[VisualDarkness]

OK, so looking at the successes others have had, I bought the adapter (RJ Pentax PK PK-A AF DA lens to Pentax Q adapter with tripod mount aperture ring), so what am I doing wrong?
My pictures are 100% c**p. Hazy, out of focus (even though I enabled focus peaking) and CA like I need 3D glasses to view the pics.
Tried the 30mm SIGMA prime, the 18-250mm DA and the 18-55mm DA. Just rubbish, rubbish results.

The Q always shows AV on the screen, the aperture rind is useful - but it's not helping.
Hand held or tripod, I'm getting truly bad results.. I mean shocking bad..

Someone have a step by step fool proof process to use let's say the 18-250mm with the adapted Q?

My short stint with the 18-55 on the Q marked it as unusable and my Sigma 20/1.8 was brutal in my first attempt. On the other hand both the DA*300/4 and my Sigma 105/2.8 DG Macro shows great result! The Q puts lenses in a test that they really weren't designed for at all and you need some luck and tests to find out the good ones.

Edit: Yeah, the Q really multiplies CA. Look at my Sigma 105mm review in this thread. My lens is nearly without CA on my K-5 but shows it clearly on the Q in some pics. This is how it "natively" performs: http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/302-sigma-af-105mm-f2...review?start=1

---

Last edited by VisualDarkness; 01-17-2013 at 07:05 PM.

[Steve.Ledger]

Yes I have a fairly decent Velbon Tripod and as said, it's not enough for the Q with a long lens.

In the interim I dug out an old manual sigma zoom III f4.5 84mm and tried that with significantly better results (compared to what I was getting). The focus ring has much more travel enabling far easier focusing and amazingly there is pretty much zero CA!

[snostorm]

Hi sledger,

It would probably be a good idea to start a new thread with some examples of problem shots. This is a reference thread for adapted lenses and a sticky, and discussions like this can get lengthy.

I'm not trying to be forum police. . .just making a suggestion.

Scott

[Steve.Ledger]

Sorry, you're probably right - maybe a mod can split the thread for me?

[GibbyTheMole]

Hey Sledger: Another thought occurs... Did you paint the inside of the adapter flat black? Some others have had problems with internal reflections causing low contrast with some lenses on that adapter. I painted mine as soon as I got it. Just mask everything off well & hit it with the flattest black you can find.

[Steve.Ledger]

Seems a messy solution... I may give it a try or I may just bin it.
Is the genuine Pentax adapter matt black inside??

[GibbyTheMole]

Seems a messy solution... I may give it a try or I may just bin it.

It's a piece of cake, actually. Takes just a few minutes. The genuine Pentax adapter is matte black inside, but it's also $250. More if you want the tripod foot.

[MarinatedHerring]

Black felt tape works well too and it is not messy at all but more time consuming. I've been using JVCC FELT-06 Polyester Felt Tape 3/4 in.

[ChopperCharles]

Pentax SMC-F 50mm f1.7 on the Q:

In low light, this is a wonderful lens. It can be used wide open with more than satisfactory results.

HOWEVER, in daylight, using it wide open will result in a soft image with a LOT of purple fringing. In fact, the entire image will have a purple color cast. It delivers sharpest results at f5.6, but falls apart at f8. OOF specular highlights look very, very odd at f1.7 (You can't really tell from my image below because they're not that OOF, but the specular highlights look like snowflakes)

Low light wide open:


Bright light, 50mm f1.7:


100% crop, 50mm f1.7:


Bright light, 50mm f5.6:


100% crop, 50mm f5.6:



Note that the low light photo was edited - some NR, sharpening, color balance, and saturation.

The images of the telephone pole are straight out of the camera, JPEG, no edits except for resizing and cropping.

Charles.

[crewl1]

Thanks for the review Charles, added to the index.

[Docrwm]

Pentax SMC K300 f4
SMC Pentax 300mm F4 Reviews - K Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

Fotodiox PK-P/Q adapter without paint.

No Post Processing except downsizing entire image.

[post_eos]

I'm going through my lenses little by little trying them on the Q. Came across something surprising tonight.

I tested the Pentax A50 f2.0 and the Sears Auto 50mm f2.0. The Sears, despite it's name is a manual lens. To my surprise, the Sears was much sharper on the Q than the Pentax. On my K10D it's the opposite. See the shots below for a comparison. Both are straight out of the camera JPEGs using the Reversal Film setting. The Pentax's exif shows a 300mm lens because I forgot to reset the camera when I changed lenses. Shake reduction was off though for both shots so this shouldn't make a difference.

I almost gave the Sears away a few months ago. I'm glad I didn't.

The first picture is the Pentax, the second is the Sears. Both shot at 1/15 second, f5.6, iso 400, on a tripod with the Fotodiox adapter.

[post_eos]

Here's a lens I got for $10. It didn't do too bad.

1/8 sec., f5.6, 400 iso, Fotodiox adapter, tripod. Exif says 300mm because I forgot to change it when I put the lens on. Shake reduction was off so it has no effect.

[post_eos]

Not great, but not too bad. Lens is small and very light.

1.3 sec., f5.6, 400 iso, Fotodiox Adapter, tripod. Focus is close to lens minimum.

[drougge]

I haven't taken any daytime shots (it's almost never daytime around here this time of year), but here are two night shots with the FA31. Both at f/3.3 (Pentax would call it f/3.5.)

Adapter: RJ (with aperture ring, from jinfinance).



The light was worse than usual for colours, so I made one without too.



This one is several shots stacked, because my adapter doesn't have a shutter. (3 x 1.3s exposures.)

My adapter is not painted, seems fine with this lens at least.

If you like pixel peeping, click the images and select original size on the flickr page.

I should shoot something more "testy" at more apertures. f/3.3 is probably the best aperture. It's useable wide open, but not good.