your camera accepts the astrotracking module (the info on the following page might be dated, not sure)
https://www.pentaxforums.com/accessoryreviews/pentax-o-gps1.html

That being said, the Q system is nice and compact and you can always take it with you. This is its main advantage, and its compatibility with K mount via simple adapters is a huge bonus, makes for easy extreme tele and maco

ZombieArmy · 10-30-2014, 05:04 PM

Originally posted by Na Horuk

You would need to use a tripod that has a rotating rig, so it follows the movement of the stars across the sky. And then you would also have to take dark frame photos for some noise reduction.
Buying the O GPS attachment for your DSLR might be a better choice, and then just crop in post production. But make sure your camera accepts the astrotracking module (the info on the following page might be dated, not sure)
Pentax O-GPS1 reviews - Pentax Camera Accessory Review Database

That being said, the Q system is nice and compact and you can always take it with you. This is its main advantage, and its compatibility with K mount via simple adapters is a huge bonus, makes for easy extreme tele and maco

I've been incredibly interested in the O GPS, but I haven't found anything to suggest it works with the k-01.

Na Horuk · 11-01-2014, 09:15 AM

Originally posted by ZombieArmy

but I haven't found anything to suggest it works with the k-01.

wish I could help with that

murrelet · 11-01-2014, 09:42 AM

Here are my test shots with a Tele-Takumar 200 mm f/5.6 at various ISOs. Aperture set at a fixed f/11. Obviously, these are all manually focused. Keep that in mind when judging for sharpness.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/benchan/sets/72157649067206732/

Full size JPEGs are here. I can put the original DNGs there if you want.

https://copy.com/rCjNBayI0K6pok20

Straight out of camera RAW. JPG conversion using Adobe Lightroom 4.4. For Flickr upload, JPG was compressed at 90 and resized to 5 megapixels.

Studio setup
* 2 X 23W 5000K natural daylight CFL
* X-Rite ColorChecker Passport
* Manfrotto 785B Modo Mini Tripod
* Generic IR wireless remote

djseeram · 11-03-2014, 10:14 PM

Originally posted by ZombieArmy

I've been incredibly interested in the O GPS, but I haven't found anything to suggest it works with the k-01.

astrotracker doesn't work with K-01.

**Mikesul** · 11-04-2014, 05:34 AM

Boy, has this thread gone off topic!

hnikesch · 11-05-2014, 08:15 AM

Originally posted by murrelet

Here are my test shots with a Tele-Takumar 200 mm f/5.6 at various ISOs. Aperture set at a fixed f/11. Obviously, these are all manually focused. Keep that in mind when judging for sharpness.

Interesting, I have kept my Q after getting a Q7 just for this reason (additional reach that is) just a point, diffraction at f11 would lower resolution for both cameras and would impact on the results in favor of the Q7

MD Optofonik · 11-05-2014, 08:20 AM

I believe I read somewhere that cropping an APSC frame to match the Q's crop factor was inferior to just using the Q.

**Mikesul** · 11-05-2014, 09:33 AM

Somebody, I think it was crewl1, did a test of the Q vs. Q7 with adapted lens and it showed convincingly that you got better detail by cropping the Q7. The extra range of the original Q did not produce better detail at long range.

**crewl1** · 11-05-2014, 10:42 PM

Yes the Q7 IQ improvements make it an overall better camera than the Q in my opinion if the goal is adapted telephoto use.
It helps if you have a great tele lens to start with. I find the DA*300 to be such a lens. @Pearsaab uses a Sigma 500 4.5 with excellent results also.

10-30-2014, 01:17 PM	#1
ZombieArmy Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Florida Posts: 3,210	Is the original Q/Q10 worth it just for the crop factor? I've been thinking of getting a Q just for the extreme telephoto effect on the k-mount lenses for mostly astronomy projects. Plus I guess it would be nice to have such a small system for on the go. I'm just thinking is the crop factor alone worth it for the Q? Or should I hold out for the IQ increase of the Q7?

10-30-2014, 01:23 PM	#2
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,595	You'd be better off with the Q7 IMO. But when it comes to astrophotography, I think traditional DSLRs are much easier to work work, as the larger sensor size really helps to bring out that detail while keeping noise under control. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

11-05-2014, 08:15 AM	#12
hnikesch Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,316	Originally posted by murrelet Here are my test shots with a Tele-Takumar 200 mm f/5.6 at various ISOs. Aperture set at a fixed f/11. Obviously, these are all manually focused. Keep that in mind when judging for sharpness. Interesting, I have kept my Q after getting a Q7 just for this reason (additional reach that is) just a point, diffraction at f11 would lower resolution for both cameras and would impact on the results in favor of the Q7 Last edited by hnikesch; 11-05-2014 at 03:34 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Is the 01 worth it if you have the 02?	nickhodak6	Pentax Q	29	04-16-2014 12:46 PM
Is it worth it to switch to K-5 II for the sake of ultrasonic dust removal?	rrstuff	Pentax DSLR Discussion	13	12-26-2013 05:53 AM
Do the Q10 and Q7 have a Magnesium Body like the Original Q?	seventhdr	Pentax Q	3	08-06-2013 12:13 AM
What is the crop factor?!	CodyShaw	Pentax Medium Format	19	04-01-2013 09:59 PM
Does the "crop factor" just crop?	jboyde	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	8	01-03-2010 08:18 AM

10-30-2014, 01:24 PM	#3
ZombieArmy Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Florida Posts: 3,210 Original Poster	Originally posted by Adam You'd be better off with the Q7 IMO. But when it comes to astrophotography, I think traditional DSLRs are much easier to work work, as the larger sensor size really helps to bring out that detail while keeping noise under control. The larger sensor only serves as a hindrance in certain situations, such as planetary photography.

10-30-2014, 02:15 PM	#4
murrelet Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Portland, OR, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 506	Unfortunately it's too cloudy where I live to test. I have a Q and Q7. I will try to test both with a Tele-Takumar 200 mm f/5.6 at a color target this weekend and post to this thread. Hopefully that will give you some idea for your needs.

10-30-2014, 02:49 PM	#5
ZombieArmy Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Florida Posts: 3,210 Original Poster	Originally posted by murrelet Unfortunately it's too cloudy where I live to test. I have a Q and Q7. I will try to test both with a Tele-Takumar 200 mm f/5.6 at a color target this weekend and post to this thread. Hopefully that will give you some idea for your needs. Would be great, thanks.

10-30-2014, 04:46 PM	#6
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	You would need to use a tripod that has a rotating rig, so it follows the movement of the stars across the sky. And then you would also have to take dark frame photos for some noise reduction. Buying the O GPS attachment for your DSLR might be a better choice, and then just crop in post production. But make sure your camera accepts the astrotracking module (the info on the following page might be dated, not sure) https://www.pentaxforums.com/accessoryreviews/pentax-o-gps1.html That being said, the Q system is nice and compact and you can always take it with you. This is its main advantage, and its compatibility with K mount via simple adapters is a huge bonus, makes for easy extreme tele and maco

10-30-2014, 05:04 PM	#7
ZombieArmy Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Florida Posts: 3,210 Original Poster	Originally posted by Na Horuk You would need to use a tripod that has a rotating rig, so it follows the movement of the stars across the sky. And then you would also have to take dark frame photos for some noise reduction. Buying the O GPS attachment for your DSLR might be a better choice, and then just crop in post production. But make sure your camera accepts the astrotracking module (the info on the following page might be dated, not sure) Pentax O-GPS1 reviews - Pentax Camera Accessory Review Database That being said, the Q system is nice and compact and you can always take it with you. This is its main advantage, and its compatibility with K mount via simple adapters is a huge bonus, makes for easy extreme tele and maco I've been incredibly interested in the O GPS, but I haven't found anything to suggest it works with the k-01.

11-01-2014, 09:15 AM	#8
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Originally posted by ZombieArmy but I haven't found anything to suggest it works with the k-01. wish I could help with that

11-01-2014, 09:42 AM	#9
murrelet Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Portland, OR, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 506	Here are my test shots with a Tele-Takumar 200 mm f/5.6 at various ISOs. Aperture set at a fixed f/11. Obviously, these are all manually focused. Keep that in mind when judging for sharpness. https://www.flickr.com/photos/benchan/sets/72157649067206732/ Full size JPEGs are here. I can put the original DNGs there if you want. https://copy.com/rCjNBayI0K6pok20 Straight out of camera RAW. JPG conversion using Adobe Lightroom 4.4. For Flickr upload, JPG was compressed at 90 and resized to 5 megapixels. Studio setup * 2 X 23W 5000K natural daylight CFL * X-Rite ColorChecker Passport * Manfrotto 785B Modo Mini Tripod * Generic IR wireless remote

11-03-2014, 10:14 PM	#10
djseeram Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Colorado, USA Posts: 83	Originally posted by ZombieArmy I've been incredibly interested in the O GPS, but I haven't found anything to suggest it works with the k-01. astrotracker doesn't work with K-01.

11-04-2014, 05:34 AM	#11
Mikesul Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 7,594	Boy, has this thread gone off topic!

11-05-2014, 08:20 AM	#13
MD Optofonik Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 962	I believe I read somewhere that cropping an APSC frame to match the Q's crop factor was inferior to just using the Q.

11-05-2014, 09:33 AM	#14
Mikesul Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 7,594	Somebody, I think it was crewl1, did a test of the Q vs. Q7 with adapted lens and it showed convincingly that you got better detail by cropping the Q7. The extra range of the original Q did not produce better detail at long range.

11-05-2014, 10:42 PM	#15
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	Yes the Q7 IQ improvements make it an overall better camera than the Q in my opinion if the goal is adapted telephoto use. It helps if you have a great tele lens to start with. I find the DA*300 to be such a lens. @Pearsaab uses a Sigma 500 4.5 with excellent results also.