Mirror lenses

[Jarhead5811]

Check this out at PopPhoto.com: ProOptic 500mm f/6.3 Mirror: Lens Test(It's $159.95 atadorama.com)...not my cup of tea but there it is.

[db_ch]

I do have a Walimex 500mm f/6.3 which is awful but still pretty decent ,-)


I mean I did manage to shoot some cool pics with it and some of them even handheld. It does mount to my Canon EF cams with a so called T2-adapter. There are loads of different adapters available for many camera makes.


There's my facebook group "Cheap & Affordable Equipment Photography"


http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=10322131620&ref=ts


If you browse to the last page, 12 or so, there are a bunch of pics taken with the lens (cat, landscape, church, etc). The bokeh is awful but then again the pics lost even some of their "quality" through fb-upload..


Obviously there's a pro version out now - sorry, the website is in German only, I guess:


http://www.foto-walser.biz/shop/Artikel/2715/83/Fuer_AF_Kameras_walimex_pro_500_6_3_DX_Spiegeltele _fuer_Canon_AF.htm


Not sure if those walimex lenses are available in the us or where ever. Got mine in Switzerland, Germany does have a market for them, too.


Price was around US$ 240 (CHF 250 or so)...


I am now more than happy with my Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS and I hardly ever use the Walimex anymore. But - the Canon is a different (price) league then, isn't it ,-)

[peety3]

<span style="font-size: 9pt; font-family: Verdana; color: black;"]I would be using a tripod, shooting in Manual and stopping down for DOF. Auto focus will probably be challenged by the low light as will my eye during MF, mirrors are rumoured to be dark anyway due their design. Manual is OK, I can probably do a better job than the AF in these situations.


<span style="font-size: 9pt; font-family: Verdana; color: black;"]Quality; acceptable sharpness and overall IQ is what I'm looking for. I know that is subjective but whatever would cause the average person to say "hey that's a nice photo!" is what I'm looking for. Not a big ask, I hope.

LensRentals says that their Sony (Minolta/Sony-mount) 500mm f/8 lens is very sharp and has little distortion (mirrors shouldn't have chromatic aberration, etc.). However, they say it's a fixed-aperture (i.e. your choices are f/8 and f/8, no other) lens, so there is no stopping down for DoF. You may be dealing with hyperfocal distance so it shouldn't matter anyway. You'll likely need manual focus, regardless of time of day, for multiple reasons: 350D won't autofocus with f/8 lenses, and an FD-mount lens is made for an in-body focus mirror, which EF-mount cameras would never have.

[Liamisnowon]

You are all very helpful, thanks. I have looked at all the material you have refered and considered carefully your comments.There can sometimes bea fine line between getting 'something for nothing' and 'bang for your buck'. Without the opportunity to actually try before I buy, I don't know how close I am to kidding myself into thinking I can get 'something for nothing' (cheap lens reach with acceptable IQ).


The lack of opportunity to try one of these lenses will probably cause me to reconsider other options. For example: 70-200 f4 L + 2X extender would probably yeld better results while also greatly expanding my photo options. Cost may be higher but so is the re-sale. This combo will should also give more predictable IQ for someone such as myself that can't try lenses befor buying.


I also have a friend who is interested setting up a tripod on the beach and photographing his mates surfing, so he is looking on with interest.

[Jon Ruyle]

These reflecting lenses are small because they fold the light path, but also because they are slow.


Another option is a slow refracting (not reflecting) lens. One can buy an 800mm f/10 telescope (not reflecting) for $400. Not much heavier than a canon 400mm f/5.6. Would require a strong tripod for long exposures, though. (I don't know how it would compare to the reflector, not as portable, better bokeh no doubt, but I dunno about false color with this inexpensive glass... probably not too bad at f/10)