Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Please Show Us Your Biggest, Baddest Zoom
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 am    Post subject: Please Show Us Your Biggest, Baddest Zoom Reply with quote

This is an offshoot from the Tamron 80-200/2.8 thread. I thought it would be fun to show the "gnarly" zoom lenses
that members own.

Here's my fairly massive Tamron 80-200/2.8 from the "Tamron" thread:





Here's iangreenhalght1's post from the "Tamron" thread:

iangreenhalght1 wrote: That thing looks as big and heavy as my monster Docter Optics zoom!

I don't use it that often although IQ is superb, it's just sooooo heavy!

Looking forward to your samples Laurence!



Last edited by Laurence on Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:28 am; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Biggest I have is that Docter Optics, weighs over 2 kilos, recipe for a bad back and sore arms!

Oh, wait, I have a Rodenstock zoom that is physically maybe bigger, certainly longer, not as heavy though, maybe 1.5 kilos...

But neither of those are camera lenses, they came from printing machines.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Biggest I have is that Docter Optics, weighs over 2 kilos

Wow! Over 2 kilos! Shocked


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mine is the Tamron CZ-735 70-350mm f4.5 zoom. 1,8 kg according to the Tamron archive. It's not a great lens, but I keep it because it is such a monster



NB This is not my picture.

I wrote about this lens in this thread

I would love to try some of Tamron's other monster zooms, but I never have the money when they appear on ebay (or they simply go for far too much).

Mark


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The biggest lens I used to have was a Soviet mirror lens. I never had big zoom lenses, mainly because
I never really liked zoom lenses Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My largest zoom is the Tamron 103A, which is the smaller 'brother' of the 30A you have.
My camera does not have a very sizable grip, so this 634 gram lens is already at the limit of comfort.

I'm sort of wondering if someone here has a Tamron 06A or 31A (both about 2.7kg cannons Shocked )?
Just to go to the extreme.

It is turning into a bit of a tamron tread here?


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Big, bad, ugly, bad and heavy.....

only owning two MF zoom lenses. A Schneider-Kreuznach and an Angenieux-Zoom Type LB3 F.50-300mm 1:3.
3383gr!
Must be a former film camera lens. In former times it transformed with the Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar mount with tripod mount for Exakta. That's why I still have it in my collection.
Not really good balanced at this weight, but at this weight, it may kill you, when trying to use it without tripod. Made a few quick'n dirty shots (at F:3) in the garden for this topic without tripod and that wasn't fun!

200mm:

50mm:


Klaus


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The biggest zoom I have is this one



It's a Soligor MC 3.5/70-220 Macro.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maginon 100-500mm
#1


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

that's a big lens, but not a zoom Smile


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Definitely not my biggest or heaviest, but certainly one of my most treasured...the Tamron 200-400/6.3 in T-Mount @ 1.55kg:



PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here is my Yashinon 75-230mm f:4.5.
Interesting zoomlens : preset, no tube extension when zooming. It's a retrofocus lens (like Angenieux).
Aperture f:4.5 to f:22. Min focusing distance : 2,50m. Filter diameter : 67mm. Weight : 1.320 grs. Diaph : 6 blades.
It's huge and heavy.

Here it is on a 400D :


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 10:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Highest zoom ratio: 6-70/1.4 Schneider in Beaulieu 5008 mount.

Fastest: 8.5-25.5/1.0 Canon on 310XL

Heaviest: Rank Taylor Hobson Varotal 10:1 f/5.6, focal length not engraved on the lens. 3.9 kg.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2011 11:46 pm    Post subject: 2 kilo lens Reply with quote

Polaris 300mm f4.5 weighs 2.005kg without the lens hood which is 86mm diameter!! If the need would ever arise I would have a great defensive weapon at hand. Of course I would dismount the camera first.


_MG_1535 by J Bruja, on Flickr


PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some serious heavy artillery in this thread!


PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:27 am    Post subject: Re: 2 kilo lens Reply with quote

JBruja wrote:
Polaris 300mm f4.5 weighs 2.005kg without the lens hood which is 86mm diameter!!


It is not a zoom, though. =)


PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
It is not a zoom, though. =)


As far as I can see it is: 55-300mm and it has two rings?

These are the lenses that make people wonder wether we are compensating for something Laughing
Still cool to see how many truly massive lenses there are out there.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ymmot wrote:
Quote:
It is not a zoom, though. =)


As far as I can see it is: 55-300mm and it has two rings?


Ah, you are right, last night the image did not load for some reason and I just assumed from the text that he was talking about a 300mm f/4.5 prime.


PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Arkku wrote:
Ymmot wrote:
Quote:
It is not a zoom, though. =)


As far as I can see it is: 55-300mm and it has two rings?


Ah, you are right, last night the image did not load for some reason and I just assumed from the text that he was talking about a 300mm f/4.5 prime.


Yup, It's a 55-300mm alright.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My first Zoom-Nikkor 200-400 ED:




PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2011 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Look at that mounting plate! Shocked


PostPosted: Wed Nov 02, 2011 9:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laurence wrote:
Look at that mounting plate! Shocked


Yeap, an impressive lens with a lot of glass inside, so a lot of weight to be supported far away from the point of gravity...