Mirror lenses

[Jon Ruyle]

Also, you have to focus them manually, which is another thing to take care of when taking picture. The advantages are size, weight and price. They work best when yoursubject is not moving too fast.

Hold on. If the ones made "for ef mount" are manal focus and have no aperture control, what is the point of being "for ef mount"? I guess it will correctly report f/number to the camera for metadata. And I guess you don't need an adapter to attach the thing. But one's options might widen if one doen't require "for ef mount", and it doesn't seem that one loses much.

As much as I heard, they are not that good at all.

Perhaps it is better to say that they have issues. There is no reason a high quality mirror can't give just as good in-focus images as a refracting lens.


But yes, bookeh will be lousy if you have a big central obstruction (which compact ones must have). And if you compare a $500 mirror lens with a $5000 refracting lens, it shouldn't be surprising if the $5000 lens does better.


Here is a review comparing canon 500 f/4 with tamron 500mm f/8 reflector. Guess what? He says the canon is better But it seems to me the reflector, with its portability and low cost, does have its place.