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
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!)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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! :)
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 $150 for mine. Love it.
I bought a 500mm mirror and am very happy with it , hand held shots with the aid of stabilising from my g9 at as low as 300th of a sec shutter , I’m over the moon for 75 , including adapter, soon to be featured on my channel called Motorcycles And Things , cheers Shane uk 🇬🇧
Dorf Schmidt Minolta did it in 1985' and its still working. l use it in bright sunlight only.When the light reduces, the image quality also reduces. Not advisable to use it low light handheld photography.
I hope one day someone will produce a good quality mirror lens. Mirror lenses are great for astrophotography. Of course a steady tripod and live view are more than necessary.
what about proper telescopes? I paid slightly more than for such a small reflector for a 2nd hand 750mm newton with EQ3 GoTo mount Yes its heavy, but in the end... its necessary if you want good tracking and long exposures! Also, the quality of even a cheap 750mm F5 newton is just worlds ahead from any of these lenses. (personal experience with 500mm and 800mm walimex and then the "big boy" 750mm newton) In fact my 750mm is still a very basic beginner telescope and mount, not even worth mentioning this already "proper telescope". A good mount cost already easily 1000$ 2nd hand!
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.
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:)
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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
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.
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
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 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!
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
Do you know if this 800mm mirror lens can work well with Sony A7 mark ii series where it has ibis (in body image stabilization)? I currently have Sony A7Sii and I'm curious to see if this will work well with it. As far as I know, it should stabilize 800mm on the sensor itself and if so, I wonder if I still need a tripod?
+Adam Iverson probably you wont even get 12. I got a sony a65 and a tokina 500mm mirror. kinda 750mm because on apsc. but i kinda doubt, that this version which Christopher frost tested is any better. I can handhold it, but its very hard to find focus because it just is not sharp anywhere. Most of the time, so unsharp that peaking wont work! Video is the absolute only thing where it might make sense. you had the money for the fullframe, even if you are now trying to save money, dont waste it.
not probably. definitely. wont be good enough. . I saw images which were not sharp, but good enough. my lens is not. any crop from a just as cheap 300 is sharper. I know lenses which are a little soft wide open, but still useable.... Im not overcritical. it just really is not sharp enough
+Joshua Mack I've already ordered the 500mm-1000mm mirror lens and I'm expecting to receive it on the 18th. I'm looking forward to try it out. If I don't like it, I'll just return it.
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...).
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.
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 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?
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.
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
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)
Did you find a difference in how sharp is between ff and apsc. I said that because I found some ff lenses to be sharper in a ff camera and softer in apsc cameras
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'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.
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.
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).
Unfortunately probably not because the optics is cheap and there will probably be lots of chromatic aberration. For instance a photo of the moon would probably have purple color fringing sons the edges. Also it would have low contrast and soft image quality so there wouldn't be much detail in your subject. Of course, it wouldn't completely rubbish but not fantastic four commercial photography or for enlarging or publishing. 🐕
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
Is it any good for astrophotography? I want to buy a star tracker and a lens with lots of zoom, and 800mm on my mirrorless 4/3 would be crazy! What do you think?
Hi, please help me! I have a Canon 80D and need lense(s). I'm a professional pilot and want to take photos/videos at my job and during sightseeing at my destinations. Which lense or two lenses (if better), should I take?
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.
Christopher Frost Photography I love your reviews! This lens is extremely inexpensive for the zoom capabilities but it seems like a lot of trouble. I am saving for a PowerShot sx50 for the zoom without the price. What are your thoughts on that? I have a T3i and for some reason, my 55-250mm lens seems to have a lot of chromatic aberration when I look at the pics zoomed in. It's a Canon and only about 7 months old. Anyway, would be very curious to know your thoughts on the PowerShot. Thanks!
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.
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)
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.
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
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.
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?
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 was looking yesterday for a good review of these lens and i didn't fiind one.Thanks. Is the Samyang 500mm MC IF f/6.3 better? i want to buy it for astrophotography.
I have both the 500mm and the 800mm version of this lens. The 500mm is a sharper lens - in fact, it is a very sharp lens as far as mirror lenses go, (and I have a lot of them). Re: bokeh, (not boca ;-), it can be used as an artistic tool in some situations, you just have to learn how and when to use a mirror lens and what they are good and not so good for. Mirror lenses are not for everyone.
Has anyone use this on a camera with good in-body stabilisation, like an Olympus or recent Panasonic? What can of shutter speeds could you get down to, if so?
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?
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!)
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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! :)
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 $150 for mine. Love it.
I bought a 500mm mirror and am very happy with it , hand held shots with the aid of stabilising from my g9 at as low as 300th of a sec shutter , I’m over the moon for 75 , including adapter, soon to be featured on my channel called Motorcycles And Things , cheers Shane uk 🇬🇧
Just for the record, Minolta had a 500mm f8 autofocus mirror lens and Pentax had a 400-600 zoom mirror lens (MF).
Dorf Schmidt Minolta did it in 1985' and its still working. l use it in bright sunlight only.When the light reduces, the image quality also reduces. Not advisable to use it low light handheld photography.
I hope one day someone will produce a good quality mirror lens. Mirror lenses are great for astrophotography. Of course a steady tripod and live view are more than necessary.
I have seen shots from a Tamron mirror lens that seemed very impressive.
And at least f/5. That lens would be a wideboi.
what about proper telescopes?
I paid slightly more than for such a small reflector for a 2nd hand 750mm newton with EQ3 GoTo mount
Yes its heavy, but in the end... its necessary if you want good tracking and long exposures!
Also, the quality of even a cheap 750mm F5 newton is just worlds ahead from any of these lenses. (personal experience with 500mm and 800mm walimex and then the "big boy" 750mm newton)
In fact my 750mm is still a very basic beginner telescope and mount, not even worth mentioning this already "proper telescope". A good mount cost already easily 1000$ 2nd hand!
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 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.
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
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
The one place that lenses like this really shine is with astrophotography if you have a Star tracker.
Thank you Mr Frost for sharing this review with us :)
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
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.
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.
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 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?
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.
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
I remember 500mm mirror lenses being popular with amateur photographers in the 1980s. Nice vid. Thanks Christopher.
Yeah, this is basically a 800mm (~3 inch) Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope with a camera mount. Needs a very stable base to keep it still.
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.
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. ua-cam.com/video/uW6Y55ru1Bc/v-deo.html
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.
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
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!
Great and informative video. Thanks for taking the time to share this with us
holy shit i want one just for those donut lights in the bokeh, that's gorgeous
Thank you 🙏 - the mirror lens has big promises so attracted my attention, I needed the reality check!
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!
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
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.
I got a kalimar 800-1200 for old films. No idea what to use tbis for. May sell it
Wonder how it would do with the in body stabilization that Pentax uses....?
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.
Do you know if this 800mm mirror lens can work well with Sony A7 mark ii series where it has ibis (in body image stabilization)? I currently have Sony A7Sii and I'm curious to see if this will work well with it. As far as I know, it should stabilize 800mm on the sensor itself and if so, I wonder if I still need a tripod?
+Adam Iverson It might be okay. You won't get 42 megapixels of resolution out of it though hehe
+Christopher Frost Photography Mine only capture 12 megapixels though as it's A7S mark ii, but its sensitivity would definitely help a lot!
+Adam Iverson probably you wont even get 12. I got a sony a65 and a tokina 500mm mirror. kinda 750mm because on apsc. but i kinda doubt, that this version which Christopher frost tested is any better. I can handhold it, but its very hard to find focus because it just is not sharp anywhere. Most of the time, so unsharp that peaking wont work! Video is the absolute only thing where it might make sense. you had the money for the fullframe, even if you are now trying to save money, dont waste it.
not probably. definitely. wont be good enough. . I saw images which were not sharp, but good enough. my lens is not. any crop from a just as cheap 300 is sharper. I know lenses which are a little soft wide open, but still useable.... Im not overcritical. it just really is not sharp enough
+Joshua Mack I've already ordered the 500mm-1000mm mirror lens and I'm expecting to receive it on the 18th. I'm looking forward to try it out. If I don't like it, I'll just return it.
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...).
I wonder how it would do on a Pentax Q-S1 with a 4.7x crop factor. That's almost a 3000mm equivalent, before the 2x teleconverter!
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.
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.
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 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?
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.
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
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)
You should try this lens on a mirror less camera with a stabilized sensor
Does this lens cover a full frame sensor?
It’s so inexpensive because you can’t see Vampires through them 😭
Did you find a difference in how sharp is between ff and apsc. I said that because I found some ff lenses to be sharper in a ff camera and softer in apsc cameras
Chris - you have a gift for words! ". . . a witch's brew of major issues' . . .' I love your reviews.
Wonder how they would perform on a Pentax (in body stabilization) for star photography. Its long exposures anyways !!
can you do a photo model (full body) in Canon 1000D+2x tele converter with it?
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.
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.
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 :-)
what is the "fakeous" @ 3:08?
I wonder if this would work better ona body that has in body stabilization? Perhaps Canon's not the way to go if you want to use one of these.
Would probably be helpful, yes
why no standard test of that nice building u usually use!
Because he would have to set his tripod up in Cornwall to get the whole of the building in ;)
Because mirror lenses are pretty soft and a proper comparison isn't really worth much
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).
Thank you for a good and realistic review!
Didn’t Samyang make mirror long lenses before it came out with some fast MF primes that caught my attention?
would this be good for an ultra cheap(you can find these + the extenders for under $100 on ebay) astrophotography set-up?
Unfortunately probably not because the optics is cheap and there will probably be lots of chromatic aberration. For instance a photo of the moon would probably have purple color fringing sons the edges. Also it would have low contrast and soft image quality so there wouldn't be much detail in your subject. Of course, it wouldn't completely rubbish but not fantastic four commercial photography or for enlarging or publishing. 🐕
lol " A witches brew of major issues" I'm stealing that
Interesting lens review thanks for this! :)
Western Avenue. If that's from the place that is now Cardiff Met I used to work there in the late 70's. EDIT. From the footbridge?
Yup
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...
Really eloquently and interesting review. Well done :-)
Another merit point of mirror reflex lenses are compactability versus reach. It can give you very long lens in a pouch.
Is it any good for astrophotography? I want to buy a star tracker and a lens with lots of zoom, and 800mm on my mirrorless 4/3 would be crazy! What do you think?
Yeah, sure. It would get ya decent range.
3:53 you have some dirt on your sensor, at the top left corner.
OHHHHH NOOOOOOO!!!!! NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!
I'd like you to do a review of Tamron 500mm f/8 (55BB) mirror lens.
You forgot a very simple test. Making a crop from that 105mm FF camera on traffic lights that might look way better than 800mm.
I hope you'd also review the 500mm f/6.3 :)
Hi, please help me! I have a Canon 80D and need lense(s). I'm a professional pilot and want to take photos/videos at my job and during sightseeing at my destinations. Which lense or two lenses (if better), should I take?
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.
Christopher Frost Photography I love your reviews! This lens is extremely inexpensive for the zoom capabilities but it seems like a lot of trouble. I am saving for a PowerShot sx50 for the zoom without the price. What are your thoughts on that? I have a T3i and for some reason, my 55-250mm lens seems to have a lot of chromatic aberration when I look at the pics zoomed in. It's a Canon and only about 7 months old. Anyway, would be very curious to know your thoughts on the PowerShot. Thanks!
Thanks! Well I haven't used the SX50 but I imagine the telephoto shots would be alright, probably better than with this mirror lens anyway
Thanks so much for responding!
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...
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)
How about Space photos ?
How does a telescopic mirror lens work? I don't get how the image keeps from having dark point in the middle.
Have a look online
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.
Thank you! extremly clear review. Best Regards,
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
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.
Hi all I need a tripod collar for this. I use it with my sony a6000. Just for fun. Would one of you know the right collar I need? Thank you!
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?
Hi Chris
Can you please put links on the products in description?
Lens and teleconverter
Thanks so much for video and for nice ideas!
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
I was looking yesterday for a good review of these lens and i didn't fiind one.Thanks.
Is the Samyang 500mm MC IF f/6.3 better?
i want to buy it for astrophotography.
I don't know if it has better picture quality, but it certainly would be easier to use
Christopher Frost Photography Thank you
I have both the 500mm and the 800mm version of this lens. The 500mm is a sharper lens - in fact, it is a very sharp lens as far as mirror lenses go, (and I have a lot of them). Re: bokeh, (not boca ;-), it can be used as an artistic tool in some situations, you just have to learn how and when to use a mirror lens and what they are good and not so good for. Mirror lenses are not for everyone.
Maybe use it on a Pentax or Sony that has IBS? Fun lens!
what would this type lens perform like shooting the moon ?
wonder how it works in astrophoto, btw f8 plus 2x tele is like f/16 ?! that is dark deep dark..
Telescopes have motorised tracking to keep the subject in frame in long exposures.
Has anyone use this on a camera with good in-body stabilisation, like an Olympus or recent Panasonic? What can of shutter speeds could you get down to, if so?