Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-25-2013, 01:11 AM   #1
Veteran Member
Lurch's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 583
Torn

So this is where I'm at. I have a Q and a K5 (The K5 is fully loaded with grip and an extra eye piece)
As it stands I have just the 8mm prime for the Q, but a whole raft of lenses (mostly wide-angleish) in K mount.
My experiment today with a Q>K adapter was disheartening to say the least

So I'm at the point of: Do I invest more $'s in the 02 zoom lens to give the Q more versatility, or do I spend just a bit more on a K-01 and get dual-purpose out of my K-mount gear?
I'm looking at $240 for the 02 zoom vs $299 for a K-01 body.

The upshot of the Q is obviously size. Not that I actually 'pocket' it at all; but even hanging from its strap its nice and light and doesnt get in the way.
Mind you, compared to a fully loaded K5, the K-01 isn't exactly huge.

Im also a bit disappointed with the low-light/high ISO abilities of the Q, but in saying that I have been quite spoilt with the K5.

But I do love the Q

EDIT: I should probably add why I got the Q in the first place. Nutshell version; the K5 just became too big/heavy for any long day/walking around, motorcycle trips yadda yadda yadda.


Last edited by Lurch; 03-25-2013 at 01:19 AM.
03-25-2013, 10:58 AM   #2
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 85
my decision as well

I keep going back and forth as well, what was it you don't like about the adapter as the Q with 5.6 x the same focal length with K mount lenses was the main reason for me wanting one. I want the K-01 for picture quality but it is better with shorter focal lengths I am told.
03-25-2013, 05:55 PM   #3
Veteran Member
Lurch's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 583
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by pickone Quote
I keep going back and forth as well, what was it you don't like about the adapter as the Q with 5.6 x the same focal length with K mount lenses was the main reason for me wanting one. I want the K-01 for picture quality but it is better with shorter focal lengths I am told.
Just pulled the trigger on a K-01
Will be posting up a FS thread for the Q tonight
*sniff*
03-25-2013, 06:06 PM   #4
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 104
Smart move, the Q is appealing given its dinky size & uniqueness, but when you compared it to the K-01 in terms of IQ + speed, it's in a different league.

03-25-2013, 08:04 PM   #5
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Far North Qld
Posts: 3,267
Keep the Q. You may regret selling it. It's a classic!.
I find the low-light capability of the Q very good.
Interested to hear what you felt was disappointing?
03-25-2013, 08:31 PM   #6
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 104
My novice take is, the lowlight capabilities was good for it's tiny sensor, but it's kinda behind the times at the moment & if you're not into interchangeable lenses why would you necessary buy (aside from its low price) it over the current alternatives out there? The Q is a great camera relative to its current price, but you have to keep things in perspective. Once you add a few extra lenses, it becomes pretty expensive and then there would be even more alternatives available.
03-25-2013, 09:41 PM   #7
Site Supporter
vagrant10's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: portland
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,343
I like to think of the Q as a supplement to the k5 not a replacement. In other words, if space is tight and light will be good, bring the Q. If I want to do macro's, I'll bring the Q along w/ the k5 if I want more a larger area in focus. If I'm doing social photography and light will be good, the Q will not freak people out so much plus a greater DOF will keep groups in focus. If I want shots at a concert, the Q will get in the door, the k5 will get rejected b/c it's too professional (plus, w/ the k to q adapter, I can be in the mezzanine and still get great shots). If I'm at a sports event and I'm nowhere near close to the action cuz my seats suck, extreme telephoto is doable.

I look at the Q as I would a lens... it's just another tool in the bag. And there are times where it's advantages outweigh the bigger gear.

And how much are you going to get back anyway? A couple hundred? Even if I use the Q a handful of times a year, that's worth it to me...
03-25-2013, 10:35 PM   #8
Veteran Member
Lurch's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 583
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by sledger Quote
Keep the Q. You may regret selling it. It's a classic!.
I find the low-light capability of the Q very good.
Interested to hear what you felt was disappointing?
For one the high ISO/Low light capabilities. Having said that tho; you have to realise my other camera is the K5, which is pretty much the best in the business for high ISO work; so a) I've been spoilt, and b) its not a fair comparison.
I hoped the Q>K converter would work out better for walk around/travel work. But it takes so much fluffing around that it just wont. Had there been a Q>K adapter that did AF; then that'd be a different story.

For not much more than the cost of the 02 Zoom, I can get a brand new K-01 body which will tick all the boxes (other than being *really* tiny and completely adorable).


Perhaps I will keep the Q.... Hmmm

[EDIT] I've removed my For Sale thread for now. More pondering is required.

03-25-2013, 11:16 PM   #9
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
QuoteOriginally posted by Lurch Quote
For one the high ISO/Low light capabilities. Having said that tho; you have to realise my other camera is the K5, which is pretty much the best in the business for high ISO work; so a) I've been spoilt, and b) its not a fair comparison.
I hoped the Q>K converter would work out better for walk around/travel work. But it takes so much fluffing around that it just wont. Had there been a Q>K adapter that did AF; then that'd be a different story.

For not much more than the cost of the 02 Zoom, I can get a brand new K-01 body which will tick all the boxes (other than being *really* tiny and completely adorable).


Perhaps I will keep the Q.... Hmmm

[EDIT] I've removed my For Sale thread for now. More pondering is required.
Which K lenses do you own? Slowish zooms don't do so well on the Q, although some folks report good results with the Pentax 55-300.
03-25-2013, 11:47 PM   #10
Veteran Member
Lurch's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 583
Original Poster
I was initially trying my Sigma 70-300 APO DG. And *everything* came out soft.
I got some 'ok' shots with the FA 50 1.7, and one 'not completely terrible' one with an old M42 SMC 200 5.6
03-26-2013, 12:11 AM   #11
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
Aperture is important as well. You want to be at a point where the lens is sharpest but not too far into the Q's diffraction range.
F5.6 has been reported as the most common best compromise.
Also, with old lenses or lenses where there may be an element near the mount, it is a good idea to eliminate the reflective finish of some third party adapters.
Flat black paint or your preferred method will help.

I like the Q as a companion to my K-5's. I have my K-5's for IQ, ease of control and ergonomics, and the Q for fun and experimentation.

Agree though that the Q isn't for everyone.

Just like the K-01 isn't for me. When I have borrowed them it feels like I'm running the K-5 in Live View without the good ergonomics and the mirror flip sound.
03-29-2013, 10:58 PM   #12
Veteran Member
Lurch's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 583
Original Poster
So irony slapped me in the face.
I ordered the K-01 with the hope that it would make Canberra before the weekend. Nope. Ordered Tuesday Lunchtime; didnt ship will late Wednesday.
Then late last night I spot an 02 zoom on eBay. $150. *Click*
04-03-2013, 10:00 AM   #13
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 64
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMike Quote
if you're not into interchangeable lenses why would you necessary buy (aside from its low price) it over the current alternatives out there?
Interchangeable lenses is for me about 50% of the reason I love the Q. If you're only after small size and good IQ then certainly there are other options that might be worth considering, not that I'd recommend them.
04-03-2013, 10:47 AM   #14
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,361
For the OP, you can get a second Q with the 02 zoom for $287 from B&H so buy a second one for the price of the lens. In all honesty, I just ordered a Q at that price, plus the adaptor, to use for extra resolution in cropping down with long tele lenses. I looked at the sample images here in the forum first, where I found some of my lenses, so I am satisfied it will work for me.

For travel I have a bridge bridge camera with a 26 x zoom (22-560mm equivalent or something like that). The Q may replace this, but if you just want a light travel camera perhaps the Q is not for you.

As I started out saying. I got mine for the 5.5:1 crop factor. That makes my 300/4 into a 1650mm/4 lens, and as I do birding, this will do quite well as a light weight (relatively speaking) set for record shots of distant birds, with better quality than cropping in with my K5. Wen I get close enough, though, you can bet the K5 will still get the lions share of the work, but for causal outings the Q is a better bet for me.
04-04-2013, 02:51 AM   #15
Veteran Member
Lurch's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 583
Original Poster
So the 02 Zoom showed up today and now Im really torn.
Having that extra versatility has really made the camera much more useful. But in practise its usefulness to me is still duplicated by the K-01.
And I cant really justify keeping both.
*sigh*
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!
bit, digital camera, k-01, k5, mirrorless, yadda
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Macro A torn wing eaglem Post Your Photos! 2 11-08-2012 03:25 PM
Torn between 3 wide angles onesikej8 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 01-19-2012 06:12 AM
I've torn a flexible cable - advice required karma mechanic Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 7 11-15-2011 01:30 PM
I'm torn... TriCon Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 06-08-2010 10:58 PM
A country torn dws1117 Post Your Photos! 9 02-23-2009 06:34 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:25 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