Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Sports
Thread started 05 Jun 2016 (Sunday) 14:40
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

500mm Mirror Lens + 2x Converter + Manual Focus + Handheld + Surf = ....

 
gjl711
They have pills for that now you know.
gjl711's Avatar
53,011 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Deep in the heart of Texas
Dec 30, 2016 09:07 |  #16

Temma wrote in post #18227591 (external link)
Is that one of the 650-1300mm refractors, or a better quality lens?

Why would it not shoot in RAW?

The P900 (external link) is a camera. I looked at the mirror lenses a while ago and also looked at the mega zoom cameras. In many cases the cameras had better IQ and more zoom and flexibility than an inexpensive lens. For instance, the P900 goes out to 2000mm. That's just insane and the quality looks (external link) to be better as well.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Temma
Senior Member
Joined Sep 2009
Rocky River, Ohio
Dec 30, 2016 09:45 |  #17

gjl711 wrote in post #18227609 (external link)
The P900 (external link) is a camera. I looked at the mirror lenses a while ago and also looked at the mega zoom cameras. In many cases the cameras had better IQ and more zoom and flexibility than an inexpensive lens. For instance, the P900 goes out to 2000mm. That's just insane and the quality looks (external link) to be better as well.

I almost ended up with a Canon like that as my first digital camera. I'm glad I got my EOS350D instead.

Of course it's a question of what better meets your needs.




LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
They have pills for that now you know.
gjl711's Avatar
53,011 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Deep in the heart of Texas
Dec 30, 2016 10:10 |  #18

Temma wrote in post #18227658 (external link)
I almost ended up with a Canon like that as my first digital camera. I'm glad I got my EOS350D instead.

Of course it's a question of what better meets your needs.

I shot with several compacts before getting the Rebel 300D and I never would consider going back 100%. There are too many things a SLR just does better. However, when it comes to really long glass, quality costs a lot. I have the 100-400 now and even 400 at times is just too short. The 400 with a 1.4 t-con gets me a bit more but quality suffers greatly. When I looked at these mega-zooms it seemed that even with the small sensor the quality is better than the 400 with 1.4 t-con especially as you can get a whole lot ore pixels on the target in the first place. Also looking at the B700. Not as much =zoom but it does support raw. I haven't had a chance to play with one yet though.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

LOG IN TO REPLY
Temma
Senior Member
Joined Sep 2009
Rocky River, Ohio
Dec 30, 2016 10:21 |  #19

gjl711 wrote in post #18227672 (external link)
I shot with several compacts before getting the Rebel 300D and I never would consider going back 100%. There are too many things a SLR just does better. However, when it comes to really long glass, quality costs a lot. I have the 100-400 now and even 400 at times is just too short. The 400 with a 1.4 t-con gets me a bit more but quality suffers greatly. When I looked at these mega-zooms it seemed that even with the small sensor the quality is better than the 400 with 1.4 t-con especially as you can get a whole lot ore pixels on the target in the first place. Also looking at the B700. Not as much =zoom but it does support raw. I haven't had a chance to play with one yet though.

I've got a ProMaster 70-300mm zoom. It's a tolerable basic zoom. Nothing special, but serviceable. I've done little to nothing with it on the T4i since I upgraded from the 350D. The weather's been too lousy.

I'll eventually do some comparisons between the ProMaster and the Opteka at long ranges.

Some day I'd like to get a better zoom, but I'm in no hurry, and especially in no hurry to spend upwards of $1,000 or more.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Noitca
Senior Member
Joined Feb 2011
Acworth, GA
Jan 03, 2017 08:21 as a reply to gjl711's post |  #20

My son (9) wanted a camera of his own for Christmas. He is allowed to use my T1i pretty much whenever he wants, but still wanted his own camera that was better than his current (and our old) Sony pocket camera. We ended up settling on the B700 for him because it would do many of the manual exposure controls and raw files with some of the other built-in bonuses of a "point-and-shoot" camera, like the zoom range and "macro" focus ability. Overally, pretty happy with it so far.


T1i with 18-55, 55-250, 50 1.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
They have pills for that now you know.
gjl711's Avatar
53,011 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Deep in the heart of Texas
Jan 03, 2017 12:37 |  #21

Noitca wrote in post #18231641 (external link)
My son (9) wanted a camera of his own for Christmas. He is allowed to use my T1i pretty much whenever he wants, but still wanted his own camera that was better than his current (and our old) Sony pocket camera. We ended up settling on the B700 for him because it would do many of the manual exposure controls and raw files with some of the other built-in bonuses of a "point-and-shoot" camera, like the zoom range and "macro" focus ability. Overally, pretty happy with it so far.

I have been searching for some solution to getting past 640mm as I have the 100-400 and a 1.4 t-con. I got to play with this over the holiday and I got to say, I was quite impressed.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

LOG IN TO REPLY
Temma
Senior Member
Joined Sep 2009
Rocky River, Ohio
Jan 04, 2017 11:53 |  #22

I got my Opteka 500mm F6.3, 2x teleconverter and EOS T-mount adapter today. It actually came at least a day early.

It's HEAVY, and a superficial examination shows a good build quality.

I won't get to do anything more than put on the T-mount adapter until this weekend.

It's supposed to snow tonight, so at most I might get to shoot down into the Cleveland Metroparks for a rough test.

For $119 for the whole deal, I don't have any unreasonable expectations. As with the Soligor it's replacing, it'll just be a means of capturing images which I wouldn't otherwise be able to capture at all.

No pictures of North Korea this time. Cleveland will have to do...




LOG IN TO REPLY
Temma
Senior Member
Joined Sep 2009
Rocky River, Ohio
Post has been edited 8 months ago by Temma.
Jan 22, 2017 17:16 |  #23

A few images with the 500mm F6.3 Opteka. ISO 1600, 1/500:
Note: Forgot to mention that it has the 2x teleconverter attached.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



LOG IN TO REPLY
saea501
... spilled over a little on the panties
saea501's Avatar
Joined Jan 2010
Florida
Feb 07, 2017 06:30 |  #24

I guess to each his own. These pictures look like they were made with a $100 lens.

I wouldn't want my name associated with images that look like this.

But if you're enjoying it, that's all that matters.


Remember what the DorMouse said.....feed your head.
Bob

LOG IN TO REPLY
NeverFollow
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Joined Jun 2005
Feb 24, 2017 14:40 |  #25

Wow I totally forgot about this post. In reply to the posts asking the question why? and things like "you have such a nice camera don't don't put cheep glass on it"... I totally understand your point of view. I bought this lens with the intent to use it solely for fun. All of my professional work requires lenses with focal ranges less than 200mm. To put the worriers at ease, all my lenses except this one and my macro are L lenses and my favorite combo for is the 135L f2 on the Sony.

That being said if you haven't shot at 1000mm.... try it! It reminds me of the first time I tried a 200mm coming from the kit lens. There is definitely a unique perspective from this lens.

Until I book some paid jobs that require me to shoot at the focal length, the "cheap 1000mm" will remain. I don't use it nearly enough to justify a quality lens.

IMAGE: https://photos.smugmug.com/Digital-Archive/Travel/White-Sands-National-Park/i-DQjNWhf/0/XL/DSC09548-XL.jpg
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://photos.smugmug​.com .../DSC09548-XL.jpg&lb=1&s=A] (external link) on Smugmug

White Sands, NM @1000mm

www.chriskennedy.photo
http://ckphotoonline.w​ordpress.com/ (external link)
http://500px.com/chris​kennedydotphoto (external link)
KCCO

LOG IN TO REPLY
Temma
Senior Member
Joined Sep 2009
Rocky River, Ohio
Post has been edited 7 months ago by Temma.
Feb 24, 2017 15:55 |  #26

NeverFollow wrote in post #18284036 (external link)
Wow I totally forgot about this post. In reply to the posts asking the question why? and things like "you have such a nice camera don't don't put cheep glass on it"... I totally understand your point of view. I bought this lens with the intent to use it solely for fun. All of my professional work requires lenses with focal ranges less than 200mm. To put the worriers at ease, all my lenses except this one and my macro are L lenses and my favorite combo for is the 135L f2 on the Sony.

That being said if you haven't shot at 1000mm.... try it! It reminds me of the first time I tried a 200mm coming from the kit lens. There is definitely a unique perspective from this lens.

Until I book some paid jobs that require me to shoot at the focal length, the "cheap 1000mm" will remain. I don't use it nearly enough to justify a quality lens.

QUOTED IMAGE
[IMAGE'S LINK: https://photos.smugmug​.com .../DSC09548-XL.jpg&lb=1&s=A] (external link) on Smugmug

White Sands, NM @1000mm

That's great. It looks like the surface of the moon.

I'm kind of tickled by the vehemence with which some people believe I should hate this lens.

Like you, I simply view it as an amusement which allows me to capture images I'd never be able to capture otherwise. I simply don't have $800-$1,000 for something that's going to get used infrequently at best.

The 500mm lens you have the money to buy will always capture better images than the one you'll never have the money for.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Temma
Senior Member
Joined Sep 2009
Rocky River, Ohio
Feb 24, 2017 15:58 |  #27

saea501 wrote in post #18266738 (external link)
I guess to each his own. These pictures look like they were made with a $100 lens.

It's a $119 lens, and worth every penny!




LOG IN TO REPLY
Temma
Senior Member
Joined Sep 2009
Rocky River, Ohio
Mar 01, 2017 08:12 |  #28

I just got my Asus Android tablet yesterday. I bought it SOLELY for the purpose of tethered shooting.

While I do 80% macrophotography, the INSTANT improvement in sharpness enabled by the large screen gives me high hopes for use with the 500mm mirror.

I did a few shots from a friend's fifth floor office Saturday. Shooting through cheap office windows, combined with heat shimmer didn't give great results, but I did get a couple of ok images. A dark, snowy day didn't help either.

We'll see what happens on a bright, warmer day, tethered.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Temma
Senior Member
Joined Sep 2009
Rocky River, Ohio
Jun 18, 2017 16:38 |  #29

I found my missing Soligor 500mm f/8 mirror lens!

Strangely, it was way back in a place on a bookshelf where I'd looked about twenty times previously.

When I get a chance, I'm going to take the T-mount adapter off of my Opteka and put it on the Soligor to try it out. I bet I haven't used it in twenty years!




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

6,149 views & 10 likes for this thread
500mm Mirror Lens + 2x Converter + Manual Focus + Handheld + Surf = ....
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Sports


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00152 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
Latest registered member is Allyn
897 guests, 439 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016