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

Despite the negative reviews, I purchased a Opteka 500mm mirror lens and a 2x teleconverter awhile ago. Last week I was finally able to go to the beach and take some test shots. Per the title, My final set up was a manual focus 1000mm lens @ f 12.6 on a Sony a7ii. The IBIS in the Sony is what allowed me to handhold the lens and at 1000mm, I think thats amazing.

I was shooting at 1/1600. Because its a mirror lens, the aperture was fixed at 12.6 ( 6.3 + 2x tele ) and the ISO was 800 to 1250. This trip I was more interested in the reach of the lens and next time out I will try to figure out the sweet spot for the settings.

I was pleased with the results. However, the contrast and sharpness of this lens is horrible and it took a lot of adjustments in Lightroom.

IMAGE LINK: https://photos.smugmug​.com …L/DSC02811-L.jpg&lb=1&s=A

IMAGE LINK: https://photos.smugmug​.com …L/DSC02816-L.jpg&lb=1&s=A

IMAGE LINK: https://photos.smugmug​.com …L/DSC02853-L.jpg&lb=1&s=A

IMAGE LINK: https://photos.smugmug​.com …L/DSC02855-L.jpg&lb=1&s=A

IMAGE LINK: https://photos.smugmug​.com …L/DSC02817-L.jpg&lb=1&s=A

I'm thinking about the same lens to replace an '81 vintage Soligor that's gone missing on me.

Nice images. That's about what I recall, quality wise, from my Soligor taking images of North Korea.

Not bad but why not stick canon 400mm f5.6. Used those are cheap and I assume with adapters you have auto focus.

bobbyz wrote in post #18225770
Not bad but why not stick canon 400mm f5.6. Used those are cheap and I assume with adapters you have auto focus.

No where near as cheap as a mirror lens. Right now I think you can get the Opteka for a tad over $100 new and I have seen used ones well below $100. That's pretty darn cheap.

Well, I looked it up and Wallymart is selling it for $82.

That sounds like without T-mount adapter or 2x teleconverter.

If I get one, it'll be from Amazon.

your camera is awesome; it truly deserves a better lens

camarillo wrote in post #18226879
your camera is awesome; it truly deserves a better lens

+1......There is a reason the lens is only $82 new ....Why buy a good camera and put a lens like that on it..

don1163 wrote in post #18226935
+1......There is a reason the lens is only $82 new ....Why buy a good camera and put a lens like that on it..

Because for the very few times it's needed or wanted, it's not worth investing $1500 or $10,000 in for the next options. I'm seriously looking at the P900 because every once in a while 2000mm would be handy and i don't have $120,000 laying around for the Canon equivalent. Sure it's a toy, but for ~$100, it works.

don1163 wrote in post #18226935
Why buy a good camera and put a lens like that on it..

Edification, sense of adventure, and honing manual focus skills are a few that come to mind, but far be it from me to question or assume anything about the OP's motivation.

don1163 wrote in post #18226935
+1......There is a reason the lens is only $82 new ....Why buy a good camera and put a lens like that on it..

Because you haven't got $1,000-$5,000 for a lens you're not going to use more than a few times a year?

Because the Army let their stuff get stolen and you're not going to buy a $1,000 lens and loan it to them... for free?

I'm still debating between a 500mm mirror and one of the 650-1300mm refractors.

Either will be more than good enough to take occasional pictures of the ice on Lake Erie, boats on the lake, and the Cleveland and Lakewood skylines.

I ended up ordering the Opteka 500mm F6.3 and 2x package from Amazon last night.

I'll probably trip over the Soligor getting ready for work tomorrow...

I'm still leaning to one of the mega-zooms like the P900. If only it had raw capability.

gjl711 wrote in post #18227586
I'm still leaning to one of the mega-zooms like the P900. If only it had raw capability.

Is that one of the 650-1300mm refractors, or a better quality lens?

Why would it not shoot in RAW?