A good 500mm mirror lens dilemma?

edri · Joined: 26 Oct 2014 Posts: 315 Location: walking in the air

Hello,

From what I read on the internet there are two mirror lenses that offers acceptable image quality at a reasonable price (150-250USD), an adaptall Tamron 500/8 lens and a M42 MTO 500/8 lens. If there are others in the same price range please tell here. Welcome Turtle

For the MTO lens there are two versions one with a weight of 650gr (say portable version) and another one of 1250gr which I would not find so easily place in my photo bag, but it has included a lens hood and tripod mounts on the lens body. Thes two variants are optically the same?
What lens do you suggest? I think I prefer MTO but I'm not clear which option would be most suitable, as using heavy version is best for included tripod / monopod mount and hood but 650gr option would be more in the photo bag. That is the dilemma Question

My cameras are Pentax DSLRs, in this moment.

Pontus · Expire: 2016-08-25

For just a tiny bit more you can have the Minolta Rokkor RF 500/8 which is good, basically the same lens as the Leica version.

WNG555 · Joined: 18 Dec 2014 Posts: 784 Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA

I own both. Bought them for capturing the Moon.

Tamron SP 500mm f/8: Two versions, first 55B, comes with a tripod mount. Second 55BB, doesn't. But the second version has a revised mirror design to correct some distortion. The Tamron is a truer f/8 compared with t/8. It's brighter than the Russian MTO.
The resolution is very good.
Can be found for ~$100 USD in USA.

I have an updated MTO called the (ZM)3M-5A MC. The diameter is smaller than the Tamron, but it is noticeably sharper. The Russian lens is a Maksutov design with a meniscus front element. I detect a chromatic aberration at the edge of the Moon. Whereas the Tamron has none.

Yes, it's heavy due to the brass. Not a problem on a tripod, but hauling it will be more of a burden. But it's very solidly built, and I enjoy it a lot. The integrated lens hood is useful, and it doesn't use plastic like the lightweight later one.

There is a thread for 500mm+ lenses with sample photos. You can find my photos from each in there.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

dickb · Joined: 04 Apr 2008 Posts: 821

calvin83 · Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7555 Location: Hong Kong

+1 for Tamron especially if you are in US.

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

I have got a Tamron, Canon FD and Minolta AF 500 mirror lenses, and briefly had a Samyang. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the Tamron, it's a very good lens that compares very favourably with the Canon and Minolta.

SXR_Mark · Joined: 12 Jun 2010 Posts: 506 Location: England

My sharpest 500mm mirror lens is the Rubinar 500mm f5.6 (note note f8 ). This beats my Olympus OM 500mm f8 and the Tamron 55B (except at close focus where the Rubinar is weak). Although the f5.6 Rubinar is not so common, I would have thought it will be within your budget.

edri · Joined: 26 Oct 2014 Posts: 315 Location: walking in the air

Thank you for answers and suggestions. I'm from Europe (EU). Unfortunately from USA I have avoided buying lenses lately because of the high price of the shipping plus the new eBay extortion with Global Shipping Programme.

Talking again about lenses. What is the focus throw for Tamron and for MTO?

marcusBMG · Joined: 07 Dec 2012 Posts: 1308 Location: Conwy N Wales

Tamron is just about 360deg.
However because of the compact design I think all mirrors are very "twitchy" focus - in and out of focus very quickly with small movements, few mm. it's been very noticeable actually that the old 500mm f8 preset t-mounts I've been playing with are easier to focus than the tamron 55BB (thats on my NX20 btw, 7x evf mag and vf doesn't get dull, auto compensates), although not as sharp.

RTI · Joined: 15 Jul 2011 Posts: 282 Location: Moldova, Chisinau

Minolta 500/8 is a very good lens, I had the AF Sony version.

Some samples in this thread http://forum.mflenses.com/minolta-rf-rokkor-500mm-f8-used-on-aps-c-mft-ff-sensor-t71129.html

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

The Tamron has a very good focus throw, very usable. Which was the opposite of the Samyang which was so quick it was difficult to focus. My Minolta is the auto focus version but can be used manually, and that is OK. I think the Canon FD has the longest throw of all my mirror lenses.

Gerald · Joined: 25 Mar 2014 Posts: 1196 Location: Brazil

Maybe you should consider an APO 400mm F5.6 lens of traditional design. With a small crop the reach can be made equal to that of a 500mm lens, but with a gain of at least one stop.

The mirror lenses had a relative popularity in the '70s, but after that virtually all the world's great lens manufacturers have abandoned the mirror lenses. Believe me, it was not without reason.

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3773 Location: Switzerland

Pontus · Expire: 2016-08-25

Sorry for the OT but do you own the Minolta MD 5.6/400mm APO? I had one but it wasn't good. The lens looked brand new but I was never happy with the performance. Do you like yours?

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3773 Location: Switzerland

Here are some A7II Full Frame images taken with the Minolta MD 8/500mm RF:

http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/371-minolta-500mm-f8-rf

The original A7 images (4000 x 6000 px) were re-sized to 50% (3000 x 2000 px), but they still an idea about the quality of the Minolta MD 8/500mm RF lens.

Greetings, Stephan

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 3773 Location: Switzerland

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

WNG555 · Joined: 18 Dec 2014 Posts: 784 Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA

The Russian mirror has a focus throw similar to the Tamron, about 340-350 degrees.

edri · Joined: 26 Oct 2014 Posts: 315 Location: walking in the air

Hmm ... I understand that even with a generous focus throw the focus is not too accurate. I have two other mirror lenses a 500/8 and a 300/5.6 with shorter focus throw. I thought that 340-350 degrees focus throw would be a clear improvement.

edri · Joined: 26 Oct 2014 Posts: 315 Location: walking in the air

WNG555 · Joined: 18 Dec 2014 Posts: 784 Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA

Yes, the DOF is so paper thin, that it still takes effort to get focused with the Tamron or the Russian ZM-5A MC.
Ultimately, mirror lenses would benefit from finer focus adjustment.
Inherent to its design, the contrast is lower than conventional lenses. Another negative trait, fixed aperture (normally).
But one can still achieve a good image.

I bought them for one purpose, astro-photography. Low cost to more focal length.
But I reach for my 300-f/4 and 400-f/5.6 refractors for almost everything else.

You're not going to see much gain if you already have a decent 400mm in real world usage.

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9098 Location: Houston, Texas

A few comments to add:

I own a Tamron 55BB and I find it to be one of the sharpest mirrors I've ever come across. As for its focus throw, yes one must be conscientious when focusing, but using it on my NEX 7 with focus peaking and display magnification, I find it to be not difficult to find "true" focus. My only complaint about the 55BB is that Tamron, in its finite wisdom, decided to eliminate the tripod mount. The Sony NEX 7, unfortunately, has a very flimsy tripod mount, so when I go to focus with this Tamron, the image bounces all over the place. Fortunately, it's a Tamron, and fortunately adapters for the Sony mirrorless cameras are now available with built-in tripod mounts. I've ordered one for Canon FD -- which hasn't arrived yet -- and if it works well, I'll be ordering one for Nikon mount also. So anyway, this should take care of the wobble during focusing.

As for its lack of contrast, I'd agree that this is a characteristic of any folded optic mirror because of the intruding central element, which blocks light from the primary and causes the "donuts." But it is a matter of degree. In fact, one of the things I like best about my 55BB is its relatively high contrast, especially for a mirror. For example:

Century Precision Optics 500mm f/5.6 @ f/8 and Tamron 55BB:

[/img]

And here's the Tamron 55BB alone. It really compares very favorably with my very contrasty CPO 500.

SXR_Mark commented that he owns the Rubinar 500mm f/5.6 and that it's an excellent lens. This lens is made by Samyang. The Samyang 500mm f/8 is not a good lens, but the 500mm f/5.6 and 800mm f/8 (they both share the same barrel and their mirrors are just ground differently) both can be outstanding performers. The biggest problem associated with them is lack of quality control. I purchased a Samyang-made 800mm f/8 and did so based on many sharp images take with it I found on the web. Unfortunately, I had to return it because it was impossible to obtain a sharp image with it -- and I tried, believe me, I tried. So I would recommend the Samyang-made 500mm f/5.6 or 800mm f/8 only if it comes with a good return policy.

A lens which hasn't been mentioned here, and which unfortunately can be subject to quality control issues as well, is the Sigma 600mm f/8. This lens is very stoutly made, has an excellent tripod mount and has about a 350 degree focus through. I purchased one new in 1984 for Canon FD and was always very happy with the resolution it provided. I sold it several years later when I switched systems to Nikon and EOS. Several months ago, I came across a deal on one of these Sigmas in EOS mount (relatively uncommon) for a good price, and I bought it. Only to discover that it is not nearly as sharp as my old one was. Its sharpness is barely "acceptable." So, I would recommend buying the Sigma only if you can return it if you're not happy with it. But if you get a good one, it can be an amazing lens.

Taken during the mid-1980s. Fujichrome 100. Sigma 600 with Canon F-1. If you look closely at the out of focus highlights, you can see the donuts. Very small and unobtrusive.

Here's another. Same film, same camera, same lens:

And another -- taken with a Canon A-1 and Kodachrome. Same Sigma lens.

Here's a 100% crop of the above image:

So anyway, if you get a good copy of the Sigma 600, you've got an outstanding lens.

jamaeolus · Expire: 2015-08-20

It won't help the OP, but I thought I would throw another kudo to the minolta af 500. I have it and took it with me to Africa and it compared reasonably well to the 70-400 G. Not quite as sharp but way lighter and smaller and a little bit more reach. I got mine "as is" cause it lacked the filter frame. (any one got one?) Supposedly wouldn't work without it, but covered it with black tape and a flat black sheet of thin aluminum and it works just fine.

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18