opteka 500mm f8

A.Gibson

A.Gibson

Suspended / Banned
Messages
400
Name
Anthony Gibson
Edit My Images
Yes
I would hazard a guess that it may make a good door stop. ;)


Kev.
 
you would be better off with a toilet roll tube & a pair of glasses on the end !:gag:
 
lol i thought as much.lol
has anyone ever bought one you think? and actually took a decent shot with one, i cant find any sample images. hmmmmm i wonder why.lol
 
I think its a mirror lens.. Im not sure on that because it doesnt actually say.
But yeah lots of people hate mirror lenses because they generally produce really flat, un-contrasty images because they work in a different way to other normal lenses.. In short its just a complete ****piece compared to any nikon, sigma or canon.
 
hahahahahahahahahha thats it its deffo sold on me now.lol
it looks like a toy but not as real as a toy.lol
 
On further research, it appears to be about as sharp as a crayon
 
a crayon thats been used for well over 10 years n never seen a sharpener buy any chance.lol
i wasnt really thinking of getting one it just intrigued me if anyone had had one or ever used one.lol
 
SamuelHearn said:
I think its a mirror lens.. Im not sure on that because it doesnt actually say.
But yeah lots of people hate mirror lenses because they generally produce really flat, un-contrasty images because they work in a different way to other normal lenses.. In short its just a complete ****piece compared to any nikon, sigma or canon.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure its not a mirror lens, although they do make 500mm f6.3 and 800mm f8 mirror lenses.

They are remarkably cheap, but there is probably a good reason for that
 
It's not a mirror lens. Someone did a review on here some time ago for this lens and I THINK the outcome was that the IQ was awfull, but what to expect from a lens this cheap. There are a couple of reviews on the UK Amazon site HERE, but while they don't actually say they are c--p, they don't say they are good either!
 
Probably be better off with a spotting scope with an adapter.


Dave.
 
Actually it looks exactly the same as a used M42 500mm f8 lens I bought the other day from this forum.

To tell you the truth it is not bad at all if there is enough light.

Some images I took (both hand-held at 500mm):
3-1.jpg

4.jpg
 
i reken the qualitys probably about the same as usin a 300mm and croppin the image alot
 
Rubber12 said:
i reken the qualitys probably about the same as usin a 300mm and croppin the image alot
Click to expand...

I found the quality to be approximately the same as a 300mm f5.6 with an 1.4 TC (making it a 420mm f8 lens).

Difference is that the 300mm+1.4x TC would cost well more than triple of what I paid for the 500mm f8 and I get a bit longer range.
 
It's not a mirror lens. Those can actually be quite good, considering the price.

It's a very, very basic long focal length lens (technically not even a telephoto, I think) with maybe three elements, instead of up to 17 for a top lens. F/8 max, manual focus, manual aperture control. Sharp as a sausage.

Pretty useless for anything serious :thumbsdown:
 
HoppyUK said:
with maybe three elements:
Click to expand...

Lens Construction: 7 elements in 5 groups, Angle of View: 5°, Minimum Focus Distance: 33 ft. Focus Modes: Manual focus Minimum Aperture: f/8.0 Maximum Aperture: f/32.0, Filter Size: 67mm

And as for the quality, do you have one as well, or have you tried one?
 
micloi said:
Lens Construction: 7 elements in 5 groups, Angle of View: 5°, Minimum Focus Distance: 33 ft. Focus Modes: Manual focus Minimum Aperture: f/8.0 Maximum Aperture: f/32.0, Filter Size: 67mm

And as for the quality, do you have one as well, or have you tried one?
Click to expand...

Haha! Oops! Oh well :shrug:

Not used that one, but something similar many years ago. It was awful. Like that one. Poor sharpness, and it's very hard to control CA with long lenses without lots of expensive glass, as your sample pictures show.

IMHO. Sorry. No offence itended :)
 
WEll it price is cheap because how its made.
It is not a telephoto lens BUT a long focus lens.
a telephoto lens is a specific construction of a long focal length photographic lens in which the physical length of the lens is shorter than the focal length. In these lenses the optical centre lies outside of its physical construction, such that the entire lens assembly is between the optical centre and the focal plane. A regular lens of a focal length that is longer than what is considered a normal lens is not necessarily a telephoto lens. A telephoto lens has to incorporate a special lens group known as a telephoto group; nevertheless, non-telephoto lenses of long focal length are often informally referred to as telephoto lenses. The angle of view created by a telephoto lens is the same as that created by an ordinary lens of the same specified focal length.
 
Chaz Photos said:
WEll it price is cheap because how its made.
It is not a telephoto lens BUT a long focus lens.
a telephoto lens is a specific construction of a long focal length photographic lens in which the physical length of the lens is shorter than the focal length. In these lenses the optical centre lies outside of its physical construction, such that the entire lens assembly is between the optical centre and the focal plane. A regular lens of a focal length that is longer than what is considered a normal lens is not necessarily a telephoto lens. A telephoto lens has to incorporate a special lens group known as a telephoto group; nevertheless, non-telephoto lenses of long focal length are often informally referred to as telephoto lenses. The angle of view created by a telephoto lens is the same as that created by an ordinary lens of the same specified focal length.
Click to expand...

In fact, I think it is a telephoto design, which explains the relatively short length (only about 300mm long) and the extra elements. It certainly says it is, but then the manufacturer's description says a lot of implausible things.

Those extra elements must be the 'telephoto group' stuck on the end - same thing as a built-in teleconverter. Makes the lens physically shorter, but doesn't help sharpness.
 
To sum up it is a very cheap lens with average capabilities so if you can afford something better go for it, if not then this is better than anything else you can get at the price.
 
think ill give it a miss.lol i think ill just buy a TC for the 70-200.lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top