|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
08-09-2015, 01:12 PM
|
| |
My little input.
I see the point on the structure being completely closed and thus better protected in the field than most geared heads.
The RC4 works well for me. The most load I use is my Sigma 500mm f4.5 with a DSLR, about 4.5 kg, it works fine. I do not use the Quick Set with the heavy load it gives the same issue as a ballhead, it flips over.
Other points I read where people saw possible improvements:
- movement between the quick release plate base, plate and the camera, there is some, but not a lot. True the RC3, plate with screw seems to be my preference with less movement.
- adjustment of one direction moves the other direction. It seems to me that it does, I do not have a problem with it, adjusting works quickly for me.
- 30 degrees is quite a lot and if you really need more reverse the plate on the camera/lens.
- it is big and heavy, it is. When I can I use it though, since the precision is a joy to work with. On longer hikes the ballhead will have to do.
It is difficult to explain the precision of geared heads though, I guess you have to use it to really understand. It is very much like macro rails, maybe a bit faster in thread.
So I do not regret to have a Manfrotto 405, it is more then I need and is not very portable, but there is no fiddeling, it feels secure and works like a breeze.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
07-30-2015, 02:22 AM
|
| |
I have been using bean bags, backpacks, suitcases, etc... really have to try the shoe it seems. :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax Camera and Field Accessories
07-30-2015, 02:20 AM
|
| |
Wow this is an old thread. (even needed to sign a disclaimer). Thanks for posting it.
I'm getting more and more in extreme macro and from there ended up in geared heads, since any lens movement on a subject that is 2mm is generally too much; I need controlled precision. (I also pray for light and patient subjects).
From budget and portability I was looking more for the Manfrotto XPRO WG. I went to touch it in the shop and it feels OK to me.
The 405 is out of the budget I wanted to spend, but I now found someone who has trouble selling his second hand so wanted to bid half the retail price.
Clearly I already have a lot of gear when I want to do Macro (055 tripod, 293 long lens support, macro rails) and I want to use the 405 also for other 3D head uses (have a 498 ball head, a 393 Gimbal and a cheapo fluid head). The goal is indeed to buy one of the best gearheads, not to have to buy an upgrade in a few years. You seem to support that option.
P.S.: on most forums gear heads are not a popular subject
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
07-29-2015, 07:20 AM
|
| |
I have been considering the Canon 65mm MP-E, but for the moment I'm quite OK with my Q and my Tamron 90mm f2.8:
 |
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
08-02-2014, 11:12 PM
|
| |
This topic keeps hunting me, so I have evolved in my conclusion:
I believe we have established that the Sony A7s is a not the wildlife shooters dream, I believe this is a lot closer:
Why: AF is better, very close in dynamic range and low light ISO performance and a lot better lens selection.
There are great Pentax alternatives:
Honestly it seems that the Pentax 654Z will give a real revolution as well, be it for other applications as the D4s.
And there are better weather sealed Pentax bodies (compared to other brands) that will do great in most of the wildlife situations and let you go out there when others stay in.
Where does this leave the Sony A7s? What are the strengths?
1) Relatively low price. No that body is not cheap, but the sensor performance (sharpness and low ISO) is very high for the price and probably outperforms anything close in price and portability in August 2014.
2) It is small and light. Yes a mirrorless is smaller and lighter then the DSLRs and Midframes. I find myself carrying already too much gear and weight gain is a decision factor when I´m 20m up a climbing path in a forest at the crack of dawn. (e.g. the Pentax Q series is great to take along, it can do a lot for the extra bother of carrying it).
3) Flexibility on lenses. With adaptors (just like the Pentax Mirrorless systems) you can add almost any lens (but losing features), I found some Leica guy stating high liked the result of the A7s with Leica lenses better then the Leica bodies.
So not the wildlife shooters dream, but combined with a good Prosumer action oriented DSLR system, some old very high quality (any brand) lenses and some passion for low light photography, this body can give a nice portable set-up for a wildlife amateur on a (larger but not professional) budget. The pro will take a larger and a lot more expensive system and there are certainly combinations possible with other bodies that give similar possibilities, it is up to the buyer to spend his money wisely.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
07-23-2014, 10:58 PM
|
| |
I downloaded the test shots of dpreview and then used post processing myself, the result is very different from the direct raw shots IMHO.
Where the A7s is impressive (seems to have best detail in crop for me at all times), the difference did not convince me, the other low light champions win on colour and overall feel (however not coherently, once one then the other).
However this is hardly a field test where you shoot yourself. I do believe that the least you have to say is: thank you Sony for changing the game and big pixel!
Mid frame or Large frame (yes on film) have their advantages, certainly for portrait and landscape. With live animals in the field, I´m a bit sceptic about the lenses to use and DOF.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
07-23-2014, 03:06 AM
|
| |
I bought the Pentax Q for extreme telephoto and extreme macro, with mitigate success, but then the photographer might be the issue. Still working on that.
The question that came up was where do I have issues, well clearly the Pentax Q is for clear daylight only.
My prosumer DSLR goes a lot further on high ISO (I find most at ISO1600 usable), but does what an APS-C can do (at this moment, still waiting to be surprised with A7S like APS-C sensors).
To go up on ISO performance we would indeed be taking flagship Canon, Nikon or Sony cameras. DXO Mark has clear results, but I also believe that is not all:
There is clearly a competition and if the Sony A7s would not have scored 3702 ISO, I would not be looking at it.
For comparison: if it matters to have a D610 iso a D700 Nikon for ISO performance then it matters to have the A7s compared to anything else.
It all depends on what you want to do.
Clearly there are AF considerations in wildlife, but there will always be compromises.
I'm looking for taking pictures in light situations where AF does not work since the contrast is too low, when taking pictures at ISO 25k (I really do that) I'm on manual focus, and I'm never going for fast action (well I do, but I do not expect it to work).
jpg does not matter to me, it will not deliver the result I can get with raw and this is more true when you go to Post Processing (PP).
Less pixels has some influence, but I would rather have a usable A6 (actually A3 is possible) size then a not usable A0. 12mpix is plenty, in the past I used to shoot at 8, which gave a fine results for my purpose, albeit limiting some more.
Now I do believe that DXO Mark uses the sensor data when they can, that is without processing. Even raw files are processed in some way.
So what is the result of the out of camera file is already unclear + what will be the result after PP even more. Some noise is easier to work work away then other.
The sad thing about this conclusion is that it is personal, it depends on shooting style, on PP style and what you want to do with the picture at the end.
So the A7s is not a wildlife shooters dream, mostly they will use a high fps, high ISO performance and super multiple axis tracking AF DSLR which supports all features of the top telephoto lenses. The Sony A7s does not do that. However someone on a budget might be able to complement their system with a Alfa 7S for extreme low light performance.
P.S.: Budget for a minimum high spec wildlife set-up is around 17K€ for me. Second hand manual, DIY gets close to that for 4k€, so I do see some potential for alternative wildlife set-ups with the Sony A7S.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
05-26-2014, 10:31 PM
|
| |
1) the slider is to control the aperture, darker means closed. Normally you mount open and then you might close just a little bit to get more depth of field. Closing a lot (going to lock) will probably ruin the pictures on the Q, however I guess we are just waiting till someone uses this creatively to create better art then others.
2) It will be easier to work with the 01, seeing what it can do, I would take it. It depends what you want to do, for the others:
10-17 is still OK for walk around, covering the normal range in 35mm FOV equivalent.
Above 17 you will be in telephoto, so the subjects and the technique changes, you will need to keep your camera more still and go for small subjects on larger distance.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
05-26-2014, 10:09 PM
|
| |
I got a Sigma 500mm f4,5 APO (first version), Nikon mount, here on the Pentax Q with a Kiwifoto G adapter:
the subject also explains why I have issues taking pictures of birds in the garden.
Now 2 images of the set-up taken with 75mm on a APS-C sensor:
 |
|
Forum: Pentax Q
03-26-2014, 07:33 AM
|
| |
I quite liked the 02 result
Last one slightly cropped (was a reflex)
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
03-12-2014, 01:17 AM
|
| |
Great picutures.
I have put my macro lens via adaptor on the Q and was quite pleased with it, however the issue was stabilizing the set up. On my DSLR I use it mounted on a tripod and a focus rail, however I have to attach the camera since the lens has no tripod foot and nor does my adaptor. Not clear if I will go for an adaptor with foot or a Manfrotto 293 long lens support to solve this. At this moment I will be limited to a bean bag or hand held.
I'll do some tests with my Pentax-02, with min focus distance 0.3 m, max. magnification 1:16.6, that should give similar results.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
03-06-2014, 11:10 PM
|
| |
OK thanks, on my DSLR I remember that they recommend to send the camera in for professional cleaning when it concerns the sensor. I think I´ll try a small careful clean here.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
03-06-2014, 01:17 PM
|
| |
This is a request for help.
Tonight I was testing a new setup: Q + Adaptor + Nikkor 18-105.
Suddenly I saw spots :hmm:, here they are on a picture of a clear sky:
In panic :mad: I checked what was going on, the lens was closed up quite a bit.
So I opened the lens up = no issue with spots anymore. :)
Next test the Pentax-02 full open = no issue with spots. :)
Next test the Pentax-02 full closed = no issue with spots. :)
Next test the Nikon DX with lens full open = no issue with spots. :)
Next test the Nikon DX with lens full closed = no issue with spots. :)
My suspicion is that the spots are rests of cleaning products on the lens, the Nikon DX does not have the issue due to less magnification.
=> any suggestion :confused: in how to determine where the issue really is. I posted it here since I only have it on the Q at this moment.
===============
Next test I did with the Nikkor 50mm f1,8G:
Bad news :fedup: the spots reappeared and seem to be on the same place when closed down.
Since I do not see this comes from the adaptor and I have it with 2 different lenses, this seems to be my Q.
Should I try to clean or hand it in at a professional?
How to find a good professional? (I trust the Nikon importer, did not find a Pentax one here)
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
03-06-2014, 12:57 PM
|
| |
I was loosing trust in my Q. I bought it as a cheaper solutions for a long lens, I got some shots like this in the week, but they did not give the results I wished for. So I decided to go back to basics, Q+ 02.
This was last week already, spring is really announced:
Here is the restaurant linked to the swimming pool in town:
Shopping street:
Corner of bar area:
Old town arch:
Main square in town:
Tourist office:
Yep the Q is fun and very portable :D
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
03-03-2014, 12:41 AM
|
| |
Time to show the reach I have currently (still need to work on sharpness though):
This is the scene shot with an 11mm lens on a Nikon DX body, please notice the building when you follow the electricity line and the 2 towers it has, the front one being a bit lower then the back one.
This is the next rig: 70-200 @ 200mm + TC 2X + TC 1,4X + Adapter + Pentax Q:
Now a detail shot of the lower tower:
The goal is obviously to take pictures of smaller animals closer to me (e.g. we have a reserve of birds that breed on the ground nearby) .
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
02-24-2014, 09:44 AM
|
| |
The issue I seem to have is concerning focus; taking in account the depth of field at high magnification.
My sensor + lens + adapter combination seems OK: my test was to turn a video starting from focus, go out of focus to infinity, coming to a too close focus (giving an out of focus image), ending up in focus again. That is what happens in the video and the focus attained between the out of focus images is acceptable (for my not top professional gear) and I seem to end in focus.
I was worried about how my lens moves when I stop manual focus and go to triggering the shutter by remote control.
Looking at calculation: A Flexible Depth of Field Calculator this should not put my subject out of focus. The movement only will make the life view image blurry.
Something I did not think about is this: On most digital cameras the Live-View image is generated by sub-sampling the sensor. Most cannot read the entire pixels fast enough to resfresh the Live-View fast enough. This means the LCD view which is usually with magnification is interpolated.
=> So the image you see on the LCD is not the information of the sensor but an interpretation of the processor of that image.
My new "technique":
1) Without magnification, I generally do not see enough to focus on the detail, the eyes of the animal in general, so I keep using magnification.
2) I need to stabilise (position of my arms) the long lens during focussing to increase the accuracy of the LCD image.
3) When I believe I reached focus, I should wait a while to let the LCD stabilise and verify the focus, while still applying 2.
4) Stop the lens down for optimal sharpness.
5) Use the 2s timer for release.
6) open the lens up for refocussing.
The last thing I'm worried about is that the manual focus ring on my lens is too sensitive for my clumsy fingers, not clear if a shaking movement (forward/backward focus) might give more precise movement. Since I have a top lens abused with a teleconverter, the focus ring is not the issue, my fingers are the issue.
P.S.: I was trying to justify the purchance of a Manfrotto 393 (Gimbal) + Manfrotto 293 (long lens support), but I seem to have missed my goal. However I do think these will increase the shots I can make.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
02-16-2014, 02:31 PM
|
| |
Pentax Q + Nikon adapter + Teleconverter 1,4 + extension tube + Osawa 80-205 Macro. For my first macro tests, difficult at aiming at the subject holding manually, but the SR worked wonders:
Buds are on my red cornus, seems a bit early in the season for this, but they are here. The red branches give the nice brokeh background with this lens:
 |
|
Forum: Pentax Q
02-12-2014, 02:12 PM
|
| |
Getting the sharpness better, I´ll have to keep learning about my Q.
Q + 02:
Q + Kiwifoto Nikon (G) Adapter + Tokina 11-16mm f2,8
 |
|
Forum: Pentax Q
02-12-2014, 04:19 AM
|
| |
It seems this is not a popular theme, but when I got my Q second hand a c mout adapter came with it.
I asked the seller what system "c mount" was and the only reply I got is, they are very expensive.
So I was looking into c mount lenses and found they are quite available and in reasonable price, however then it is something different then what I'm used to in photography.
Even if I would love to have the Pentax-08, but do not see the investment in that one coming soon. I have the Pentax-02 5-15mm zoom. More telephoto I will do via adapter.
The pentax-03 seems a good choice as well, but still quite a cost, people hang on to it it seems.
So I was thinking of experimenting with real cine or cctv lenses on the c-mount, probably very cheap in flee market kind of photo shops.
I already learned that 1/2" is larger than the Q's 1/2.3", which will be very helpful.
Looking around I noticed that many CCTV lenses are fixed on f1.25 or so and have other designations like for 2MP camera or enhancements for night vision.
Does anyone have experience with how to see what lens could work? How do you find them (e.g. do you look for old filming cameras and then just use the lens)?
Does anyone love the effect of the cctv lens they own?
It seems most very wide lenses are CS mount for 1/3" sensors, so no good for my c-adaptor and not that good for the Q sensor (lots of vignetting to be expected).
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
02-11-2014, 01:33 AM
|
| |
Thanks for that: I was generally shooting 15mm (about 84mm FOV equiv) full open. I'll try some more wide shots one stop down and some 7-9mm @ f4.
I also should try my lenses with my Nikon adapter a bit more, somehow in my 11-16mm test the Vibration Reduction was disabled and it seems my shutter speed was unacceptably low for that situation. I'm convinced it is just a matter of getting used to the strong points of the Q and how to use the lenses on it and when do options get disactivated.
I did read in the article above: Remember that f/4 is already equivalent to f/22 on a full format DSLR!
1) f4 is a ratio of the focal length of the lens to its diameter, your sensor size never changes this, that is why I find the above very confusing.
2) since a crop sensor, croppes the image you have a different effect of DOF, I guess that is what is meant with the sentence above?
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
02-10-2014, 01:49 PM
|
| |
I did a test on sharpness today:
Even if this is quite good in my book, it did not hold up against my Dslr result. I guess it just confirms the reasonable expectation, the Q is very good, but you can do better with a lot bigger material.
Did not try to find the sweet spot on the Pentax-02 yet, that might change the view.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
02-08-2014, 02:03 AM
|
| |
So testing further yesterday evening, I took this from more then 800m as a detail of a building, very impressive, I had to travel 650m closer to see the same detail with the bare eye:
I do believe that I forgot to use the sweet spot of my lens during testing, that would be 20mm under maximum focus length and 2 stops down when using the TC 2X. So I did not like all of the results yesterday.
The main learning point was that with adapter and foreign lens the slowest shutter speed on the Pentax Q will be 2" (no shutter in the lens).
My idea yesterday was cityscape at night with extreme telephoto, but the telephoto FOV of 2200mm equivalent was too extreme, it was too dark from my position and night photo with slowest shutter of 2" seems insufficient at base ISO.
The 2" timer works well, the ballhead was not convincing, but will do for the moment.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
02-07-2014, 06:33 AM
|
| |
The Kiwifoto adapter NK(G)-PQ with aperture control arrived just before I left for work, I have not looked at the pictures on the big screen, but my first impression is good using a 50mm and a 80-205mm. I'll be able to add to the Adapted lenses tested on the Q soon.
The aperture control works in continuous mode from full open (lowest aperture number on the on mark) onto fully closed (off mark), so you do not really know where you are, but it works.
You mount the lens in "on" mode as I expected.
@robtcorl yes I had seen it, that is the thread that pops up when you google this, very interesting, I'll try to post my better rig there soon.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Q
02-06-2014, 11:40 PM
|
| |
No adapter yet, so started testing with the Pentax-02 5-15mm lens:
Control via DslrDaxhboard does not seem to work, my android device sees the camera as a disk, not a devise it can control.
Picture developed in Silkpix 15mm 4" F/7,1 ISO-125, all manual settings shot from tripod:
The 2" delay worked well on a sturdy tripod.
The text seems clear, but I do see something on the car I do not like. I´ll have to see on future pictures.
---------- Post added 02-07-14 at 09:15 AM ----------
Current rig, a bit unbalanced :):
 |
|
Forum: Pentax Q
02-05-2014, 08:01 AM
|
| |
The Q makes me think of Star Trek, however....
I felt like I needed an extreme wildlife solution (mainly small European birds). After calculating how many years it would take me to save up for a SigMonster I came to a video where someone had combined the Q with a Samyang 650-1300mm and actually the result was ... bad of course, but not that bad for something you could get, being lucky on the second hand market, for 200€ .
Since I have a high quality 70-200 f2.8 lens (not Pentax) with 2X and 1,4X teleconverters I thought letting the crop sensor capturing good input from the lens would probably work (I did see some examples of this). Maybe not getting professional grade pictures, but something fantastic for an enthusiast like me and with a solution that is a lot more portable.
So now I'm waiting for my Kiwi adapter with aperture control to test it. If this one does not do the trick (apparently aperture control is limited to 3 positions) but shows enough promise I'll probably go Novoflex for the adapter.
Other things on my list are an LCD viewfinder and if the 2" timer does not do the trick a not offical remote control (that is my long lens technique, not touching).
I already ordered an official Pentax spare battery, since just setting up my system drained the battery.
My current set-up:
- AF, but on the green button in the back with focus tracking
- Shutter priority (so I get shots)
- Central zone metering
- Manual settings, but probably will go aperture control in the field.
- Raw, but it seems I need to go to JPG for Hi continuous shooting.
- My 70-200 will be on a ballhead, might want to go to a Gimbal if that does not work out, already got quite upset last weekend on how slow I was to track wildlife with the ballhead.
By the way I have the Pentax-02 5-15mm zoom. I would like to add to that a foreign lens (shared with my DSLR system), at this moment that will be my Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 with TC 1.4x for a 16-22mm f4, but I might go for a cheap second hand Sigma 18-125mm which should give an insane 35mm equivalent reach.
|
