$200 - 2600MM TELEPHOTO LENS TEST
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2021
- Today, Hunter and I venture out to try out Opteka's telephoto lens sporting an insane 650-2600mm focal length.
Subscribe for more videos in the near future!
Opteka Lens: www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...
Music:
Moldy Lotion - Light foot: • Moldy Lotion - Light f...
Herbal Tea - Artificial.Music: • herbal tea - Artificia...
Spring Autumn Sunset - Artificial.Music: • Spring Autumn Sunset -...
Life Is - Cosimo Fogg 201: • Life Is - Cosimo Fogg ...
Pretending you care - autumn keys: • Pretending you care - ... - ภาพยนตร์และแอนิเมชัน
Hey guys! I’m going to do a follow-up video using this lens to take photo/video from what you suggest! Comment below what you want to see me do with it! ⬇️
So far, I’m going to show some moon shots, so if you have something else, please reply with ideas!
I’d try wildlife, but might be quite difficult without AF… some static wildlife?
Also, generally maybe more astrophotography, not just the moon 🌚
@@adventureswithaleks8216 I’ll see how much more can be seen in the way of astrophotography. Not sure how much it can do. It’s not really a telescope and much as just a far reaching telephoto lens, but I will try!
Wildlife photography
Jupiter, Saturn and Mars too!
You say there's some fog what do you expect at 2600mm that's a lot of atmosphere you are shooting through.
On the A7iii, which is full frame, it maxes out at 2600mm, but on the A6100, which is APS-C, it's actually at 3900mm (1.5x crop)! With this sort of zoom, doing it on a still, cold day will give you MUCH better results than a hot windy day, as you are looking through so much space. Nice job guys!
Yes! After the video we remembered that one would be cropped. But the cropped made it even better lol. But yeah, weather conditions were not ideal, but I plan to do more with it in the future tho, so keep an eye out!
@@ChaseGuerdet somewhat surprised at shooting over water - that would cause some problems.
They're the same potentially because you can record in apsc mode on the a7iii without losing resolution instead of cropping in post
@@gianpa the crop would be at a reduced resolution compared to a native APS-C body a6000 has a 6000x4000 sensor at 24.3MP. A7iii crop mode drops from 24MP to 10MP
@@IanBPPK not for video, 4k is less than 10 megapixels so there's no drop in resolution. What you say is true only for pictures.
Very interesting! It actually performed better than I expected. I have recently been trying to get into astrophotography, and one of the first things you learn about is sampling. Basically, there is a fundamental, theoretical limit to the the degree of magnification one can achieve, and this is tied directly to the size of the primary lens. With the combination of lens and cameras you were using, you guys were way oversampling! For the A7iii you were 3.1 times past the theoretical maximum resolution, and the A6100 was 4.6 times past the maximum! So even with perfect optics, there would still have been significant fogging. To prevent this fogging, the minimum size of the objective would have to be 240mm, or nearly 10 inches!
If you want more information, I would suggest looking at the wiki pages for Dawes limit and the page "Angular resolution"
Dang, when you put it like that, you make the lens sound a lot better 😂. Note: it does also take some pretty nice shots of the moon. Got some good ones during the last lunar eclipse.
Do you have a link to a calculator for this? Would be interested to see where a combo like the sony 200-600mm and A6000 fall.
@@ChaseGuerdet that's exactly what I'm looking for with this lens, moon photography, u got any samples? Would be nice a video about it
@@alexisgarciagonzalez1915 I do! I’ll be sure to show them soon!
@@ChaseGuerdet This is also where my interest in this lens lies. Subscribing to see some stills.
Try it on the Moon and Jupiter. Could be a cheap option for some planetary astrophotography. The amount of flex that thing has is a big problem but if you could mount it in a lens support it would probably work fairly well. As long as your not worried about chromatic aberration or edge focus snobbery.
It works pretty well for the moon! Got some shots during the lunar eclipse. Will probably show those soon.
not a good way to do planetary imaging...
Ivedomeso!erhimg like this with an e500 and ibelieve a cheap vintage Tamron 4 or 500 zoom and 2x. It worked ok as long as a mouse didn't sneeze nearit
One other quick thing. When you picked the extended lens up it had flex to it. Without a strong arm or rail to mount the lens at two points and maybe a third point for a camera you cannot get the arch out of the lense. Cannot get a good focus unless looking thru the center of the lens. Good luck guys I think you can get this thing tack sharp.
I can tell some effort went into this video, it has good production quality. Hope your channel grows 👍
Thank you so much! I hope to be doing more soon!
Keep up rhe good work guys.@@ChaseGuerdet
Hey great work! Love the effort for such a small channel. You guys nailed it. Can't wait to see your progression on TH-cam. You have earned my subscription
Thanks! I plan on having another one up this week. Kind of a follow-up but definitely worth it!
oh my god you have only 150 subscribers
aw man that was such a nice video. This channel had a lot of potential! Looking forward to seeing future videos 👀
Thank you! Actually before this video, I was at like 24 subs, so the reactions from you all have been amazing! Never expected it to take off at all! Will definitely have to give a shoutout about that in the next vid.
I started watching without knowing how many subs you got, and with the video's quality and efforts put into it I genuinely thought you got way more subs than you actually got, you got my respect bro
Thank you so much! It means a lot to see the effort appreciated! But even before this video that randomly popped off, I was only at like 24 subs or something so the love we’ve seen from this has been astonishing.
@@ChaseGuerdet you deserve way more attention
I've had one of these bad boys for 6 or 7 years now and I took it to Africa on safari ( Kenya , Tanzania ) really for a laugh , I set it up in camp on a tripod ( must have a tripod ) and focused in on a spot on small mountain over a mile+ away in Sumburu national park that had Leopards
( allegedly ) , managed to get a good focus on an area of rocks and bushes ( Sony A6000 with a remote controller can of Beer and a large JD and Coke at the ready ) I didn't have the 2x converter so I was at 1300mm + extension E-Mount adaptor + Crop , all being viewed on a 7inch monitor. Well I was quite surprised at the clarity afforded by all this monstrosity , The misses ( wife ) and our guide and camp ranger all huddled around the screen in anticipation with Beer in one hand and remote control in the other waiting for some unsuspecting Leopard ( or anything living ) to walk in shot , but you guessed it , jack sh@t , nada zip , NOTHING, we sat until the batteries went dead and not a peep . But in Tanzania from the Safari Truck with the lens laying on the roof of the truck , begging the wife the driver and cook to remain motionless i captured a Leopard resting in a tree I managed to get 5 or 6 shots before the light breeze picked up a bit and made focusing impossible . The best shot was WOW because the Leopard in shot 5 lifted his head and looked straight at the camera. That moment for me was spiritual man awesome . How I wished I had 61 Megapixels A7r4 with IBIS to then allow the crop in post .
Yeah, we now have better cameras for it with a higher megapixel, and I’m sure clarity would be much better without the 2x magnifier. But that sounds like an awesome experience for sure and what it’d be best at. We did it honestly in it’s worst state being 2x magnified and as a video rather than photo. I’m sure it’s not all that bad. In fact, I got some decent shots of the moon with it during the recent lunar eclipse.
Here's what I would do with it: Forget about the teleconverter. Use the fullframe camera. Under-expose a little bit. Use a rock or a building instead of a tripod. Increase "contrast" in the video or picture settings to get rid of haze. And then it might actually yield usable results. :)
Using the right filter would be a better idea.
Oh yeah, that converter easily magnifies any problems the lens had to begin with. I do think a much more stable stand would make a world of difference for the shake as well. I did try to fix the video in some later spots to see if it could look better, but it just didn’t work out. But I have gotten good results from using it for moon photos, so it can look good in the right conditions for sure! Thank you for the feedback!
Or just use the tripod mount on the lens which means a more stable center of gravity.
@@ChaseGuerdet I'd say you're focusing too much on the far end performance. It's pretty common for budget tele lenses to perform poorly at the extremum. But it's still pretty long at "short" end and also faster as well.
It's a zoom lens after all, and if I buy it (considering it atm along with some cheap-ass mirror 500/6.3 lens) I'm gonna use all the mm I paid for!
I was looking at almost this exact lens for some astrophotography, this video (of which helped me decide against it, lmao) was randomly recommended to me - you earned a like & sub, great video!
While using it to take photos of the moon, they look pretty nice actually. However, idk if you could ever make it look real sharp with it. The focus is very sensitive, and there was seemingly no perfect spot to make it fully clear
I bought this lens back in 2017 and used it to take pics of the Solar Eclipse in August of that year. Did phenomenal. However, it isn't really suited for much else because of the manual focusing. It's really only good on objects with fixed focal lengths that don't move around too much. Even the moon is problematic due to Earth's rotation moving the subject out of frame consistently at such a high zoom factor.
That being said, it's a good introductory lens for understanding super telephoto lenses without the hefty price tag. I upgraded after this lens to a 200 - 800mm with a 2x entender and even though 1600mm is half the distance, it's a lens I 200% love more due to autofocusing and it being a fast lens.
Nice test video.
Lol thanks! Yeah, it was really just as a goofy test more than an actual official test of quality. The follow-up vid we did does a little more testing with actual photos in different environments.
Not to say that ones all that serious either but if you want to see more in the way of results, thats there too. 😅
It's soft for three, or more, reasons:
1. Fixed aperture so you can't stop down
2. Shooting through a great deal of atmosphere _and_
3. Shooting over water = more moisture/humidity/atmosphere, and more turbulence
True, our second try at it got generally better results.
@@ChaseGuerdetYes, I watched that video. 👍
its part poor optics and its part simple physics. your shooting through SO M UCH ATMOSPHERE that the air itself distorts the image. this is why those big 800mm+ lenses from canon cost $20,000 $40,0000. the degree of precision you need to get sharp images at that focal length are just astonishing.
Try the 800mm reflectors. ($100 to $150) they are a royal PAIN IN THE ASS to focus but when you nail it. the results are actually amazing.
if you want big zoom with decent quality on a budget here is how you get it.
Sigma 150-600mm $700 used. then you get a high quality doubler (I have a 2x mkiii for my canon)
NOW on an FF you have 1200mm (I got a "ok" decent shot of the lunar eclipse with this HAND HELD yes it was 90% luck) and if you pair it with a crop sensor camera now your talking 1800-1900mm of "usable" quality (IE much better than this) but as you no doubt see its gonna cost you $1100 for the sigma and a good quality doubler
a 1.4x will greatly improve image quality but at the expense is not nearly as much mm FF 840mm Crop 1260mm
also either of these combo's will auto focus.
Something I have not tried. is putting my opteka 800mm reflector on my canon 2x doubler. should be better image quality than the included crap doubler it came with that I can't find anyway. might have to try that. would net me 1600mm at F16
the sigma however will net you 1200mm (FF) with a doubler at F12.3 which is much better. and while 1200mm is not 2600mm the resolution sharpness difference will mean you can MORE than 50% crop which means a better overall image at 2600mm effective than with that.
ALSO much beefier tripod! I mean it. think surveyor tripod and some weights to make it heavier. the sturdier the tripod the less of those micro vibes you will get. also if your sony has IBIS use that !! it does work quite well and will net you 1800mm effective on the sony if its a crop sensor !!!
Thanks for the info my friend. Much appreciated
I have this lens too. It's looks pretty good with circular lens. I use auto breaking for images and manual focal length. With two tripods, no movement.
Well even if the images are poor it will impress the ladies!!
Size does matter!!
10/10 for vlogging
This is far and away the most entertaining and authentic feeling lens review/vlog I’ve watched in recent memory. I’m certainly a fan of character over quality down to every tiny production detail. All of the information is there, the character of the people in the video is prominent and authentic, and ultimately it feels like chatting with friends. 10/10
Thank you! It was definitely a fun way to try it out. It may not be the most efficient or best way to show it off proper, but it was certainly the most entertaining way in my opinion😂
@@ChaseGuerdet It certainly kept my attention better than the efficient alternatives. I think the absurdity of the lens compliments the video's tone well, though. If you replaced this with a 70-200 or something it wouldn't quite be the same, yk?
When i was watching I thought you have like 100k subs. Great quality!
Thank you! Feedback has been incredible so far. TH-cam’s algorithm is a strange thing, but I’m glad people are able to see it and enjoy it!
This is definitely for stills, fast shutter speeds and in body IS will help the shake situation and make photos usable for things like birds and wildlife. That said, it won’t be as sharp as other options. The max quality from that lens will be without the teleconverter and somewhere at the lower end of the range. Again, not ideal, but for a birder on a budget, it may be better than no long reach lens.
not quite new, back in the 35mm film day(yeah, I'm old) these type of lenses would be in the back of Petersons Photographic or Popular Photography magazines(are these mags still even around)?
That’s pretty cool that you can get this zoom for just 200… though not sure what you could actually do with it… hope you can think of a good use!
Subbed, curious to see more, always on the lookout for some video ideas 😁
Thank you so much! But also, it does great moon photos which I’ll need to show soon. So keep an eye out for those. I may try to show it in its better circumstances.
The images are different due to the sensor size. A6100 APS-C sensor has a 1.5x factor over the fullframe camera.
A medium format sensor is about .64x the fullframe. A 4/3 sensor is about 2x of the fullframe. A 1" sensor is about 2.7x of the fullframe. A typical cellphone sensor has a crop factor of about 5.6x.
This is what I was thinking about while watching. Cameras are soo fun😂😱
I would like to see more of this type of videos
Thank you! Definitely expect some real soon here!
I like it guys :) I hope you don't stop public something like this. Because the experiment was crazy and pretty interesting. The lens is not bad I think. Maybe this converter was superfluous. On 650-1300 it can be good lens for animals photography, or maybe this converter can help you to get something interesting in astrophotography. But however don't stop doing you content! It's kind, funny and interesting. Peace!
Well good news, the follow-up to this is coming out in the next day or so, so keep an eye out! We may just show some of that stuff 👀
Man this video is so funny 😂
Nicely done and a fun little field test. :) I would partly blame diffraction for the fogginess. With the Teleconverter it results in an aperture of f/32 which makes loss of detail due to diffraction very likely. You could test a cropped 1300mm shot against a 2600mm shot and see whether the cropped resolution looks worse.
Yeah, I do plan to take it back into the field to see if we can get better results
Wow. Great Video. Well done, especially like how you took the time to go to separate places and did test. I've bought one aswell and its come with a t-mount, would you know what adapter I need to attach it to a micro 43? Thanks
Thank you so much! I believe that depending on which one you buy determines the adapters they come with. Mine of course came with the Sony mount, but I know there are others! So make sure it’s the right one.
@@ChaseGuerdet Many thanks. I've just had a thought, the price of some this cheap lens in Ebay is upto about £150 mark, a decent branded one costs literally £1000s, but a branded decent telescope costs from about £150. I wonder what result would one get by using a telescope as a lens substitute - could it be better than even using the Nikon P1000? One day maybe.
No way! The focal length is insane!
Need to try shots with and without the x2 converter. Good glass vs this products converter should have a huge effect on the quality of the image. I am curious if without the converter if it would be a clear focus image.
We did experiment a bit more to try and make it look good in our follow-up video. Be sure to check that out too!
I have this exact same lens. I have had it for about 12 years.
I found it was a tad foggy - especially on high magification (1200mm). However, this is to be expected on a lens at the price range it is in.
I have used it several times and one excellent thing to shoot with it is ... the moon.
But, for the price, the results are good. If you want something crisper and clearer, you will need to save up and buy a much more expensive lens.
One thing about tripods - the sturdier it is the better. That is why very good tripods are built like the proverbial craphouse and heavy az.
Totally. You should check out our follow-up we just did where we right some of the wrongs we had here.
It works best set to (pulled out to) around 800 to 900mm max, then it's quite sharp.
True! In our follow-up video we take photos from different focal lengths, and you can really tell the difference in them.
So you basically took one of those kids telescopes and turned it into a pinhole camera 😂 awesome
cool reviews guys!!
i'm thinking to buy these lens lol
It has its problems for sure. It shines most when doing things like photos of the moon. But even then, focus is very sensitive and it may be hard to get real good detail on it. But I did get some good shots of the lunar eclipse!
Looks better than I was expecting it to, but my only telephoto is the EF 75-300mm so that's probably why. I compared the price to cheap telescopes and adapters and saw the lens isn't cheap enough when you can get comparable reach with cheap telescopes. Part of me kind of still wants one but I know I can put that money to many better uses. I like how the lens bends when handled.
Yes! Money can go to much better use I’d say. But was still really fun to test its extremes.
Ordered mine three days ago. The covid pandemic is affecting shipments these 😁
Yeah, I heard some people had problems getting them or seeing them being sold out on the site.
When using focal lengths of 2500mm + I like to use the celestron edge HD line of telescopes, they are f/10 and much sharper
Yeah, I bet they would turn out a whole lot better. I just got some shots of the super lunar eclipse and it could benefit from a sharpness boost. But hey it was only $200
i really like this video. Keep it up!"
Thank you! We plan to do a little follow-up so if you have any new ideas for what to do let me know!
Perhaps in the future computational photography will be able to deal with the many issues of heat, vibration and filtering by the atmosphere. The mass market may not justify that kind of development work, but I suppose that satellite and military applications would. There is a feeling of power and fun being able to see things from such a great distance, but I can think of no other useful application other than wildlife photography and video.
I think attaching some heavy weights to the base of the tripod could help with the incessant shaking.
Yeah, the tripods used weren’t the best for the job. Hindsight is 20/20 😅
What distance were you apart from eachother when you were filming your buddy on the other shore?
Image is blurred because of small aperture. Basically you are seeing diffraction artifacts. Check out Hyugens Optics channel. The guy explains this effect in details in his recent video.
Should try something like this on my 5dsr and 1dx mark iii
I loved the video but I really would have liked to have seen a test of the lens at a shorter focal length and without the teleconverter in place to see how it does at 600mm - 1000mm and possibly with a polarizing filter in place on a high res dslr with mirror up, or a mirrorless upwards of 50Mp. That said I guess if you have the money for cameras like that, you wouldn't be in the market for a lens like this? Who knows. Interesting project though, thanks.
Thats fair. I will do an update that shows it in a better light. I got good moon shots while using it at its base ranges. So its not all bad!
Tbh, "proper" lens of this length cost well above the price tag of most (if not all) mirrorless bodies. So there's definitely a demand. At least just to see if such lenses is your thing altogether.
I have one of these (though without the 2x teleconverter) -- used for $30 US (and it looked unused), on my Lumix G85 Micro-Four-Thirds mirrorless (2x crop factor). So that's an equiv of 1300-2600mm full frame. I was not shooting video but stills, and I had all of the same issues that you encountered -- very hard to get steady, image was very soft, and not a lot of light makes it through. Fun to test out once, but I cannot see any reason that I would ever use it for photography *or* video.
Yeahhhh, glad you got it on the cheap lol. But I do want to do a little more with it yet before I’m done with it.
@@ChaseGuerdet -- Might be useful for a private investigator trying to get pictures of someone having an affair!!! 🙂 Oh -- and it does look cool when mounted on a camera and carrying it around! 🙂
I got one .and a good tripod to hold it.i use it on my 80 D
It doesn't matter what size sensor you use, the focal length of the lens remain the same!!!
I had one of those and it worked well for Moon photos. =)
Yes! I got some great shots the other day of the Lunar Eclipse!
About 70K views and only 396 subscribers? You guys should have 100K subscribers by now.
Thank you! The feedbacks been insane so far from this video alone so I’m still more than happy with the results.
I recently started into photography and i was looking for some gear i could use at the beginning. I firstly thought on analogical lens, which would save me some money, but i could only find small ones, since the high focal distance ones always looked shady (and so that one you showed kkkkkkl, but then it got some good results and i might look forward to have one later. Greets from Brazil, a quite difficult country to be a photographer KKKKKKKKKKKKKK
Look out for soligor zooms there's this 90-230mm f4.5 amazingly built and has fixed apperture for all the focal lengths it covers, quite inexpensive, also the vivitar series 1 zooms are legit the 70-210 f3.5 macro, it's a pain in the ass handheld but it's actually decent and very affordable, the Nikkor 135mm f2.8 it's amazing, bought mine for 175€. Ofc these are not crazy Tele lens, but worth the lookout! Keep shooting
@@simonsusername bro, thank you very much! As soon as i get enough money to buy a new lens, i will make sure to check those out. Thanks again for the tips, king 🙏🏻
Hey there, some great video here. Would you guys please zoom at the moon with the lens? Maybe some comparisom between 650mm and 2600mm. Thanks
Oh yeah, it does great moon shots. I plan on doing more with it soon so I’ll be sure to add some in when I do!
@@ChaseGuerdet Alright! let's subscribe and wait for that
yes - that would be an obvious task.
Useful video
Thank you! Theres another follow-up coming up soon that shows it in more practical uses, so definitely check that one out too when it comes out.
Enjoyed the video a lot - great job and of course the crop sensor is the difference. I still think the lens did a pretty good job and of course it's $200. For that price it's just amazing. At these zoom levels you're going to need extreme stabilisation - an incredibly expensive tripod or pedestal for it to shine, but that kind of defeats the purpose of a two hundred dollar lens. Plus there's the atmosphere itself that comes into play, so video is way out of scope.
Just as a comparison, in TV we have used a UHD Canon Digisuper 122 box lens with the standard Sony Pro B4 mount. They extend out to 1000mm and 2000mm with the built-in doubler and are designed for sports and concerts. You might find a special deal on one of those for $300,000 - if you're lucky. Plus the hyper expensive mounting gear.
Canon and Fujinon make cheaper versions of similar lenses - 1300mm at 86x about $200,000, the 100x Fujinon equivalent is $250,000. The reason so expensive? The multiple various elements of artificial fluorite glass take months to grow and refine. Plus the electomechanicals are microscopic precision works of art.
So $200 is pretty amazing that it even works at all! Gear like this simply wasn't even thinkable 20 years ago. For someone who wants to try lunar photography I think it would be ideal and an absolute bargain.
Yeah, it definitely has it’s downfalls being the cheaper version of the the proper thing. But I couldn’t resist seeing how it would do and honestly it doesn’t do bad photography. Just terrible video recording lol
This is exactly what I was thinking. Budget Astrphotography on the Cheap.
Need a Vixen mount and my telescope mount that holds 18 lbs. A 12 inch vixen mount to shim up the camera.
Ah, two tripods. That's the trick. (I am struggling to use this lens, don't want to give up yet.). Fun vid. Maybe lunar photog?
Oh it’s perfect for close-ups like the moon! Focus is a bit sensitive so make sure it’s in focus but yes two tripods for stability and a monitor to see it’s focus were my methods to success.
"It's a photography lens!" - and yet...there are no photos? Cool!
Check out our follow-up if you want to see them
Instead of comparing at a distance too far , determine ,at what distance it does, produce a better result with more detail, on a perched bird.
Obviously the wobble ,and haze is a problem at that lens extension, and distance.
THAT, would be helpful to know.
Thanks
Yeah, that’s fair. I have more of that since with moon shots where they actually turn out fairly decent that way. This was more of just a way of testing how far it can go and what that looks like given its ridiculously high focal length. But I’ve heard a lot along the lines of your request, and will do an update in the future about it.
At 1:05, no it does not "zoom". It is a multifocal lens. There is a difference.
I can use this on my EOS R if I use my adapter correct?
Yeah, as long as you buy the canon version, it works on that too.
What was the MP on your camera. a still photo lens. what MP cameras you guys used?
It was a 24mp and the full frame a7sIII shoots with a 12
@@ChaseGuerdet So the Lens wasn't the best and can still work for casual close range photos.
I got the same lens several years ago. It sucks! The shake is a problem but the real issue is that you can't really focus it. It's never sharp. I took it out once to photograph the sandhill cranes in a cornfield. I had to rest the lens on my car door because I only had one tripod and it wasn't strong enough. I was able to zoom pretty well on the birds, but nothing was in focus.
😂yeaaaa
Atmospheric Haze. You are shooting super far through all sorts of things in the air, especially water vapor! No matter what you do the farther from your subject the more hazy it’ll be! It’s just physics!
Yeah, I also think it was at least a little but from condensation from a very cold car to a hot outdoor climate. But yeah, shooting across the river can also have other rippling effects that adds to problems 😅
@@ChaseGuerdet still a fun experiment!
Cool
You needed to use, hacked canon 5d mark iii or EOS M/M2 with magic lantern open source custom firmware why?
Then you could use 10x zoom feature to focus on his nose🙂
gawd, youtube algorithm just blew this up
I know right? 😂 Love all you guys for the support.
This is a far better test than all these test chart- shooters poduce all the time....!
Good enough for physical surveillance purpose.
Yes! We have a follow-up vid showing it off in other ways coming in the next day or so, so keep an eye out for it! We do a better job with it.
I have the exact same lens and it does a decent job at photos of the moon for how cheap it was
That is one of its stronger suits!
I can HEAR the quality of materials as you screw the 2x converter on. I don't even need to see the rest of the test (but I will, for the algorithms). :D
Thanks! 😂 It didn’t turn out great in the end but it can be good when used right. I got good lunar eclipse shots with it.
I'm thinking of situations where you have to be far from your subject. At a motorsports event like a NASCAR race. Looking across a city from a tall building. Maybe you're on a hill in Yellowstone overlooking a field full of bison being chased by wolves.
Will this lens work on the Canon 400d
They come with an adapter for a certain type of camera. Mine came with a Sony adapter, but I’m pretty sure there are Canon adapters that can work with it.
Great lens for street photography
Yeah was surprised with some quality I got on the street. Vid coming soon with that.
I wouldn't mind seeing some more intermediate shots. Max range does not look great but if it can produce some sharp images at a more mid range, it could be worth the $200. Unless you're a very low budget P.I. I would skip using it for long range video.
A follow-up where we do our best to make it look good is coming soon. Keep an eye out for it! 👀
@@ChaseGuerdet I like what you're doing and wanna see where you go. Subscribed!
Try it without the Tele converter. The quality should be better. Really like the video.
Thanks! I think it was actually condensation build-up on the lens, but yeah, the converter definitely also makes an impact 😂
I actually have seen similar lenses before, No way it costs 200$, a 450-900 plus 2x converter is around 80$ and actually useable if you use it as a telescope to "see" instead of trying to get a sharp photo
Are you saying I was scammed?! 😭
If use Olympus with IBIS would be much more interested vs 35mm sensor
need to make a brace mount for it
Check out my latest vid, I use your guys’ suggestions and sort it out 😅
Surely not a good idea to test it over a vast expanse of water. The water vapour and atmospheric refraction it causes must affect both definition and contrast. A bit of fun though. 😉
Oh yeah, we tested the lens to its most extremes. All in good fun though lol. Will do a follow up if there’s something you want to see though where we try to make it look better lol
Is it worth getting it? I wanna get it for wildlife photography
In our follow-up vid we did manage to get some more decent shots. If its real still, and not zoomed in all the way, you can get some better product out of it.
Jack Harlow out here testing out lenses
Really digging the twin tripod mount.
Really aided stability 😂
you could take a picture of the moon.
Yes! It does moon photos pretty well. Got some during the last lunar eclipse. Will likely be showing those soon!
what do you expect from Chinese brands vs Japanese brands
Absolutely nothing! 😁
Was not disappointed
not available now on amazon ... you must have made them sell out the inventory.
I guess so 😳😂
I'm betting you would need an FX like 45 megapixel and then dumb down to 20 in post just to sharpen it up..
Oh yeah, I bet that’d help. Using a 12mp wasn’t the best option 😂
Does it fit the rebel t5 ?
I believe there are multiple versions where each one comes with a certain camera brand adapter. So there should be a version that does.
@@ChaseGuerdet oh ok thanks
I bet all, or at least some of the elements are plastic, hence the piss poor resolution/ contrast.
At that distance and over water you're probably contending with contrast eating haze too, although it did look a clear day.
Interesting video, big like guys!
Thank you! And its mostly metal, but yeah, I reckon there’s some cheap craftmanship in there and low quality glass. The water could definitely have been a variable as well, but I think it was condensation from a large temperature difference which with cheap glass I’m sure is plausible.
Would have been good to see what it would look like without the teleconverter on also. Might of been able to get a better focus, but wouldnt of been as much of a zoom
I promise you that’s some of the best sharpness it offers. I’ll show in a followup vid soon😅
@@ChaseGuerdet Hahaha, i dont doubt it, just was wondering what it might look like without the teleconverter haha
Don't you want to try to shoot some planets with this lens? Maybe you will find a flag that was left on the Moon? :D Also maybe you'll try to use it on micro-four-thirds camera, that would be nice 5200mm zoom!
It does take good moon shots! I got some that I might share in the future!
At 7:39, that is NOT dirt on the lens, it is on your camera's sensor.
I found this VID today by chance etc etc
That's not a lens!!!
It's a astronomical space telescope!!@
I can see the Milkyway from here!!
The world's first suspension bridge zoom lens. 😂
Yeah, definitely need to sort out a solid base for it to stay steadier on😂
I have a Nikon P900 which is 2000mm. It’s way better. I tried the Nikon P1000 (3000mm) and was a bit disappointed. The Sony RX10 at 600mm is the sharpest superzoom.
it could be used for astronomy
Yeah totally! It works pretty well for moon photos.
It was bad, although I have seen worse. But for $200 you really can't expect top quality pictures, that being said for a zoom lens of that range and that price. It was definitely better than I was expecting it to be, before watching this video.
Oh yeah, we had zero faith in the product 😂. But it was worth a try, and it does impress in some ways! Yes, it does look better in other conditions like photo and especially for things like the moon, but we just wanted to take it to its extreme. I may show some of those at some point because they turned out pretty good.
I can imagine it’s minimum focusing distance is like 20 feet 😅
It might even be further than that 😂
Isn't it amazing with so little money you can get so much of a lens?!
Its fair. There is a lot of lens physically there. But its not good lens 😂. Results may vary in the next video though.
@@ChaseGuerdet Heh heh and yes. But I have this lens and can say a few things about it.
First of all at this price you simply cannot find anything at this magnification ratio.
Then the sharpness is really not that bad, especially before using that crappy 2x TC.
You actually lose a lot of that (Wrongly) so-called sharpness due to low light passing through it and slow shutter speed resulting, in reality, in a blurred image that reflects by the user as lower sharpness. What it lags is contrast. Then has CA and other aberrations including some ghosting. Then, of course, you need full sun. Better yet, if you take it to planet Naboo where they have 2 suns! ! ! : - )
But my friend, you really need a better tripod. Those crappy ones you have won't cut it. Anyways thanks for uploading this, least to say, interesting one.
@@samsen3965 oh yea, they’ve been replaced a long time ago. (This vids almost a year old now 😂)
I have those tripods. Not so good in the wind.
Yeah, definitely need something less flimsy to control them
Just get a Nikon P1000, you'd get a bit further and with better results. Of course, its costs more too :)
Yea about 6x the cost 😂. But fair. Definitely don’t think that this is for anyone unless they want it to be blurry.
What is the name of the lens again?
Its the brand opteka, 650-2600mm
@@ChaseGuerdet ah ok tysm :)