yay or nay? 650-2600mm lens (ebay)

[andrewvid]

i was just told by a friend about this lens:

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/650-2600m...ht_3453wt_1141

has anyone seen/used it? and would it be worth the risk of quality etc..?

it's a focal length that i'm very interested in..

what do you guys think?

yay or nay?

[Tjfrnds]

I'd say nay. I've never heard of this brand of lens, but a quick google and I reckon save up for something with better optics. From the specs it seems it only reaches 2600mm with a 2x teleconverter, and aperture is limited to f8-f16. I believe they are also manual focus only. What kind of photos would you take with it? I don't shoot Nikon, but I'm sure someone in the know could suggest some better options for you

[Wayne]

Go to your bathroom, grab 6 empty toilet roll tubes, tape them together and mount to the front of your camera and you will probably get the same quality output.

[davidd]

Nay

[Kym]

These plastic lenses work - after a fashion. Fully manual, so they are near useless for fast action.
If you have some spare cash and really don't care they can be fun, but don't expect anything near decent or even acceptable image quality.
They get the extra length via a very cheap 2x converter.

These lenses are sometimes known as perv lenses, i.e. people buy them cheap coz they only want to use them for less than honourable purposes.
Ditto the 90 degree mirror 'spy' lenses.

Don't leave it in strong Sunlight, they melt and distort in the heat.

[arthurking83]

Don't waste your $250!! .... you can get better quality super long lenses for approximately similar money.

Look for the MTO brand mirror lenses .. something like that would probably give better results.
You can get a very decent Tamron 500mm mirror lens for less, they used to work quite well, and add a teleconverter of half decent quality to it and you're almost there.

There are many other half decent, old slow lenses that will allow you to capture half presentable images ... much better than these things.

Note tho that they are all very slow lenses(they all are!!).
Because of this you'll need a sturdy tripod and a camera with very clean high ISO ability which could help to get some half decent IQ from a long lens.

Don't expect to get many good images of wildlife with them tho!

[ashey]

No way, buy cheap pay twice lessons learned.

[arthurking83]

I just noted too, the link to the lens on ebay is for a Nikon mount lens.

If the OP has a Nikon camera, then the wisest cheap long lens suggestion I'd make is for a Nikon 500mm f/8 mirror lens.
They can be had in good nic for about that kind of money.. sometimes more, sometimes less.

And if you do look for them, make sure they're not the really early version of the lens, which aren't as good as the next generation, nor as good as the final N version.
The N version is quite expensive for what it is tho, and a more modern super tele zoom from Sigma in the form of a 150-500 would make more sense.

But for about up to $300 you should be able to find a Nikon 500/8 mirror lens.

[Lance B]

$250?

Enough said.

[andrewvid]

wow! Thanks guys, i wasn't going to seriously get it.. was just an option but from what you guys say i think i'll keep away and stick to the more genuin brands.. the main reason for this is mainly the moon.. i love to take photos of the moon and want that extra bit of reach but not as much as a telescope.. hence the cost.

as for the tamron/nikon 500mm mirror's where could i obtain them?

Thanks everyone

Andrew

[ameerat42]

Either way, it's hard to say. I certainly have no idea, though I have heard the name a few times b4.

Andrew, when you ask for opinions, you'll get'em. Then what?

Have you seen any specs for this lens? BTW, its 650-1300mm, not as (it is rather ambiguously) posted (on E-Bray!).

Or any reviews for this lens, and other Rokinons?

Have you seen any pics taken with this lens? There are some (not very good ones) on Flickr.

Tamron mirrors are now 2nd hand. I saw a delectable looking one at Whilton's in George Street about 5 weeks ago. They wanted some $300 for it. I was tempted, but I had not yet morphed into Bill Gates.
I knew this because when I left the store I did stoop to pick up a $20 note. (Not really.)


Am.

Update: on checking the reviews link above, I found it said nothing. Sorry for that.
Reviews are hard to find for this lens, which is apparently badged under a few different names. Here's one
listed as a "Bower" brand.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ping+%28USA%29

[andrewvid]

Thanks Am.

i have looked at the specs on the eBay site for it, although i haven't seen any reviews or example pics taken with it no.. didn't really think of it.
though thanks very much for the links.

i guess i'll just continue to save up and see what i'll really need (want) in the near future!

[ameerat42]

Andrew. From what I've seen about this lens: its workings AND samples (unless the photographers are ALL hopeless!), I would tend to not get it.

It has such a horrible zoom action, just sliding our like a trombone. It'd be hard to keep steady at the given focal length, I reckon.

In fact, you might be better off with a trombone!

(And on that note...)

[andrewvid]

Andrew. From what I've seen about this lens: its workings AND samples (unless the photographers are ALL hopeless!), I would tend to not get it.

It has such a horrible zoom action, just sliding our like a trombone. It'd be hard to keep steady at the given focal length, I reckon.

In fact, you might be better off with a trombone!

(And on that note...)

haha might be worth getting some trombone lessons with that money then!

yeah i've been looking around and indeed i'm getting more doubts about it..

[mongo]

it will be near completely useless - do not even think it.

[arthurking83]

Aha! Moon shots.

In that case forget the mirrors as well ... you need aperture!
(Umm sorry .. variable aperture that is!)

Mirror lenses don't have an variable diaphragm capability and are stuck at one particular aperture value.. usually f/8, sometimes f/6.3.

Even tho you can get OK IQ from the mirror lens in some situations, moon shots are not one of them.

FWIW, I'd say at the moment the best lens I can think of for a moon lens, would be a Sigma 150-500 OS. Can be had for near $700 or so dollars, so start saving!

[andrewvid]

Aha! Moon shots.

In that case forget the mirrors as well ... you need aperture!
(Umm sorry .. variable aperture that is!)

Mirror lenses don't have an variable diaphragm capability and are stuck at one particular aperture value.. usually f/8, sometimes f/6.3.

Even tho you can get OK IQ from the mirror lens in some situations, moon shots are not one of them.

FWIW, I'd say at the moment the best lens I can think of for a moon lens, would be a Sigma 150-500 OS. Can be had for near $700 or so dollars, so start saving!

yes i was just researching and found out the fixed aperture of f/8.. so indeed scrap that plan out.. i was wanting the 150-500 for a while but i wanted to also get into macro so i got the tamron 90 instead.. guess i'll continue saving!

[arthurking83]

the fixed aperture of f/8 is not ALWAYS an issue.. just those times where you want that wee bit more DOF or if you want to stop down just for a bit more contrast or something like that.

Otherwise in normal usage it's never really bothered me.

I've taken a few quick test snaps with the 150-500 Sigma, and from those quick snaps, I reckon for value for money, nothing comes close!
For moon shots tho it may still require a steady tripod if you want very good image quality.

[andrewvid]

thanks for that,

i know it's not always an issue, but would be hard to keep the shutter speed up in those shots that need it..

as fir the sigma, i have a friend who has one and from what i can see it performs extremely well!
so i'll be headed that direction now..

[Bennymiata]

Some of the Rokkinon lenses are quite good actually, even though they are fully manual lenses, but I doubt this one is any good.

F8 is not really that bad as when I've taken shots of the moon at F8, or even smaller apertures, the shutter speed is usually around 1/250th or so anyway.

The 50-500 Sigma is only F6.3 at 500mm, and if you put a 2X converter onit, it becomes an F12.6 anyway, so not far off the Rokinon.

Here's a very low-res shot of the moon taken with my Canon 60D, 100-400L with a Kenko 2X converter.

SMoonJan07-12-8003.jpg