actually its appear because the lens have a mirror and its infront of the sensor :D and if you make a picture about a mirror? is that mirror is infornt of the senor :O thats crazy :O
Bad lens for photographers but great lens for the private investigator who wants to capture license plates or document insurance fraud from long ranges and without being spotted.
2:00 at the top of western avenue about to head to Ely in the left lane... THATS ME! I've got my AGV Horizon blue motorcycle lid on riding a Hornet 900. How strange!
92JMFL First time I've watched one of your videos, and I saw Whitchurch Hospital and Castell Coch in one shot. I'm in Swansea. Enjoyed the review. (Don't think I'll buy one!)
Had the 500mm version, same thing: soft, low contrast, difficult to focus and needed ridiculous shutter speed, like 1/2000. Sold it and didn't loose much money.
I hope one day someone will produce a good quality mirror lens. Mirror lenses are great for astrophotography. Of course a steady tripod and live view are more than necessary.
what about proper telescopes? I paid slightly more than for such a small reflector for a 2nd hand 750mm newton with EQ3 GoTo mount Yes its heavy, but in the end... its necessary if you want good tracking and long exposures! Also, the quality of even a cheap 750mm F5 newton is just worlds ahead from any of these lenses. (personal experience with 500mm and 800mm walimex and then the "big boy" 750mm newton) In fact my 750mm is still a very basic beginner telescope and mount, not even worth mentioning this already "proper telescope". A good mount cost already easily 1000$ 2nd hand!
This lens isn't a waste of money, for the low price and lightweight it's nice to have it in your bag when you want to travel and do creative shoot.. It may not be that super sharp but when you be creative trying to get some reach, your creativity will matter. Ex, if you want a compressed image of a heavy traffic, the sharpness won't matter because the heat and humidity is there. Not all creative image requires sharpness. As for the doughnut bokeh, again it depends on your composition. Maybe flower with the bright sea on the background, those donuts looks very captivating. Lastly I agree about the camera shake on tripod, use bean bag. This lens is a nice 'extra lens' on the bag. IMHO:)
Minolta / Sony users have the advantage here: for the Minolta/Sony A-mount you can get the AF 500mm F8 Reflex. Yes, a mirror lens with AF. Combined with the steady shot in the camera, it is a lens that is really fun to use. For Sony E-mount users, they just have to use the proper E2A adapter and they can use it too with AF. IMHO the AF 500mm F8 Reflex in combination with the new Sony A7-II + LA-E2A4 adapter is a nice compact package to carry around with a lot of reach.
I bought one of these just to take shots of the moon - mainly video, but the novelty soon wore off. I only paid £120 off eBay, so no major expense. It is a very soft lens as you say. I found I got much better photos of the moon by using the Canon 70mm - 300mm IS and crop from a full frame, in my case the Canon 5DmkIII
Technicaly it´s a kind of Schmidt Cassegrain telescope, but much cheaper. So is the quality of this device. An f/8 is nothing weird in this case, f/10 apertures are common. Yes, it is crappy, but if you dont want to spend 1.000+ for an Celestron telescope, and want to make som amature astrophotography, its worth considering for the price, to play with.
these types of not-so-dead-sharp lenses are more than fine enough for some applications anyway ... besides, under certain lighting and subject conditions, as it is visible here on some of the samples in this video too, the image is more than acceptably sharp and can be made even sharper in post, for both stills as well as video ... use a double converter on any lens, even the best matched combinations out there, and the lens loses a lot of its quality no matter what ... so, by what i saw here, i say i like this lens and its doubler converter too! :) let's not forget that part of the loss in sharpness with any strong telephoto lens lies in the fact that when using them we also see some to a lot of 'mirage' in most subjects far away from the camera anyway! especially in desert shots ... camera shake a problem with these lenses? then either hook up the camera to a steady-cam stabilizer device of some kind , or simply use a camera with in-camera shake reduction and it'll certainly be a great help! overall, i believe one can take a lens of this class a little bit more seriously, and it'll serve you very well considering its very low price as well as its relatively small size and little weight that make it a much better choice for many jobs, where owning and taking a prime telephoto lens is simply too hard, if not impossible! the Donuts-shape Bokeh is also ok in my own personal views: it's good for some subjects, and for others where a true circle Bokeh is more desired, it can be handled in post and 'corrected' by some retouching or even software tricks ... i would happily go for two of these lenses as soon as i can afford it: the 500mm as well as the 800mm ... great video and very fine tests btw! professionally made, thanks and keep up the good job! :)
Dorf Schmidt Minolta did it in 1985' and its still working. l use it in bright sunlight only.When the light reduces, the image quality also reduces. Not advisable to use it low light handheld photography.
Minlolta made an AF mirror lens like this, I have seen some of the images and they really aren't that bad. Hand held really isn't an option, moving targets aren't either. However, with a Sony DSLR and the in camera Steady Shot, sharp images can be taken.
They are a fiddly nightmare but they are FUN and when you do nail it they REALLY nail it. on my XTI the 800 mm is 1280mm effective (crop sensor) the issue is manual focus only on a small viewfinder. so very hard to actually get it in focus and worse the DOF is very very very shallow. BUT when you actually "DO" nail it. wow is all I can say. so a shot you need? don't even try. but for having fun nabbing super far shots that you can shot over and over again to try and get it? TONS of fun and super cheap in comparison. I think I paid $150 for mine. Love it.
I bought a 500mm mirror and am very happy with it , hand held shots with the aid of stabilising from my g9 at as low as 300th of a sec shutter , I’m over the moon for 75 , including adapter, soon to be featured on my channel called Motorcycles And Things , cheers Shane uk 🇬🇧
Something this would be good for is cheap deep sky astrophotography, just pair it with a guider and camera and you got a real cheap astrophotography telescope setup.
I was very fascinated by this type of lenses back in the 80's. So small and still such a long focal length. Today though, I wouldn't get one. Pretty sure it would lend it self to a frustrating experience. Your review was very good, as usual.
You don’t understand how the equivalent focal length works with an APS-C camera. The image doesn’t magically get higher magnification. Your field of vision gets smaller as if with a longer lens. Example- close one eye and see the room, your focal length is approximately 17 mm, now pick up a straw and look through it. What you see through the straw hasn’t improved, the magnification hasn’t improved, but the amount of the room you can see has decreased as if you were using a higher focal length. That means that the amount of the room you will be able to see is equivalent to the area you would see if using a 1600 mm lens. In other words you capture less of the scene with an APS-C than a full frame. The focal length of the lens (magnification) is fixed by the size of the lens. In real life the image (information) on the APS-C is smaller but zoomed to fit the view finder. FYI 24 MPixels on an APS-C is better than 24 MPixels on a full Frame because it means there are more pixels on the smaller image.
In the past Nikon, Canon, Minolta Sigma, Tamron or even Sony(Minolta design) were selling f/8 reflex lenses at around 500mm. Recently in 2020 Tokina has announced an f/8 400mm reflex lens for various mounts. It is said that has very good optical quality. Minolta is the only manufacturer that produced autofocus reflex lenses. The autofocus 500mm f/8 reflex a-mount for 135mm film SLR cameras and the less known autofocus 400mm f/8 reflex for APS film SLR cameras.
Sony until quite recently was producing the only autofocus reflex lens in the world for its a-mount cameras. It was the autofocus SAL500F80 500mm f/8 reflex, an update of the autofocus Minolta AF 500mm f/8 reflex camera. Both lenses should work perfectly with the a-mount to e-mount LA-EA4 adapter with translucent mirror on e-mount bodies. At eBay these lenses cost around 400-600 depending on quality
I suppose that the old adage "you get what you pay for" is applicable here. I have a cheapo fish-eye lens that I use for fun shots. I enjoyed your videos of the UK as I have not been to Europe in quite some time. Cheers!
I have a used 500mm Chinon mirror lens I got for cheap. Love throwing it in for a quick moon shoot sometimes with a 2X teleconverter or just putting it on to see what you can see. It can help tell a story very well. If there’s a story you can’t tell because you can’t afford a better tool to do it what’s the point of even thinking about it in the first place.
I wonder if placing a little beanbag on the tripod then the camera on the beanbag would steady it better? That way, the front of the lens wouldn't vibrate because it would be embedded in the beanbag.
If you'd tilt the back mirror (the one closest to the sensor) 45° you could avoid that donut bokeh, as the light would exit through the side and you can leave out the mirror on the front, which is the culprit in this case you would just need to add another mirror just "outside" the lens at 45° again, to avoid tilting your camera 90° to shoot straight. in other words: similar to a herschel telescope but modified to allow the camera to attach to the back of the lens
Catadioptric lenses are really neat! Should work pretty well for astrophotography. I use a heavy tripod with motor drive for stability and sidereal star tracking. Something like this lens would serve me well.
Bought the Tamron version and is apparently the second best for sharpness. Carl Zeiss being the best but also extremely rare. Will try my Tamron once it arrives and let you know if it's good. I've seen some good pictures taken with this lens
This Half Scotsman bought it. Cheap cheap! Tried it. Had fun. Looked great on me. Conversation piece n all. Took it back. End of story. Weird lens? Good name for it
Really interesting review Chris. Apertures such as f/8 are really not that bad to use in decent daylight on 'normal' telephotos as I'm sure you know. I use a Canon 70-200 f/4 l is with a Canon 2x mkiii extender (yes, I know how all the forums rate this combination but my image results look pretty darn good) which gives me a manual focus f/8 400 mm lens. In good light f/8 is never a problem (as long as you use a tripod/monopod tripod if no I.S though!). But 800mm+ must be quite a challenge.Great to see someone reviewing the 'lost' lenses on the market. I'd love to see you review some of the old L lenses such as the 28-70, 28-80, 20-35 and 100-300 L; no-one seems to have done an old L round up. Keep up the excellent work.
Hmm yes it's interesting - at 800mm I thought I might be able to get away with 1/800 second but it seems that you need even faster shutter speeds. I found that on the Sigma 50-500 (non OS) - whereas at 200mm 1/200 is fine. Strange. Hmm I'd love to review some older 'L' lenses, and I have a couple of reviews of discontinued lenses coming up, but I don't have the time to be doing too many :-( I'm happy to review lenses anyone wants to lend me though, hehe
Astrophotography is a good use for this lens :) , of course having a computerized telescope with a 1/20 or 1/4 screw is a super plus. Add that with Magic Lantern , and you'll be taking deep sky objects in no time :)
Managed to get a similar 500mm Mirror lens (Opteka). With the x2 converter. $80 Tones of fun, and way easier to handle than its long nosed cousin the 500mm Telephoto. My only quibble with it is Focus... Its a real bas**rd to get focused some times... especially when you have the x2 adapter on it.
Many amateur photographers like lenses with long focal lengths for creativity but don't like to carry a lot of weight. Besides the high price of an 800mm prime lens, there are P&S cameras that are classified as super zooms. These have just 1 fixed zoom lens but can go up to 60x or even 80x. The aperture can be more practical at F6.3 and adjustable than fixed. The camera is a bit bulky but for a low price you can get a camera with a lens so why pay for just the lens?
I'm surprised someone hasn't got one currently on the market - the tech isn't that involved now, with the IBIS and peaking focus options you'd think they could pull it off easy enough.
Seems to me the fixed aperture is the only _real_ disadvantage for a lens like this. Sure, the bokeh effect isn't great, but depending on your shot, it is avoidable. The contrast can always be fixed in post-processing. Most lenses of this focal length require a tripod, either because they too have insufficient (or just lacking) image stabilization or because they're too heavy. So, when you consider what the alternatives are, I'm not sure you can get something anywhere near as good and convenient as mirror lenses without spending thousands of dollars (and even then, you're still going to end up with something huge and heavy).
I had a Vivitar 600mm f8 lens mirror lens (also called a catadioptric or cat), which I used with my Canon EOS 5 and Canon EOS 10 35mm cameras in the early 90's. I remember some old git at the local camera club telling me how rubbish mirror lenses were - until I showed him some images. He kept quiet after that. It was a decent lens. Not sure if I could focus one now without a split or fresnal focusing screen.
i just bought this lens in a second hand shop and havnt tried, but watching this video, i wonder if im the only person finding the donut bokeh totally beautiful. cant wait to try it!
Yes. 2nd vote on Tamron 500mm adaptal mount (That would fit virtually all cameras) and also the Nikon CAT 500 F8 is a very good mirror lens, if you find a good used copy.
I can focus up to moon see space shuttle orbit around it with this lens all I need to do is practice on focus to get clear pictures with it this lens is step back for me still learning how to use it but recommend it for long manual distance for what this guy is using it for
Provided this lens has aperture blades and f stops. Just use f11 to f14 aperture and the photos will be reasonably sharp. f8 lenses are natrually soft wide open. But my TOU Five Star 500mm f8 Prime Preset lens on Nikon D90 could get reasonable birds shots straight out of camera, but rather comparable to bridge digicam superzooms with built in AF lenses.
If you want long focal lengths without very expensive glass, you are much better off getting one of the small sensor super zoom compacts, such as Nikon's P900. The will give you MUCH better IQ, are easier to handle and give you a range of focal lengths to boot.
Nice review. Mirror lenses are ideal for astronomical🔭 usage or astrophotography. Before buying a mirror lens one thing is important above all. A STURDY TRIPOD. Any light and cheap tripod will created vibrations. This lens is ideal for moon photography or solar planet photography with long shutter speed and tripod. Of course is not handheld at all.
+Achilleas Labrou : how can you make long shutter speed on a tripod ? I strongly believe that tests for astrophotography has to be made by stacking process (short shutter speed of 0,6 sec. x 400 photos + 20 biaised photos + 20 dark photos)
every lens has a purpose. they also have drawbacks but i would rather have it rather than need it and not have it. which one of us can afford the high cost of the profesional super telephoto lens.
The focal length of the lens and 2x tc is 1600mm. The equivalent focal length of this lens with the 2x converter on an apsc sensor is 1600mm. It doesnt change. The equivalent field of view however changes. On an apsc it would have an equivalent field of view of a 2560mm lens but with the focal length of 1600mm. Crop sensors only trim the edges off therefore reducing the field of view. There is no change in focal lenght/reach/zoom etc
That's what saying 'equivalent focal length' means. 2560mm is not the real focal length - it's the 'equivalent' to what you'd see on a full frame camera.
I could make use of it. I have a total ocean view off of the cliffs. I get tons of sunlight everyday so the slow aperture of f8 ro f16 shouldn't be a problem. Good review.
i got one for $20 well loved the softness is from the chromatic aberration. this is a great little lens for moon shoots for fun i stacked 3 2x teles on it and i didn't need an ND to get good moon shots.
Lol I take it you have never used one then? It's very noticeable on these still it is out weighted by the advantages of having a 500mm that has nil weight. But if you don't believe me here en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic_aberration
Ryan "Ducky" Georgieff lol I don't even have to look at it.. it is mirror lens . It doesn't have chromatic aberration. Wiki? Lol you have to look half baked idea from Wikipedia? It is optics 101 stuff ok. Chromatic aberration happened due to refraction not reflection. Lol
+joker 13_14 season technically chromatic aberration can happen anytime lightwaves don't hit the same point on the focal plane do to lens quality Catadioptric systems use both mirrors and refractive optics, and are used in pretty much all mirror lenses for cameras. They’re not immune to chromatic aberration.
Ryan "Ducky" Georgieff and this lens use any elements , even if used , cause nice blur due to chromatic abberation? Sorry I didnt bother this kind of simplistic design. Since 1990s so be it You won. Happy?
I know this is an old video, but maybe it would have done better with a full frame to APSC speed booster. Let in more light and maybe sharpened the image... (if the focal reducer/speed booster is of good quality). Also, maybe on a camera with good IBIS inbody stabilization could help an absolute ton.
You might think about doing a weird lens segment on the Tokina 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 ATX Pro U.S. Version) or the 28-70mm f/2.8 ATX Pro (Japanese Version). Angenieux, the French maker of great cinema lenses brought out a 28-70mm f/2.6 zoom lens in the late 1980's or early 1990's. It was a good lens but Angenieux could not produce them at a price competitive with Japanese lenses of the era. Tokina purchased the rights to produce this lens and sold it under the designators referred to above. However, Tokina could not produce the lens cheaply enough to compete with Nikon and Canon so, they dropped this model after a short time of production and brought out the 28-70mm f/2.8 SV (special value) lens. In this case SV is an oxymoron. I love my Tokina (I have the f/2.8 model produced for Japanese domestic consumption) for shooting people.
Nonsense. The image is merely cropped, not the focal length increased. If you image the moon, for instance, it will be the same size no matter what size sensor you use!!
There are many errors stated in this video. Mirrorless lens do not give better photos since the mirror does not take the picture; the sensor size (full, APS-C, or APS) dictate some quality; the real picture quality comes from the lens. The 2x teleconverter can only double the lens FL to 1600, no more, and it cannot double the aperture to f/16 since the aperture is fixed at f/8 (there are fins to move).
It's difficult to read your English, so I have a feeling you've probably misunderstood what I've been saying the video. I never said the 2x converter takes you beyond 1600mm (although I did say that on an APS-C camera the EQUIVALENT would be 2,560mm). Workably, the aperture DOES become f/16 - both in terms of light gathered and depth-of-field. And I never said that there's no difference between APS-C and full-frame. And, whether you like it or not, conventional optics ('mirrorless' lenses, as you put it) do perform much better almost all the time.
... when you deal with crop factor you multiply ALL variable elements by the crop factor. In this instance, f-stop and focal length will both be affected by crop factor of an APS-C / M43. Adding the teleconverter also simulates crop factor. Remember, this is why a speed booster gives you MORE workable light, it operates on exactly the same principle, just in reverse. Therefore, the maximum focal length and aperture on an APS-C lens would be: (X * crop * tele), where X is the aperture or the focal length. In this instance, you would get an effective focal length of 2560mm, and an effective equivalent aperture of f25.6. This is also why a 25mm f1.7 Micro 4/3 lens is roughly equivalent to a 50mm f3.4 in terms of light captured and overall focal length.
I'm not going to get into this debate because I know from experience it can go on and on and on - but I'll say this: You're absolutely correct about the lens with the 2x teleconvertor on an APS-C camera being 2560mm with equivalent aperture f/25.6 (or thereabouts) in terms of depth of field. However, in terms of the INTENSITY of the light that actually hits the camera's sensor, it's still f/16. APS-C cameras and full-frame may have big differences in their sensors and ISO read outs etc. - but at the end of the day, putting an APS-C camera behind a lens does not make the lens any darker. (Whereas using a teleconvertor does, because it's changing the optical formula). Similarly, a 25mm Micro 4/3 lens is roughly equivalent to a 50mm f/3.4 in terms of focal length and depth of field. But in terms of the intensity of the light that actually hits the camera's sensor, it's still f/1.7. If you took that M3/4 lens and mounted it onto a full-frame camera (somehow) then, although you would see very heavy vignetting, obviously, the image projected into the middle would still have the light intensity of...f/1.7.
Christopher Frost Photography Thanks for the in-depth reply! :) EDIT: This was referring to say, going down from a Full Frame lens / APS-C lens to a M4/3 body. There is little if any point mounting a lens designed for a smaller sensor (ie m4/3 onto fullframe), whereas at least with larger lenses to smaller sensors you'd be able to use a speedbooster to get a bit more usable light. That's all I was trying to convey.
Whilst nothing you have said is untrue (although I do like the bokeh personally but totally understand why people don't).I still love my mirror lens, I never have more fun with my camera then when playing with it. The shots are rarely the best but it seriously stokes my love of just being out taking photos.
No, it's a mini Schmidt Cassegrain. Many telescopes are made in this manner. One of mine is. A Newt doesn't have the front secondary, it has the 45 degree reflector to the focuser. ..Joe
I tested such a lens also once... then i bought a "real telescope"... a cheap 2nd hand 750mm newton with GoTo mount for "only" 400$, basically the 2nd cheapest newton aviable more or less and WOW! Big difference. The 750mm F5 newton looks MUCH BETTER than the 800mm of the Walimex i tested. Only the sharpness, 2 different worlds! The 150/750mm newton has its own newton specific problems but there are coma-correctors if you want nice corners too.
@@harrison00xXx Yeah I totally agree. I own a 6" Newtonian myself. Shortly after that comment, I started using a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 APO DG HSM which I hadn't been using for a while. WOW such a difference. 500mm to 200mm was a big difference too but the quality of the images I get with the APO are several steps above the 500mm. Very sharp and no chromatic aberrations. Now I see wide field astrophotography is much more interesting than I thought. I thought it was all about reach but NO! It's much more than that.
@@ruiner101 Yes good APOs, especially in the 200-350mm range for astrophotography are just awesome. I am still using for that case a 100mm Macro lens with F2.8 or even my RF 50mm 1.8 (at 2.8) But im much more into deep sky and small nebulas, the wider fields are already boring Mostly if i want to make an awesome widefield sky only im making a mosaic with the 750mm newton for the sake of 80MP+ It also works just great and easy af (just a lot time needed to gain data and process it) with a astrophotography software which controls everything including queues and plate solving. Except for autofocusser i am basically already completely automated
@@ruiner101 Btw, have you never used a COMA-corrector?! I used my 750mm newtonian without for a while, but as i once borrowed one from a friend... i was ordering very very fast my own one. I always refused to buy the ones fitting 750mm F5s because of the price and the additional work on the scope (backfocus!!!!) But it was totally worth it, i just got a proper focusser too by replacing the not for astrophotography meant focusser. All i am missing is a motor for autofocusser but as i dont want to be THAT LAZY... its already awesome with complete computer control and even better than awesome with plate solving and co!
@@ruiner101 As i did everything manually (so searching for the objects i wanted to target) i barely found the small, faint stuff. Yes, i did orion nebula, flame nebula and all the other "more easy" targets because i found them, but even NGC2237 (rosetta nebula) was hard to find already. Let alone the small stuff. So i began to randomly investigate places which looked interesting for me in the live view. It was also extremely interesting, i found a lot "stars" which were actually small galaxies just too small for 750mm for proper details (and tried to solve what galaxy im looking at by known data). As if i would investigate which bird i took a photo of after the hunt for images. But as i began to use GoTo, especially with PC and plate solving, a complete new world opened for me! Ofc many stuff i was interested to i found out... i just need 2000mm+, but also i found a lot more faint, not as known targets to combine multiple nights, so sometimes 20hrs+ on an image. I had to deal with a lot of hassle but some of these images are just AWESOME, considering you can barely make them out with 30 minutes of data and very noisy. Very time consuming hobby, but the GoTo/Plate solving/target queue stuff per computer makes the hobby so enjoyable. Not once i took the telescope with my older MacBook Pro to camping in the middle of nowhere, just took some images while enjoying the camping with friends, then swap out the AP gear for the eyepiece to show the people some stuff in the night sky. Its just a 6"... thats the reason im probably upgrading anytime to at least 8", better 10"+ dobson (mainly observations to feel like a Mr Newton or Messier, Charles Messier used ) for cheap And hopefully some day i can afford a Celestron C8, better even C11 and make proper images of the small galaxies like the whirlpool galaxy (where my 750mm is big enough to see it, but too small for nice details)
Buy this lens (or any mirror lens) used on eBay, play with for a few weeks then sell it. My favorite is the Sigma 600mm in olive drab. Looks very military.
Minolta/Sony has a 500mm F8 mirror lens with autofocus, although I do believe this is the only one that made it to series production? I use a Sigma 600mm F8 mirror lens quite often and find with Live View, focusing accurately really isn't an issue at all as long as you have a sturdy tripod, solid ground and preferably a remote release for the shutter. The donut bokeh is avoidable given some practice. Now I just need a backpack of some kind for the lens and other stuff. Any suggestions?
Hmm an AF mirror lens, that's interesting! I need to look at backpacks myself really, so no suggestions as of yet. Maybe you'll find some ideas at the-digital-picture dot com.
Sony is the only company who has made an AF mirror lens, I have it and it is a very useful lens. Some rumors say Sony is working on a 250mm f/4.5 Mirror lens for the E mount, an ASP-C lens.
Alex Alexander I've heard of something similar before, I suppose we'll see soon enough as there's bound to be plenty of discussion/videos on various sites about it. Well done to Sony for breaking the mould! Samyang also produce a few mirror lenses for the E-mount separately. Oh and as for the backpack issue; I finally picked up a Tamrac 5585 and with some shuffling of the dividers, I can accomodate either the Sony 500mm or Sigma 600mm but only if its not attached to the camera body. You'll need something either larger than that backpack, or a dedicated telephoto-carrying bag like Tamrac's "Super Telephoto Lens Pack". Just in case anyone's looking!
I got this a while back on a whim. It's pretty difficult to use, but with practice you can coax some decent pictures from it. I use it mostly for moon photos, which turn out pretty well. Video shot through it is also pretty decent. I use it most to record heron, geese and such from a distance.
If you can send me one it would be appriciated, I can buy this lens used for about $80, and would like to know if it comes close to my telescope (1000mm)
Just buy a Nikon P900 camera, small sensor but the quality is way superior. With a 2000mm (soft over 1500) lens it does GREAT. I love mine. They run about $500 now, and Nikon P1000 with the 3000mm is even better, 4K, raw, and big buffer, but it's 1k. Serious, you will use the lens in this review once or twice, but the P900 or P1000 you will use a lot. I own 9 cameras from D2's D3, D500, D7200's etc, and yet I keep the P900 in the car all the time because the reach is far and sharp. Good for close up too and 24mm for wide angle.
I just happened to click on your clip as the lens looked like my old Sigma 600mm mirror and was amazed to see that you filmed some of it from the bridge over the A48 by the university just 2 mins walk from my home! It was nice to see Castell Coch and the Whitchurch Hospital tower too :-) . Are you local to the area? Neil.
Wish I could have tried this lens (just for fun) on the Super blood moon. Since I had to use F11 ISO-1600 and 1.3 sek shutter, I might have been able to fill the frame a bit more without too much more softness (seeing the one I used is quite soft already, gotta compare their data later...).
If you mount a 800mm lens on an APS-C's camera, you still have 800mm of focal, but cropped. Nothing like a 1200mm focal lens. Mount it on a full frame sensor cámera, and then crop the image and amplify it, you'll just have the same as yout APS-C mount.
You should inform you about what a lens focal is. What is right, is that 800mm Full Frame has an angle of view equivalent to a 1.600 DX lens. But focal remains ever and ever the same, that's mean that your lens won't approach you more on an APS-C than on a FF. Exactly the same. Keep on being funny.
I would love to see how this compares with the 2x converter vs not using the converter but cropping the image to match the 2x view. Which would be better?
the sigma 600 f8 is also a very well built lens, sharp images but focus has to be spot spot on in other words don't trust your eyes, go with the little "in focus" light, I'm shooting with Nikon so not sure how the others letyou now when something is in focus
Picked up the Samyang 800mm a few weeks ago, eBay - £40. T2 adaptors from Aliexpress (£6) and I'm away. It's not going to win over my 600mm Sigma for image quality but it's around the size and weight of the Sigmas' lens hood.
![[Live] : ONE 168 วันนี้!! "โจนาธาน vs ซุปเปอร์เล็ก"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0jIN65KgJsI/mqdefault.jpg)
if mirrorless cameras use this lens, would it still be a mirrorless camera?
So you're asking me, if I put this lens on a mirrorless camera using an adaptor, then would a mirror magically appear in front of the sensor? No.
+Christopher Frost Photography he was joking lol
actually its appear because the lens have a mirror and its infront of the sensor :D and if you make a picture about a mirror? is that mirror is infornt of the senor :O thats crazy :O
Cmon man, sarcasm!
If man say something and no woman hears him.. Is he still wrong?
Bad lens for photographers but great lens for the private investigator who wants to capture license plates or document insurance fraud from long ranges and without being spotted.
Bill Weckel yip lol
thanks for giving me ideas
Bill Weckel I don't think that is true? because I see no problem for photographers?
Too slow, you need faster lens like F4 or faster..
That's why I got one. Works very well for astrophotography.
2:00 at the top of western avenue about to head to Ely in the left lane... THATS ME! I've got my AGV Horizon blue motorcycle lid on riding a Hornet 900. How strange!
Wow, amazing!
I can't believe it. I've been watching your videos for a while now and didn't know you were from Cardiff. Small world.
92JMFL First time I've watched one of your videos, and I saw Whitchurch Hospital and Castell Coch in one shot. I'm in Swansea. Enjoyed the review. (Don't think I'll buy one!)
Had the 500mm version, same thing: soft, low contrast, difficult to focus and needed ridiculous shutter speed, like 1/2000. Sold it and didn't loose much money.
You've got quite a noticeable bit of dirt on your sensor in the top left most noticeably at 3:55
I hope one day someone will produce a good quality mirror lens. Mirror lenses are great for astrophotography. Of course a steady tripod and live view are more than necessary.
I have seen shots from a Tamron mirror lens that seemed very impressive.
And at least f/5. That lens would be a wideboi.
what about proper telescopes?
I paid slightly more than for such a small reflector for a 2nd hand 750mm newton with EQ3 GoTo mount
Yes its heavy, but in the end... its necessary if you want good tracking and long exposures!
Also, the quality of even a cheap 750mm F5 newton is just worlds ahead from any of these lenses. (personal experience with 500mm and 800mm walimex and then the "big boy" 750mm newton)
In fact my 750mm is still a very basic beginner telescope and mount, not even worth mentioning this already "proper telescope". A good mount cost already easily 1000$ 2nd hand!
This lens isn't a waste of money, for the low price and lightweight it's nice to have it in your bag when you want to travel and do creative shoot.. It may not be that super sharp but when you be creative trying to get some reach, your creativity will matter. Ex, if you want a compressed image of a heavy traffic, the sharpness won't matter because the heat and humidity is there. Not all creative image requires sharpness.
As for the doughnut bokeh, again it depends on your composition. Maybe flower with the bright sea on the background, those donuts looks very captivating.
Lastly I agree about the camera shake on tripod, use bean bag.
This lens is a nice 'extra lens' on the bag.
IMHO:)
very true
Reasonable... Yet still, It's quite chunky and well... maybe inexpensive, but not amazingly cheap for the quality it provides
Minolta / Sony users have the advantage here: for the Minolta/Sony A-mount you can get the AF 500mm F8 Reflex. Yes, a mirror lens with AF. Combined with the steady shot in the camera, it is a lens that is really fun to use. For Sony E-mount users, they just have to use the proper E2A adapter and they can use it too with AF. IMHO the AF 500mm F8 Reflex in combination with the new Sony A7-II + LA-E2A4 adapter is a nice compact package to carry around with a lot of reach.
I noticed that as well minolta auto fucus mirror lens has been around for twenty years and people just dont remember it
The name of the adapter is LA-EA4, by the way, without the 2 ;)
I bought one of these just to take shots of the moon - mainly video, but the novelty soon wore off. I only paid £120 off eBay, so no major expense.
It is a very soft lens as you say. I found I got much better photos of the moon by using the Canon 70mm - 300mm IS and crop from a full frame, in my case the Canon 5DmkIII
If you still have it, try taking photos of the planets with it! You’ll get a nice view of Jupiter’s moons and probably some detail. Same for Saturn
Technicaly it´s a kind of Schmidt Cassegrain telescope, but much cheaper. So is the quality of this device. An f/8 is nothing weird in this case, f/10 apertures are common. Yes, it is crappy, but if you dont want to spend 1.000+ for an Celestron telescope, and want to make som amature astrophotography, its worth considering for the price, to play with.
these types of not-so-dead-sharp lenses are more than fine enough for some applications anyway ...
besides, under certain lighting and subject conditions, as it is visible here on some of the samples in this video too, the image is more than acceptably sharp and can be made even sharper in post, for both stills as well as video ...
use a double converter on any lens, even the best matched combinations out there, and the lens loses a lot of its quality no matter what ... so, by what i saw here, i say i like this lens and its doubler converter too! :) let's not forget that part of the loss in sharpness with any strong telephoto lens lies in the fact that when using them we also see some to a lot of 'mirage' in most subjects far away from the camera anyway! especially in desert shots ...
camera shake a problem with these lenses?
then either hook up the camera to a steady-cam stabilizer device of some kind , or simply use a camera with in-camera shake reduction and it'll certainly be a great help!
overall, i believe one can take a lens of this class a little bit more seriously, and it'll serve you very well considering its very low price as well as its relatively small size and little weight that make it a much better choice for many jobs, where owning and taking a prime telephoto lens is simply too hard, if not impossible!
the Donuts-shape Bokeh is also ok in my own personal views: it's good for some subjects, and for others where a true circle Bokeh is more desired, it can be handled in post and 'corrected' by some retouching or even software tricks ...
i would happily go for two of these lenses as soon as i can afford it: the 500mm as well as the 800mm ...
great video and very fine tests btw!
professionally made, thanks and keep up the good job! :)
Just for the record, Minolta had a 500mm f8 autofocus mirror lens and Pentax had a 400-600 zoom mirror lens (MF).
Dorf Schmidt Minolta did it in 1985' and its still working. l use it in bright sunlight only.When the light reduces, the image quality also reduces. Not advisable to use it low light handheld photography.
Minlolta made an AF mirror lens like this, I have seen some of the images and they really aren't that bad. Hand held really isn't an option, moving targets aren't either. However, with a Sony DSLR and the in camera Steady Shot, sharp images can be taken.
They are a fiddly nightmare but they are FUN and when you do nail it they REALLY nail it. on my XTI the 800 mm is 1280mm effective (crop sensor) the issue is manual focus only on a small viewfinder. so very hard to actually get it in focus and worse the DOF is very very very shallow.
BUT when you actually "DO" nail it. wow is all I can say. so a shot you need? don't even try. but for having fun nabbing super far shots that you can shot over and over again to try and get it? TONS of fun and super cheap in comparison. I think I paid $150 for mine. Love it.
I bought a 500mm mirror and am very happy with it , hand held shots with the aid of stabilising from my g9 at as low as 300th of a sec shutter , I’m over the moon for 75 , including adapter, soon to be featured on my channel called Motorcycles And Things , cheers Shane uk 🇬🇧
Something this would be good for is cheap deep sky astrophotography, just pair it with a guider and camera and you got a real cheap astrophotography telescope setup.
I was very fascinated by this type of lenses back in the 80's. So small and still such a long focal length. Today though, I wouldn't get one. Pretty sure it would lend it self to a frustrating experience. Your review was very good, as usual.
holy shit i want one just for those donut lights in the bokeh, that's gorgeous
You don’t understand how the equivalent focal length works with an APS-C camera. The image doesn’t magically get higher magnification. Your field of vision gets smaller as if with a longer lens. Example- close one eye and see the room, your focal length is approximately 17 mm, now pick up a straw and look through it. What you see through the straw hasn’t improved, the magnification hasn’t improved, but the amount of the room you can see has decreased as if you were using a higher focal length. That means that the amount of the room you will be able to see is equivalent to the area you would see if using a 1600 mm lens. In other words you capture less of the scene with an APS-C than a full frame. The focal length of the lens (magnification) is fixed by the size of the lens. In real life the image (information) on the APS-C is smaller but zoomed to fit the view finder. FYI 24 MPixels on an APS-C is better than 24 MPixels on a full Frame because it means there are more pixels on the smaller image.
I remember 500mm mirror lenses being popular with amateur photographers in the 1980s. Nice vid. Thanks Christopher.
In the past Nikon, Canon, Minolta Sigma, Tamron or even Sony(Minolta design) were selling f/8 reflex lenses at around 500mm. Recently in 2020 Tokina has announced an f/8 400mm reflex lens for various mounts. It is said that has very good optical quality.
Minolta is the only manufacturer that produced autofocus reflex lenses. The autofocus 500mm f/8 reflex a-mount for 135mm film SLR cameras and the less known autofocus 400mm f/8 reflex for APS film SLR cameras.
Sony until quite recently was producing the only autofocus reflex lens in the world for its a-mount cameras. It was the autofocus SAL500F80 500mm f/8 reflex, an update of the autofocus Minolta AF 500mm f/8 reflex camera. Both lenses should work perfectly with the a-mount to e-mount LA-EA4 adapter with translucent mirror on e-mount bodies. At eBay these lenses cost around 400-600 depending on quality
I have the Samyang 500mm f6.3 lens, great for pics of astro photography on a budget (got mine second hand too so even cheaper).
+Flippy2k6 How do you like the IQ of that lens and where can I see some sample astro images taken with it?
How do you keep the camera steady for long exposure?
tripod.
Flippy2k6 I mean, with an 800mm lens even a slight breeze can ruin a shot...
bigger heavier tripod or use a wind break or something to offer some shelter.
The one place that lenses like this really shine is with astrophotography if you have a Star tracker.
I suppose that the old adage "you get what you pay for" is applicable here. I have a cheapo fish-eye lens that I use for fun shots. I enjoyed your videos of the UK as I have not been to Europe in quite some time. Cheers!
Yeah, this is basically a 800mm (~3 inch) Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope with a camera mount. Needs a very stable base to keep it still.
cropped images from a decent 85mm are sharper than what comes out of a mirror lens
Not sure about that but a decent 300 or 400mm lens, maybe
I have a used 500mm Chinon mirror lens I got for cheap. Love throwing it in for a quick moon shoot sometimes with a 2X teleconverter or just putting it on to see what you can see. It can help tell a story very well. If there’s a story you can’t tell because you can’t afford a better tool to do it what’s the point of even thinking about it in the first place.
I wonder if placing a little beanbag on the tripod then the camera on the beanbag would steady it better? That way, the front of the lens wouldn't vibrate because it would be embedded in the beanbag.
It'd be difficult to focus though, with the size of the focus ring
If you'd tilt the back mirror (the one closest to the sensor) 45° you could avoid that donut bokeh, as the light would exit through the side and you can leave out the mirror on the front, which is the culprit in this case
you would just need to add another mirror just "outside" the lens at 45° again, to avoid tilting your camera 90° to shoot straight.
in other words:
similar to a herschel telescope but modified to allow the camera to attach to the back of the lens
Chris - you have a gift for words! ". . . a witch's brew of major issues' . . .' I love your reviews.
Thank you Mr Frost for sharing this review with us :)
lol " A witches brew of major issues" I'm stealing that
"Absolutely hideous donut-shaped bokeh"- now that's funny! !
Bought one for safari in Tanzania. Some pictures where just out of focus, but the overall results where good. Lots of fn for a small price.
Catadioptric lenses are really neat!
Should work pretty well for astrophotography. I use a heavy tripod with motor drive for stability and sidereal star tracking. Something like this lens would serve me well.
+antiprotons I'm testing an even bigger catadioptric lens in a few months...
Bought the Tamron version and is apparently the second best for sharpness. Carl Zeiss being the best but also extremely rare. Will try my Tamron once it arrives and let you know if it's good. I've seen some good pictures taken with this lens
This Half Scotsman bought it. Cheap cheap! Tried it. Had fun. Looked great on me. Conversation piece n all. Took it back. End of story.
Weird lens? Good name for it
Really interesting review Chris. Apertures such as f/8 are really not that bad to use in decent daylight on 'normal' telephotos as I'm sure you know. I use a Canon 70-200 f/4 l is with a Canon 2x mkiii extender (yes, I know how all the forums rate this combination but my image results look pretty darn good) which gives me a manual focus f/8 400 mm lens. In good light f/8 is never a problem (as long as you use a tripod/monopod tripod if no I.S though!). But 800mm+ must be quite a challenge.Great to see someone reviewing the 'lost' lenses on the market. I'd love to see you review some of the old L lenses such as the 28-70, 28-80, 20-35 and 100-300 L; no-one seems to have done an old L round up. Keep up the excellent work.
Hmm yes it's interesting - at 800mm I thought I might be able to get away with 1/800 second but it seems that you need even faster shutter speeds. I found that on the Sigma 50-500 (non OS) - whereas at 200mm 1/200 is fine. Strange. Hmm I'd love to review some older 'L' lenses, and I have a couple of reviews of discontinued lenses coming up, but I don't have the time to be doing too many :-( I'm happy to review lenses anyone wants to lend me though, hehe
It’s so inexpensive because you can’t see Vampires through them 😭
Astrophotography is a good use for this lens :) , of course having a computerized telescope with a 1/20 or 1/4 screw is a super plus. Add that with Magic Lantern , and you'll be taking deep sky objects in no time :)
$300 dollars for a astrophotography lens? I would love this lens!
Managed to get a similar 500mm Mirror lens (Opteka). With the x2 converter. $80
Tones of fun, and way easier to handle than its long nosed cousin the 500mm Telephoto. My only quibble with it is Focus... Its a real bas**rd to get focused some times... especially when you have the x2 adapter on it.
Many amateur photographers like lenses with long focal lengths for creativity but don't like to carry a lot of weight. Besides the high price of an 800mm prime lens, there are P&S cameras that are classified as super zooms. These have just 1 fixed zoom lens but can go up to 60x or even 80x. The aperture can be more practical at F6.3 and adjustable than fixed. The camera is a bit bulky but for a low price you can get a camera with a lens so why pay for just the lens?
You should try this lens on a mirror less camera with a stabilized sensor
Mirror lenses are manual focus only: there is one exception. The Sony / Minolta AF 500 f/8 reflex is an autofocus lens. Works very well :)
I'm surprised someone hasn't got one currently on the market - the tech isn't that involved now, with the IBIS and peaking focus options you'd think they could pull it off easy enough.
You forgot a very simple test. Making a crop from that 105mm FF camera on traffic lights that might look way better than 800mm.
Seems to me the fixed aperture is the only _real_ disadvantage for a lens like this. Sure, the bokeh effect isn't great, but depending on your shot, it is avoidable. The contrast can always be fixed in post-processing. Most lenses of this focal length require a tripod, either because they too have insufficient (or just lacking) image stabilization or because they're too heavy.
So, when you consider what the alternatives are, I'm not sure you can get something anywhere near as good and convenient as mirror lenses without spending thousands of dollars (and even then, you're still going to end up with something huge and heavy).
I had a Vivitar 600mm f8 lens mirror lens (also called a catadioptric or cat), which I used with my Canon EOS 5 and Canon EOS 10 35mm cameras in the early 90's. I remember some old git at the local camera club telling me how rubbish mirror lenses were - until I showed him some images. He kept quiet after that. It was a decent lens. Not sure if I could focus one now without a split or fresnal focusing screen.
Some of them are not too bad. I've heard good things about the old Tamron 500mm.
i just bought this lens in a second hand shop and havnt tried, but watching this video, i wonder if im the only person finding the donut bokeh totally beautiful. cant wait to try it!
Yes. 2nd vote on Tamron 500mm adaptal mount (That would fit virtually all cameras) and also the Nikon CAT 500 F8 is a very good mirror lens, if you find a good used copy.
I can focus up to moon see space shuttle orbit around it with this lens all I need to do is practice on focus to get clear pictures with it this lens is step back for me still learning how to use it but recommend it for long manual distance for what this guy is using it for
The Space shuttle program has been grounded for a few years now. Do you mean ISS (International Space Station) ?
Provided this lens has aperture blades and f stops. Just use f11 to f14 aperture and the photos will be reasonably sharp. f8 lenses are natrually soft wide open. But my TOU Five Star 500mm f8 Prime Preset lens on Nikon D90 could get reasonable birds shots straight out of camera, but rather comparable to bridge digicam superzooms with built in AF lenses.
If you want long focal lengths without very expensive glass, you are much better off getting one of the small sensor super zoom compacts, such as Nikon's P900. The will give you MUCH better IQ, are easier to handle and give you a range of focal lengths to boot.
Nice review. Mirror lenses are ideal for astronomical🔭 usage or astrophotography. Before buying a mirror lens one thing is important above all. A STURDY TRIPOD. Any light and cheap tripod will created vibrations. This lens is ideal for moon photography or solar planet photography with long shutter speed and tripod. Of course is not handheld at all.
+Achilleas Labrou : how can you make long shutter speed on a tripod ? I strongly believe that tests for astrophotography has to be made by stacking process (short shutter speed of 0,6 sec. x 400 photos + 20 biaised photos + 20 dark photos)
This len is amazing .......
Have a 500mm f6.3, would be great for investigative work. Images aren't all that bad. Bought mine second had for $100.
Tom Allen YES its a great tool for private investigation, for pictures as proof during a divorce case.
every lens has a purpose. they also have drawbacks but i would rather have it rather than need it and not have it. which one of us can afford the high cost of the profesional super telephoto lens.
Another merit point of mirror reflex lenses are compactability versus reach. It can give you very long lens in a pouch.
best for photo documenting or surveillance or just as a toy. the x2.2 telephoto lenses that screw on the front of your lens are pretty good.
The focal length of the lens and 2x tc is 1600mm. The equivalent focal length of this lens with the 2x converter on an apsc sensor is 1600mm. It doesnt change. The equivalent field of view however changes. On an apsc it would have an equivalent field of view of a 2560mm lens but with the focal length of 1600mm. Crop sensors only trim the edges off therefore reducing the field of view. There is no change in focal lenght/reach/zoom etc
That's what saying 'equivalent focal length' means. 2560mm is not the real focal length - it's the 'equivalent' to what you'd see on a full frame camera.
I could make use of it. I have a total ocean view off of the cliffs. I get tons of sunlight everyday so the slow aperture of f8 ro f16 shouldn't be a problem. Good review.
“Jeepers, so that’s what 1600mm look like!” lol This a an awesome video. Thanks for making it.
i got one for $20 well loved the softness is from the chromatic aberration. this is a great little lens for moon shoots for fun i stacked 3 2x teles on it and i didn't need an ND to get good moon shots.
Lol. these type of lens DO NOT HAVE CHROMATIC ABEERATION.
Lol I take it you have never used one then? It's very noticeable on these still it is out weighted by the advantages of having a 500mm that has nil weight. But if you don't believe me here en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic_aberration
Ryan "Ducky" Georgieff lol I don't even have to look at it.. it is mirror lens . It doesn't have chromatic aberration. Wiki? Lol you have to look half baked idea from Wikipedia? It is optics 101 stuff ok. Chromatic aberration happened due to refraction not reflection. Lol
+joker 13_14 season technically chromatic aberration can happen anytime lightwaves don't hit the same point on the focal plane do to lens quality
Catadioptric systems use both mirrors and refractive optics, and are used in pretty much all mirror lenses for cameras. They’re not immune to chromatic aberration.
Ryan "Ducky" Georgieff and this lens use any elements , even if used , cause nice blur due to chromatic abberation? Sorry I didnt bother this kind of simplistic design. Since 1990s so be it
You won. Happy?
Interesting lens review thanks for this! :)
I know this is an old video, but maybe it would have done better with a full frame to APSC speed booster. Let in more light and maybe sharpened the image... (if the focal reducer/speed booster is of good quality). Also, maybe on a camera with good IBIS inbody stabilization could help an absolute ton.
As a filmmaker I actually love the unusual bokeh.
Thank you 🙏 - the mirror lens has big promises so attracted my attention, I needed the reality check!
Mabey with In Body Stabilization found in pentax, sony or olympus cameras would help with the hand held shake :/
it does help i use it with my sony a 77
upload some clips
Fuentes Contardo here is a shot of the moon. th-cam.com/video/uW6Y55ru1Bc/w-d-xo.html
You might think about doing a weird lens segment on the Tokina 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 ATX Pro U.S. Version) or the 28-70mm f/2.8 ATX Pro (Japanese Version). Angenieux, the French maker of great cinema lenses brought out a 28-70mm f/2.6 zoom lens in the late 1980's or early 1990's. It was a good lens but Angenieux could not produce them at a price competitive with Japanese lenses of the era. Tokina purchased the rights to produce this lens and sold it under the designators referred to above. However, Tokina could not produce the lens cheaply enough to compete with Nikon and Canon so, they dropped this model after a short time of production and brought out the 28-70mm f/2.8 SV (special value) lens. In this case SV is an oxymoron.
I love my Tokina (I have the f/2.8 model produced for Japanese domestic consumption) for shooting people.
Great and informative video. Thanks for taking the time to share this with us
Slap this lens on a Micro Four Thirds camera for more focal length
And more softness
Nonsense. The image is merely cropped, not the focal length increased. If you image the moon, for instance, it will be the same size no matter what size sensor you use!!
Does this lens cover a full frame sensor?
Haha someones been to Cardiff
I wonder how a lens like this would do on a D800E/D810. The D800 series turns every lens into a super-monster!
There are many errors stated in this video. Mirrorless lens do not give better photos since the mirror does not take the picture; the sensor size (full, APS-C, or APS) dictate some quality; the real picture quality comes from the lens. The 2x teleconverter can only double the lens FL to 1600, no more, and it cannot double the aperture to f/16 since the aperture is fixed at f/8 (there are fins to move).
It's difficult to read your English, so I have a feeling you've probably misunderstood what I've been saying the video. I never said the 2x converter takes you beyond 1600mm (although I did say that on an APS-C camera the EQUIVALENT would be 2,560mm). Workably, the aperture DOES become f/16 - both in terms of light gathered and depth-of-field. And I never said that there's no difference between APS-C and full-frame. And, whether you like it or not, conventional optics ('mirrorless' lenses, as you put it) do perform much better almost all the time.
... when you deal with crop factor you multiply ALL variable elements by the crop factor. In this instance, f-stop and focal length will both be affected by crop factor of an APS-C / M43. Adding the teleconverter also simulates crop factor. Remember, this is why a speed booster gives you MORE workable light, it operates on exactly the same principle, just in reverse. Therefore, the maximum focal length and aperture on an APS-C lens would be:
(X * crop * tele), where X is the aperture or the focal length. In this instance, you would get an effective focal length of 2560mm, and an effective equivalent aperture of f25.6. This is also why a 25mm f1.7 Micro 4/3 lens is roughly equivalent to a 50mm f3.4 in terms of light captured and overall focal length.
I'm not going to get into this debate because I know from experience it can go on and on and on - but I'll say this:
You're absolutely correct about the lens with the 2x teleconvertor on an APS-C camera being 2560mm with equivalent aperture f/25.6 (or thereabouts) in terms of depth of field.
However, in terms of the INTENSITY of the light that actually hits the camera's sensor, it's still f/16. APS-C cameras and full-frame may have big differences in their sensors and ISO read outs etc. - but at the end of the day, putting an APS-C camera behind a lens does not make the lens any darker. (Whereas using a teleconvertor does, because it's changing the optical formula).
Similarly, a 25mm Micro 4/3 lens is roughly equivalent to a 50mm f/3.4 in terms of focal length and depth of field. But in terms of the intensity of the light that actually hits the camera's sensor, it's still f/1.7. If you took that M3/4 lens and mounted it onto a full-frame camera (somehow) then, although you would see very heavy vignetting, obviously, the image projected into the middle would still have the light intensity of...f/1.7.
Christopher Frost Photography Thanks for the in-depth reply! :)
EDIT: This was referring to say, going down from a Full Frame lens / APS-C lens to a M4/3 body. There is little if any point mounting a lens designed for a smaller sensor (ie m4/3 onto fullframe), whereas at least with larger lenses to smaller sensors you'd be able to use a speedbooster to get a bit more usable light. That's all I was trying to convey.
Hi Chris
Can you please put links on the products in description?
Lens and teleconverter
Thanks so much for video and for nice ideas!
Whilst nothing you have said is untrue (although I do like the bokeh personally but totally understand why people don't).I still love my mirror lens, I never have more fun with my camera then when playing with it. The shots are rarely the best but it seriously stokes my love of just being out taking photos.
Minolta did make an autofocus 500mm "Cat". It can still be used as an AF lens on Sony bodies with the proper adapter.
That's right, I heard of it. Wouldn't it be fascinating to see a mirror lens with AF today.
Cute, its a mini newtonian. I use an 8" newtonian when i look at and take photos of the stars and planets. Didn't know they made them that small.
No, it's a mini Schmidt Cassegrain. Many telescopes are made in this manner. One of mine is. A Newt doesn't have the front secondary, it has the 45 degree reflector to the focuser.
..Joe
mirror lenses might be grate with the emerging light field technology
I bought a 500mm f/6.3 version for 120 USD. I got it specifically for astrophotography and it performs wonderfully with the right tripod.
I tested such a lens also once... then i bought a "real telescope"... a cheap 2nd hand 750mm newton with GoTo mount for "only" 400$, basically the 2nd cheapest newton aviable more or less and WOW! Big difference. The 750mm F5 newton looks MUCH BETTER than the 800mm of the Walimex i tested. Only the sharpness, 2 different worlds!
The 150/750mm newton has its own newton specific problems but there are coma-correctors if you want nice corners too.
@@harrison00xXx Yeah I totally agree. I own a 6" Newtonian myself. Shortly after that comment, I started using a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 APO DG HSM which I hadn't been using for a while. WOW such a difference. 500mm to 200mm was a big difference too but the quality of the images I get with the APO are several steps above the 500mm. Very sharp and no chromatic aberrations. Now I see wide field astrophotography is much more interesting than I thought. I thought it was all about reach but NO! It's much more than that.
@@ruiner101 Yes good APOs, especially in the 200-350mm range for astrophotography are just awesome.
I am still using for that case a 100mm Macro lens with F2.8 or even my RF 50mm 1.8 (at 2.8)
But im much more into deep sky and small nebulas, the wider fields are already boring
Mostly if i want to make an awesome widefield sky only im making a mosaic with the 750mm newton for the sake of 80MP+
It also works just great and easy af (just a lot time needed to gain data and process it) with a astrophotography software which controls everything including queues and plate solving.
Except for autofocusser i am basically already completely automated
@@ruiner101 Btw, have you never used a COMA-corrector?!
I used my 750mm newtonian without for a while, but as i once borrowed one from a friend... i was ordering very very fast my own one. I always refused to buy the ones fitting 750mm F5s because of the price and the additional work on the scope (backfocus!!!!)
But it was totally worth it, i just got a proper focusser too by replacing the not for astrophotography meant focusser. All i am missing is a motor for autofocusser but as i dont want to be THAT LAZY... its already awesome with complete computer control and even better than awesome with plate solving and co!
@@ruiner101 As i did everything manually (so searching for the objects i wanted to target) i barely found the small, faint stuff.
Yes, i did orion nebula, flame nebula and all the other "more easy" targets because i found them, but even NGC2237 (rosetta nebula) was hard to find already. Let alone the small stuff.
So i began to randomly investigate places which looked interesting for me in the live view. It was also extremely interesting, i found a lot "stars" which were actually small galaxies just too small for 750mm for proper details (and tried to solve what galaxy im looking at by known data). As if i would investigate which bird i took a photo of after the hunt for images.
But as i began to use GoTo, especially with PC and plate solving, a complete new world opened for me! Ofc many stuff i was interested to i found out... i just need 2000mm+, but also i found a lot more faint, not as known targets to combine multiple nights, so sometimes 20hrs+ on an image.
I had to deal with a lot of hassle but some of these images are just AWESOME, considering you can barely make them out with 30 minutes of data and very noisy.
Very time consuming hobby, but the GoTo/Plate solving/target queue stuff per computer makes the hobby so enjoyable.
Not once i took the telescope with my older MacBook Pro to camping in the middle of nowhere, just took some images while enjoying the camping with friends, then swap out the AP gear for the eyepiece to show the people some stuff in the night sky.
Its just a 6"... thats the reason im probably upgrading anytime to at least 8", better 10"+ dobson (mainly observations to feel like a Mr Newton or Messier, Charles Messier used ) for cheap
And hopefully some day i can afford a Celestron C8, better even C11 and make proper images of the small galaxies like the whirlpool galaxy (where my 750mm is big enough to see it, but too small for nice details)
Heck, with a lens like that, at 2500mm, you'd be the first to get a glimpse of the "BIG MAN" Himself, way up there amongst the clouds😇 ☁️
Well, I can see donut shaped bokeh in Battlefield 4... :D
Buy this lens (or any mirror lens) used on eBay, play with for a few weeks then sell it. My favorite is the Sigma 600mm in olive drab. Looks very military.
Makes for an interesting upskirt camera
Minolta/Sony has a 500mm F8 mirror lens with autofocus, although I do believe this is the only one that made it to series production? I use a Sigma 600mm F8 mirror lens quite often and find with Live View, focusing accurately really isn't an issue at all as long as you have a sturdy tripod, solid ground and preferably a remote release for the shutter. The donut bokeh is avoidable given some practice. Now I just need a backpack of some kind for the lens and other stuff. Any suggestions?
Hmm an AF mirror lens, that's interesting! I need to look at backpacks myself really, so no suggestions as of yet. Maybe you'll find some ideas at the-digital-picture dot com.
Sony is the only company who has made an AF mirror lens, I have it and it is a very useful lens.
Some rumors say Sony is working on a 250mm f/4.5 Mirror lens for the E mount, an ASP-C lens.
Alex Alexander
I've heard of something similar before, I suppose we'll see soon enough as there's bound to be plenty of discussion/videos on various sites about it. Well done to Sony for breaking the mould! Samyang also produce a few mirror lenses for the E-mount separately. Oh and as for the backpack issue; I finally picked up a Tamrac 5585 and with some shuffling of the dividers, I can accomodate either the Sony 500mm or Sigma 600mm but only if its not attached to the camera body. You'll need something either larger than that backpack, or a dedicated telephoto-carrying bag like Tamrac's "Super Telephoto Lens Pack". Just in case anyone's looking!
I got this a while back on a whim. It's pretty difficult to use, but with practice you can coax some decent pictures from it.
I use it mostly for moon photos, which turn out pretty well. Video shot through it is also pretty decent. I use it most to record heron, geese and such from a distance.
+Steel Rain Can you send me a link to a moonpicture you made with it?
only on my facebook page. don't know how to share them in a public forum. I could email you if ya like.
If you can send me one please do :) fommes65 at gmail dot com
If you can send me one it would be appriciated, I can buy this lens used for about $80, and would like to know if it comes close to my telescope (1000mm)
I hope you'd also review the 500mm f/6.3 :)
Just buy a Nikon P900 camera, small sensor but the quality is way superior. With a 2000mm (soft over 1500) lens it does GREAT. I love mine. They run about $500 now, and Nikon P1000 with the 3000mm is even better, 4K, raw, and big buffer, but it's 1k. Serious, you will use the lens in this review once or twice, but the P900 or P1000 you will use a lot. I own 9 cameras from D2's D3, D500, D7200's etc, and yet I keep the P900 in the car all the time because the reach is far and sharp. Good for close up too and 24mm for wide angle.
I just happened to click on your clip as the lens looked like my old Sigma 600mm mirror and was amazed to see that you filmed some of it from the bridge over the A48 by the university just 2 mins walk from my home! It was nice to see Castell Coch and the Whitchurch Hospital tower too :-) . Are you local to the area? Neil.
I used to live in Cardiff, yes :-)
Wish I could have tried this lens (just for fun) on the Super blood moon. Since I had to use F11 ISO-1600 and 1.3 sek shutter, I might have been able to fill the frame a bit more without too much more softness (seeing the one I used is quite soft already, gotta compare their data later...).
If you mount a 800mm lens on an APS-C's camera, you still have 800mm of focal, but cropped.
Nothing like a 1200mm focal lens.
Mount it on a full frame sensor cámera, and then crop the image and amplify it, you'll just have the same as yout APS-C mount.
Don't be so silly. 800mm x 1.6 = 1,280mm full-frame equivalent. Stop trying to be clever.
You should inform you about what a lens focal is. What is right, is that 800mm Full Frame has an angle of view equivalent to a 1.600 DX lens. But focal remains ever and ever the same, that's mean that your lens won't approach you more on an APS-C than on a FF. Exactly the same.
Keep on being funny.
The samyang lenses may not be great, but the Nikon brand 500mm mirror lenses are very sharp and well built.
I would love to see how this compares with the 2x converter vs not using the converter but cropping the image to match the 2x view. Which would be better?
Really eloquently and interesting review. Well done :-)
Now i know where the traffic lights photo in captcha were taken
i have the sony 500mm f8 mirror lens and It has Autofocus !! thats the best and useful at 500mm..bought it almost 10 years ago $1000 singapore dollars
the sigma 600 f8 is also a very well built lens, sharp images but focus has to be spot spot on in other words don't trust your eyes, go with the little "in focus" light, I'm shooting with Nikon so not sure how the others letyou now when something is in focus
Older Sony Alphas need an adapter witha chip...
3:38 lol. that bokeh alone is a pretty good reason to never venture into mirror lenses
Picked up the Samyang 800mm a few weeks ago, eBay - £40. T2 adaptors from Aliexpress (£6) and I'm away. It's not going to win over my 600mm Sigma for image quality but it's around the size and weight of the Sigmas' lens hood.
Thank you for a good and realistic review!
Robert Denero used one of these lenses in the movie "Heat" ..and it looked cool as hell
Cool, I'll have to check that out
This would be a beast on the Sony image stabilized camera.