Fotodiox might be working on the adaptor as we speak. 50 mm K mount lenses are dirt cheap and would pack 12 MP into a 275 FOV, if my math is correct.
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Darren Addy <pixelsmi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Part of my reply below was just WRONG. > The 35mm equiv. is not printed on the front of the lens. That was the > filter size. > My basic multiplication tables have failed me once again. > > Still, the descriptions refer to the 35mm equiv. and Pentax and > reviews all note the 35mm equiv. and crop factor (doubtless for the > reasons I gave). > > Darren Addy > Kearney, Nebraska > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Darren Addy <pixelsmi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:54 AM, John Sessoms <jsessoms...@nc.rr.com> wrote: >>> I don't see how "crop factor" is even relevant in a camera that doesn't use >>> K-mount lenses. >> >> This comment confuses me. Crop factor is relevant because most people >> don't think in Field of View. They think in 35mm camera focal length >> equivalents. >> Pentax obviously thinks it is relevant, which is why their Q lenses >> have both the actual focal length printed on the front and also the >> 35mm camera focal length equivalent (which is the focal length of the >> lens multipled by the crop factor). >> >> Darren Addy >> Kearney, Nebraska >> > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- Steve Desjardins -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
