No, the Auto 110 lenses had no diaphragm. Not sure about the Q.

110 lenses have no diaphragm either - the aperture is formed by the shutter blades.

I would suspect that an adapter will have a built in shutter to cover this as the Q has a setting for using the "electronic" or "lens" shutter.

Just back from Focus on Imaging, with feet remarkably not aching at all, and I had a look at the Fisheye lens for the Q. That's now on the To Buy list, but I don't buy at exhibitions. Too many things are too tempting.

What was very interesting was that it's manual focus and, despite presumably staggering amounts of depth of field, was an absolute doddle to focus using the screen. That implies very good screen sharpness and it bodes well for the verstaility of the Q.

I'm still searching for a better case that maintains the ability to pop it in a jacket pocket. Nothing at Focus was quite right.

It is what it is, an image. It can't be a lie unless it purports to be something it's not...so the point is obscure for me too.

Lens now sold.

Thanks for the link.

The K-5 has a 1.5x crop factor and the Q has a 5.5x crop factor. Not useful for wide angle shots, but certainly very useful for extreme telephoto shots.

It's an interesting challenge, so I hope you get a great response to it.

Is the adapter available yet? It certainly looks like a very useful idea.

I don't believe in a "walk around lens", basically because images are made by the photographer. The number of times you will have the camera ready and something incredible will happen in front of you will be very, very small. In a lifetime it will be so rare as to be almost non-existent.

Opportunities are made.

Having said that, when taking a variety of images the 18-135mm will be my lens of choice. For small flowers and other close details, the 100mm macro lens. For birds and wildlife something longer such as the 55-300mm. For portraits probably the 18-135mm again, but the 70mm f2.4 or 77mm f1.8 lenses could be very nice. For very, very close macro shots sometimes the W90 compact has its advantages.

There's a misunderstanding possible from what frogfish has quoted. The figures may well be right, but if you keep the distance the same and change the lens you will be magnifying the subject much more.

Now, istead move your 105mm lens back until it gives the same field of view as your 35mm and recalculate your figures. The DOF should be exactly the same.

It is magnification that controls DOF, not focal length. It's just that in the general world the simplification is good enough. In the macro world it isn't.