3000mm Eq with Q

Started 11 months ago | Discussions
Dale108
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,015
Like?
3000mm Eq with Q
11 months ago

This was show with the Q/Tamron 300 f2.8 and Tamron 2X TC.  It is not a great picture but is over 3000mm equivalent.

Dale

Rod Herdman
Senior MemberPosts: 2,522Gear list
Like?
Re: 3000mm Eq with Q
In reply to Dale108, 11 months ago

Well for 3000mm equivalent it ain't bad!

A bit of PP (contrast & NR) will help a bit too (I am assuming that was OOC ?)

Cheers,

Rod

-- hide signature --

All I want is a digital back for my trusty K1000 . . .

 Rod Herdman's gear list:Rod Herdman's gear list
Pentax *ist D Pentax smc DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL Pentax smc DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Sheehy
Forum ProPosts: 15,829
Like?
Re: 3000mm Eq with Q
In reply to Dale108, 11 months ago

It's not the greatest image in the absolute sense, but what would the subject look like if you had used a DSLR with the same lens from that distance, instead of the Q?  It would have been worthless crap, most likely.

And if you had stacked TCs for the DSLR, you would have lost a lot more contrast and introduced other artifacts that would not have been create by higher pixel density.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dale108
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,015
Like?
Re: 3000mm Eq with Q
In reply to John Sheehy, 11 months ago

Agree John.  This is not a great quality photo but cropping the K5 to get the equivalent would have been a challenge also.  I will do more testing to see if the results can be improved.

Dale

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Sheehy
Forum ProPosts: 15,829
Like?
Re: 3000mm Eq with Q
In reply to Dale108, 11 months ago

Dale108 wrote:

Agree John.  This is not a great quality photo but cropping the K5 to get the equivalent would have been a challenge also.  I will do more testing to see if the results can be improved.

The benefit of something like the Q over cropping is even bigger with video, as cropping video gives way too little resolution.

I really believe that it would be better to have a few lenses, and multiple bodies with different sized sensors, than to have a wide range of lenses, in many ways.  If any of the DSLR makers made a full APS-sized body with a comfortable grip and smaller sensors, people would laugh at first, until they saw the results.  Imagine a 200mm f/2.8 or 400mm f/5.6 lens on a Q-like sensor with AF, camera-controlled aperture, and IS, with a camera body that doesn't turn when you manually focus the lens.

Especially with a tripod-mounted lens, changing bodies is a snap.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dale108
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,015
Like?
Re: AF on K to Q Converter
In reply to John Sheehy, 11 months ago

What would be really sweet if Pentax had an AF function on the Q to K converter like Nikon does with their 1 series converter.

Dale

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DAD519
Contributing MemberPosts: 669
Like?
Re: AF on K to Q Converter
In reply to Dale108, 11 months ago

I would sure look at getting the pentax q to k adapter if it was auto focus.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Sheehy
Forum ProPosts: 15,829
Like?
Re: AF on K to Q Converter
In reply to DAD519, 11 months ago

DAD519 wrote:

I would sure look at getting the pentax q to k adapter if it was auto focus.

Bring a bag of batteries with you always, if that ever happens!  The Q is battery-hungry enough, as it is (how do you turn off that stupid flashing red light?).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads