Pentax Adapter Q for K-mount Lenses - is really worth it? ($200)

lytrytyr · 07-16-2018, 07:12 AM

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.

Originally posted by clickclick

I have a K3II and a suite of nice lenses to go with it, including the DFA 150-450. So, am I just wasting $200 bucks to buy one of these adapters to mount one of these lenses, or is this something I must have given that I already have these lenses?

Can you get a good 450mm x 4.44 = 2000mm equivalent lens for $200 any other way?

Fenwoodian · 07-16-2018, 08:39 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by lytrytyr

Can you get a good 450mm x 4.44 = 2000mm equivalent lens for $200 any other way?

.
A Q camera, adapter, red dot scope, and a telephoto lens are lots of fun to play with. This set up is a novelty, a toy - but it's not any good for serious photography.

I've spent hours with such a set up shooting waterfowl on the water. Used an expensive tripod and great technique. Didn't get a single image worthy of keeping. On none of the images did I get a sharp eye, or feather details - something I regularly get with a good telephoto lens on my APS-C sized cameras.

So, because of the disappointing results, I sold my K to Q adapter and put the "red dot scope" back on my Browning BPS 12-gauge shotgun.

**clickclick** · 07-16-2018, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by pearsaab

I now use a gimbal and I don't use the red dot scope

I had been thinking of a gimbal prior to the Q-S1, so perhaps this should go on the list too. What brand/model did you choose? I also shoot, so I have a red dot sight on hand I can pull off one of my other toys, but you say you don't use it anymore. Any particular feelings good/bad about that setup? Do you have a favorite rail you'd recommend for mounting the sight on the Q-S!? I'm assuming someone makes a Weaver compatible mount.

reh321 · 07-16-2018, 09:51 AM

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

.
A Q camera, adapter, red dot scope, and a telephoto lens are lots of fun to play with. This set up is a novelty, a toy - but it's not any good for serious photography.

I've spent hours with such a set up shooting waterfowl on the water. Used an expensive tripod and great technique. Didn't get a single image worthy of keeping. On none of the images did I get a sharp eye, or feather details - something I regularly get with a good telephoto lens on my APS-C sized cameras.

So, because of the disappointing results, I sold my K to Q adapter and put the "red dot scope" back on my Browning BPS 12-gauge shotgun.

If you demand absolute perfection, and have the $$$$, then a "Q" will seldom satisfy you. But my entire birding kit plus my K-30 kit, cost much much less than a 560mm. My birding kit is not a toy; here is a picture of an insect that was so tiny that with naked eye I could just barely detect it - in fact, my wife didn't know what I was talking about what I asked her - but the Sigma 70-30mm mounted on my Q-7 via the a Pentax adapter I got an entirely reasonable picture, more than enough to identify it.

**clickclick** · 07-16-2018, 10:01 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

A Q camera, adapter, red dot scope, and a telephoto lens are lots of fun to play with. This set up is a novelty, a toy - but it's not any good for serious photography.

Thanks for your sanity input too. I may plunge down this path to check it out, satisfy some more GAS requirements, and also to have it for "the collection". Given I have the a6000 as a modern mirrorless, one could certainly argue I'm gong nowhere with the Q-S1 anyway, but the kid in me loves to play, and I've found the whole Q series very intriguing. Having expectations in line with reality is always a good thing, so if I grab this adapter (probably will), I won't expect it to outpeform my DFA 150-450 on the K3II. It strikes me like my Takumar 500. It's a neat lens, and I'm happy to have it, but the realiity is I when the Blue Angels came to town for commencement a few months ago, I grabbed the 150-450. So, I will do my best to keep my expectations in line with reality.

reh321 · 07-16-2018, 10:34 AM

Originally posted by clickclick

Thanks for your sanity input too. I may plunge down this path to check it out, satisfy some more GAS requirements, and also to have it for "the collection". Given I have the a6000 as a modern mirrorless, one could certainly argue I'm gong nowhere with the Q-S1 anyway, but the kid in me loves to play, and I've found the whole Q series very intriguing. Having expectations in line with reality is always a good thing, so if I grab this adapter (probably will), I won't expect it to outpeform my DFA 150-450 on the K3II. It strikes me like my Takumar 500. It's a neat lens, and I'm happy to have it, but the realiity is I when the Blue Angels came to town for commencement a few months ago, I grabbed the 150-450. So, I will do my best to keep my expectations in line with reality.

Trying to photograph serious motion with the "Q" is probably a waste of time - manual focus is hard if the proper focus is continually changing.

**boriscleto** · 07-16-2018, 10:36 AM - **1 Like**

Don't buy the tripod foot from a US seller. They'll charge you like $90...Get it from eBay...

Camera Genuine Pentax Tripod Mount For K-Mount & Adapter Q 38100 MA 4549212218385 | eBay

Last edited by monochrome; 07-17-2018 at 09:14 AM.

reh321 · 07-16-2018, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by clickclick

I have a red dot sight on hand I can pull off one of my other toys, but you say you don't use it anymore. Any particular feelings good/bad about that setup?

I don't use "red dot" either. In days of film I learned to get general composition zoomed out and then zoom in for final focus and composition. That was easier in days of parafocal lenses, but I still do it today.

**clickclick** · 07-16-2018, 10:53 AM

Originally posted by boriscleto

Don't buy the tripod foot from a US seller. They'll charge you like $90...Get it from eBay...

Thanks for the pointer. I'm hoping based on the review her at PF that the foot from my 60-250 will work.

normhead · 07-16-2018, 10:56 AM - **1 Like**

I have one, I never use it. I bought it for use with the Q and my DA* 60-250 which is actually pretty nice set up.... and I bought the thing that attaches to the back of the Q to turn the back screen into a viewfinder, but, we just never use it.

reh321 · 07-16-2018, 11:01 AM

Originally posted by normhead

I have one, I never use it. I bought it for use with the Q and my DA* 60-250 which is actually pretty nice set up.... and I bought the thing that attaches to the back of the Q to turn the back screen into a viewfinder, but, we just never use it.

I find my Hoodman clone to be essential - only with it can I see well enough to focus.

Fenwoodian · 07-16-2018, 11:03 AM

Originally posted by reh321

If you demand absolute perfection, and have the $$$$, then a "Q" will seldom satisfy you. But my entire birding kit plus my K-30 kit, cost much much less than a 560mm. My birding kit is not a toy; here is a picture of an insect that was so tiny that with naked eye I could just barely detect it - in fact, my wife didn't know what I was talking about what I asked her - but the Sigma 70-30mm mounted on my Q-7 via the a Pentax adapter I got an entirely reasonable picture, more than enough to identify it.

.

One photographer's "reasonable picture" is another photographers' "not good enough" image. I guess that it all comes down to one's standards of acceptability.

A friend of mine showed me a photo that she was proud of. It was an empty field with a distant black blob. Well, it turns out the indistinguishable blob was a bear. She considered it to be a reasonable photo, to me, it was not good enough.

**pearsaab** · 07-16-2018, 12:45 PM

Originally posted by clickclick

I had been thinking of a gimbal prior to the Q-S1, so perhaps this should go on the list too. What brand/model did you choose? I also shoot, so I have a red dot sight on hand I can pull off one of my other toys, but you say you don't use it anymore. Any particular feelings good/bad about that setup? Do you have a favorite rail you'd recommend for mounting the sight on the Q-S!? I'm assuming someone makes a Weaver compatible mount.

I have a Wimberley wh200 and appropriate plate but I have a 500mm lens on it..you may not need the fire power depending on what you use. I use the red dot for a while but found I could find what I was looking for without it and the birds seemed to notice it when I was using it and they flew away

Sandy Hancock · 07-16-2018, 03:38 PM - **3 Likes**

I agree the image quality with adapted telephotos on the Q is lower than that achievable with a high quality super telephoto on a larger format, but sometimes the latter option is simply not available.

Case in point: you're not allowed to take "real" cameras into Adelaide Oval. With the Q7 and 01 lens proudly hung over my shoulder and the DFA100WR and adaptor stashed discretely in a small bag I was able to get shots like this from halfway up in the grandstand.

Ashes day 3

Sure, it won't make the cover of Sports Illustrated, but you won't do much better without a press pass.

lytrytyr · 07-16-2018, 03:46 PM

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

A Q camera, adapter, red dot scope, and a telephoto lens are lots of fun to play with.
I've spent hours with such a set up shooting waterfowl on the water. Used an expensive tripod and great technique. Didn't get a single image worthy of keeping. On none of the images did I get a sharp eye, or feather details - something I regularly get with a good telephoto lens on my APS-C sized cameras.

Which "Q camera" and lens were you using?

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

This set up is a novelty, a toy - but it's not any good for serious photography.

That's what they used to say about the Leica.

Originally posted by Fenwoodian

So, because of the disappointing results, I sold my K to Q adapter and put the "red dot scope" back on my Browning BPS 12-gauge shotgun.

No wonder the birds won't let you get close. Their facial recognition can be pretty good, you know!

07-16-2018, 08:39 AM - 1 Like	#17
Fenwoodian Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,874	Originally posted by lytrytyr Can you get a good 450mm x 4.44 = 2000mm equivalent lens for $200 any other way? . A Q camera, adapter, red dot scope, and a telephoto lens are lots of fun to play with. This set up is a novelty, a toy - but it's not any good for serious photography. I've spent hours with such a set up shooting waterfowl on the water. Used an expensive tripod and great technique. Didn't get a single image worthy of keeping. On none of the images did I get a sharp eye, or feather details - something I regularly get with a good telephoto lens on my APS-C sized cameras. So, because of the disappointing results, I sold my K to Q adapter and put the "red dot scope" back on my Browning BPS 12-gauge shotgun. Last edited by Fenwoodian; 07-16-2018 at 09:22 AM.

07-16-2018, 10:01 AM - 1 Like	#20
clickclick Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2016 Location: East Coast Posts: 2,903 Original Poster	Originally posted by Fenwoodian A Q camera, adapter, red dot scope, and a telephoto lens are lots of fun to play with. This set up is a novelty, a toy - but it's not any good for serious photography. Thanks for your sanity input too. I may plunge down this path to check it out, satisfy some more GAS requirements, and also to have it for "the collection". Given I have the a6000 as a modern mirrorless, one could certainly argue I'm gong nowhere with the Q-S1 anyway, but the kid in me loves to play, and I've found the whole Q series very intriguing. Having expectations in line with reality is always a good thing, so if I grab this adapter (probably will), I won't expect it to outpeform my DFA 150-450 on the K3II. It strikes me like my Takumar 500. It's a neat lens, and I'm happy to have it, but the realiity is I when the Blue Angels came to town for commencement a few months ago, I grabbed the 150-450. So, I will do my best to keep my expectations in line with reality. Last edited by clickclick; 07-16-2018 at 10:07 AM.

07-16-2018, 11:03 AM	#27
Fenwoodian Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,874	Originally posted by reh321 If you demand absolute perfection, and have the $$$$, then a "Q" will seldom satisfy you. But my entire birding kit plus my K-30 kit, cost much much less than a 560mm. My birding kit is not a toy; here is a picture of an insect that was so tiny that with naked eye I could just barely detect it - in fact, my wife didn't know what I was talking about what I asked her - but the Sigma 70-30mm mounted on my Q-7 via the a Pentax adapter I got an entirely reasonable picture, more than enough to identify it. . One photographer's "reasonable picture" is another photographers' "not good enough" image. I guess that it all comes down to one's standards of acceptability. A friend of mine showed me a photo that she was proud of. It was an empty field with a distant black blob. Well, it turns out the indistinguishable blob was a bear. She considered it to be a reasonable photo, to me, it was not good enough. Last edited by Fenwoodian; 07-16-2018 at 02:20 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax SDM lenses, how much they are really worth or are they worth it?	Pentaxor	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	01-17-2015 11:32 PM
Whats a Pentax A20mm F2.8 really worth?	PPPPPP42	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	08-24-2012 03:11 AM
Pentax Mount Adapter K vs Chinese Mount Adapter	Vylen	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	01-23-2009 01:03 AM
Pentax 6x7 Lenses w/ adapter - Worth it? Experiences?	cputeq	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	07-26-2008 01:36 PM

07-16-2018, 07:12 AM	#16
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	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. Originally posted by clickclick I have a K3II and a suite of nice lenses to go with it, including the DFA 150-450. So, am I just wasting $200 bucks to buy one of these adapters to mount one of these lenses, or is this something I must have given that I already have these lenses? Can you get a good 450mm x 4.44 = 2000mm equivalent lens for $200 any other way?

07-16-2018, 09:49 AM	#18
clickclick Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2016 Location: East Coast Posts: 2,903 Original Poster	Originally posted by pearsaab I now use a gimbal and I don't use the red dot scope I had been thinking of a gimbal prior to the Q-S1, so perhaps this should go on the list too. What brand/model did you choose? I also shoot, so I have a red dot sight on hand I can pull off one of my other toys, but you say you don't use it anymore. Any particular feelings good/bad about that setup? Do you have a favorite rail you'd recommend for mounting the sight on the Q-S!? I'm assuming someone makes a Weaver compatible mount.

07-16-2018, 09:51 AM	#19
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,175	Originally posted by Fenwoodian . A Q camera, adapter, red dot scope, and a telephoto lens are lots of fun to play with. This set up is a novelty, a toy - but it's not any good for serious photography. I've spent hours with such a set up shooting waterfowl on the water. Used an expensive tripod and great technique. Didn't get a single image worthy of keeping. On none of the images did I get a sharp eye, or feather details - something I regularly get with a good telephoto lens on my APS-C sized cameras. So, because of the disappointing results, I sold my K to Q adapter and put the "red dot scope" back on my Browning BPS 12-gauge shotgun. If you demand absolute perfection, and have the $$$$, then a "Q" will seldom satisfy you. But my entire birding kit plus my K-30 kit, cost much much less than a 560mm. My birding kit is not a toy; here is a picture of an insect that was so tiny that with naked eye I could just barely detect it - in fact, my wife didn't know what I was talking about what I asked her - but the Sigma 70-30mm mounted on my Q-7 via the a Pentax adapter I got an entirely reasonable picture, more than enough to identify it.

07-16-2018, 10:34 AM	#21
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,175	Originally posted by clickclick Thanks for your sanity input too. I may plunge down this path to check it out, satisfy some more GAS requirements, and also to have it for "the collection". Given I have the a6000 as a modern mirrorless, one could certainly argue I'm gong nowhere with the Q-S1 anyway, but the kid in me loves to play, and I've found the whole Q series very intriguing. Having expectations in line with reality is always a good thing, so if I grab this adapter (probably will), I won't expect it to outpeform my DFA 150-450 on the K3II. It strikes me like my Takumar 500. It's a neat lens, and I'm happy to have it, but the realiity is I when the Blue Angels came to town for commencement a few months ago, I grabbed the 150-450. So, I will do my best to keep my expectations in line with reality. Trying to photograph serious motion with the "Q" is probably a waste of time - manual focus is hard if the proper focus is continually changing.

07-16-2018, 10:36 AM - 1 Like	#22
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,473	Don't buy the tripod foot from a US seller. They'll charge you like $90...Get it from eBay... Camera Genuine Pentax Tripod Mount For K-Mount & Adapter Q 38100 MA 4549212218385 \| eBay Last edited by monochrome; 07-17-2018 at 09:14 AM.

07-16-2018, 10:39 AM	#23
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,175	Originally posted by clickclick I have a red dot sight on hand I can pull off one of my other toys, but you say you don't use it anymore. Any particular feelings good/bad about that setup? I don't use "red dot" either. In days of film I learned to get general composition zoomed out and then zoom in for final focus and composition. That was easier in days of parafocal lenses, but I still do it today.

07-16-2018, 10:53 AM	#24
clickclick Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2016 Location: East Coast Posts: 2,903 Original Poster	Originally posted by boriscleto Don't buy the tripod foot from a US seller. They'll charge you like $90...Get it from eBay... Thanks for the pointer. I'm hoping based on the review her at PF that the foot from my 60-250 will work.

07-16-2018, 10:56 AM - 1 Like	#25
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,448	I have one, I never use it. I bought it for use with the Q and my DA* 60-250 which is actually pretty nice set up.... and I bought the thing that attaches to the back of the Q to turn the back screen into a viewfinder, but, we just never use it.

07-16-2018, 11:01 AM	#26
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,175	Originally posted by normhead I have one, I never use it. I bought it for use with the Q and my DA* 60-250 which is actually pretty nice set up.... and I bought the thing that attaches to the back of the Q to turn the back screen into a viewfinder, but, we just never use it. I find my Hoodman clone to be essential - only with it can I see well enough to focus.

07-16-2018, 12:45 PM	#28
pearsaab Otis Memorial Pentaxian Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2011 Location: Richmond, Virginia USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,900	Originally posted by clickclick I had been thinking of a gimbal prior to the Q-S1, so perhaps this should go on the list too. What brand/model did you choose? I also shoot, so I have a red dot sight on hand I can pull off one of my other toys, but you say you don't use it anymore. Any particular feelings good/bad about that setup? Do you have a favorite rail you'd recommend for mounting the sight on the Q-S!? I'm assuming someone makes a Weaver compatible mount. I have a Wimberley wh200 and appropriate plate but I have a 500mm lens on it..you may not need the fire power depending on what you use. I use the red dot for a while but found I could find what I was looking for without it and the birds seemed to notice it when I was using it and they flew away

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-16-2018, 03:38 PM - 3 Likes	#29
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,267	I agree the image quality with adapted telephotos on the Q is lower than that achievable with a high quality super telephoto on a larger format, but sometimes the latter option is simply not available. Case in point: you're not allowed to take "real" cameras into Adelaide Oval. With the Q7 and 01 lens proudly hung over my shoulder and the DFA100WR and adaptor stashed discretely in a small bag I was able to get shots like this from halfway up in the grandstand. Ashes day 3 Sure, it won't make the cover of Sports Illustrated, but you won't do much better without a press pass.

07-16-2018, 03:46 PM	#30
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by Fenwoodian A Q camera, adapter, red dot scope, and a telephoto lens are lots of fun to play with. I've spent hours with such a set up shooting waterfowl on the water. Used an expensive tripod and great technique. Didn't get a single image worthy of keeping. On none of the images did I get a sharp eye, or feather details - something I regularly get with a good telephoto lens on my APS-C sized cameras. Which "Q camera" and lens were you using? Originally posted by Fenwoodian This set up is a novelty, a toy - but it's not any good for serious photography. That's what they used to say about the Leica. Originally posted by Fenwoodian So, because of the disappointing results, I sold my K to Q adapter and put the "red dot scope" back on my Browning BPS 12-gauge shotgun. No wonder the birds won't let you get close. Their facial recognition can be pretty good, you know!