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

Recomment long range lens (600-800mm) or so.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Aug 31, 2022 11:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I very rarely shoot at f=600mm or above. Occasionally I use my Canon nFD 2.8/400mm L with a Canon FD 1.4x or FD-A 2x converter, mainly for documenting frescoes in churches. Apart from strong lateral CAs (which are easy to correct in PP) this combinations are pretty OK, even wide open (using 24 MP FF).

I also have the newest version of the Novoflex Noflexar-T 5.6/400mm which has much less CAs than the Canon 2.8/400mm L (!!); however its field curvature is pretty disturbing if you have "flat" sceneries (landscapes!). The corresponding Noflexar 8/600mm might be an option for you, but it will have field curvature as well. They occasionally are quite cheap: I got my pristine, like-new Noflexar-T 5.6/400mm for a whopping CHF/EUR/USD 2.-- since the two parts (lens head and focusing unit) were sold in two separate auctions, both starting at 1.-- ...

I also own a Sigma 13.5/1000mm mirror which is really bad. Not recommended at all!

In my experience all good lenses > 300 mm usually are limited by the weather and air turbulences. It's VERY rare here in Switzerland to have conditions when I really can see the absolutely stunning performance of my nFD 2.8/400mm - the lens itself has a perfect corner resolution wide open (=f2.Cool even on 50 MP FF cameras ...

S


PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2022 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
I very rarely shoot at f=600mm or above. Occasionally I use my Canon nFD 2.8/400mm L with a Canon FD 1.4x or FD-A 2x converter, mainly for documenting frescoes in churches. Apart from strong lateral CAs (which are easy to correct in PP) this combinations are pretty OK, even wide open (using 24 MP FF).

I also have the newest version of the Novoflex Noflexar-T 5.6/400mm which has much less CAs than the Canon 2.8/400mm L (!!); however its field curvature is pretty disturbing if you have "flat" sceneries (landscapes!). The corresponding Noflexar 8/600mm might be an option for you, but it will have field curvature as well. They occasionally are quite cheap: I got my pristine, like-new Noflexar-T 5.6/400mm for a whopping CHF/EUR/USD 2.-- since the two parts (lens head and focusing unit) were sold in two separate auctions, both starting at 1.-- ...

I also own a Sigma 13.5/1000mm mirror which is really bad. Not recommended at all!

In my experience all good lenses > 300 mm usually are limited by the weather and air turbulences. It's VERY rare here in Switzerland to have conditions when I really can see the absolutely stunning performance of my nFD 2.8/400mm - the lens itself has a perfect corner resolution wide open (=f2.Cool even on 50 MP FF cameras ...

S


In order to obtain a focal length longer than 500 mm (mainly for moon and setting sun pictures but for stationnary birds as well), I'm using the Minolta MC Rokkor 400 mm f/5,6 with its assorted 300-L converter, resulting in a focal length of 800 mm. Thanks to the optimized tele converter, IQ stays high enough for most applications as long as I close the aperture at least half a stop.

I've found the same low chromatic aberrations with my Novoflex Noflexar-T 5.6/400mm of which I've recently found a sample against a "whopping" 60 Euro fee. But my sample doesn't show field curvature in disturbing quantities which would sound quite logical since the lens had been made for 35 mm and medium format cameras. While sharpness outside of the center is a little bit lower, it's still acceptable in the final prints. Anyway, I think the lens renders astonishingly well in the center as well as in the corners, given its low prices in the second hand market Wink


PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2022 12:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Alsatian2017 wrote:




I've found the same low chromatic aberrations with my Novoflex Noflexar-T 5.6/400mm of which I've recently found a sample against a "whopping" 60 Euro fee. But my sample doesn't show field curvature in disturbing quantities which would sound quite logical since the lens had been made for 35 mm and medium format cameras. While sharpness outside of the center is a little bit lower, it's still acceptable in the final prints. Anyway, I think the lens renders astonishingly well in the center as well as in the corners, given its low prices in the second hand market Wink


I have to argue that the Novoflex is a totally different computation than the Leica Telyt 400 mm long focus; I had this one and the sharpness outside the center was simply unacceptable on flat subjects


PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2022 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Alsatian2017 wrote:

In order to obtain a focal length longer than 500 mm (mainly for moon and setting sun pictures but for stationnary birds as well), I'm using the Minolta MC Rokkor 400 mm f/5,6 with its assorted 300-L converter, resulting in a focal length of 800 mm. Thanks to the optimized tele converter, IQ stays high enough for most applications as long as I close the aperture at least half a stop.


While I don't own the MC/MD 5.6/400mm APO, I have been able to shoot extensively with a pristine-looking sample (MC-X). This sample had pretty obvious astigmatism in the image center (!) which indicates problems with centering. I'm aware of two other Mniolta 5.6/400mm APO lenses with the same problem, thus indicating an common failure mode (I don't think Minolta would have shipped such an expensive lens with such an obvious flaw). We have discussed this earlier, and it seems your lens doesn't have that problem (BTW yours is the only "good" MC/MD 56/400 APO I'm aware of!).

Combining "my" test lens with the corresponding dedicated tele converter did not produce useful images ... just as a "caveat" in case someone thinks about getting the MC/MD 5.6/400 APO & 2x Converter combo!

Alsatian2017 wrote:

I've found the same low chromatic aberrations with my Novoflex Noflexar-T 5.6/400mm of which I've recently found a sample against a "whopping" 60 Euro fee. But my sample doesn't show field curvature in disturbing quantities which would sound quite logical since the lens had been made for 35 mm and medium format cameras. While sharpness outside of the center is a little bit lower, it's still acceptable in the final prints.

Depends on the size of the print, of course. Compared to what the nFD 2.8/400 mm L at f2.8 can do, the Novoflex (at f5.6) is pretty weak for landscape purposes. However, if one focuses the Noflexar-T 5.6/400mm (newest computation) somewhere "in between" (ie in between center and corner), and stops it down to f11, the image quality is very good also for landscapes. Especially remarkable is the good color correction, which is much better than that of Canon nFD 2.8/400mm L (see samples below).


Alsatian2017 wrote:
Anyway, I think the lens renders astonishingly well in the center as well as in the corners, given its low prices in the second hand market Wink

Agreed Wink

Now here a few samples to support my statements made above. All samples are 100% crops from JPGs directly out of the A7II (24 MP FF). Although the weather was quite dull, I was lucky to have no wind at all, and no visible disturbance from thermic air movements.

Let's first look at the newest computation of the Noflexar-T 5.6/400mm. Here's a 100% crop from the image center at f5.6 (wide open):
Resolution is pretty good, although we can't really find "the" focus point when focusing - some remaining LoCAs (also visible as purple fringing) confirm that the lens doesn't have a well defined focus point. But it's pretty good for a long vintage lens!



Now the same motive, but this time as a crop from the image corner! It simply is blurred, all the detail is lost, and frankly unacceptable for my needs (e. g landscape or documentation of ancient frescoes in churches):



Then the same stuff - still with the Noflexar-T - when focused to the corner, and stopped down to f11. Sharpness/detail is pretty good (though not overwhelming), and there's very little lateral CA. However, now the image center is slightly blurred (not shown here - for landscape purposes it would be best to focus somewhere in between center and corners):


Now let's switch to the Canon nFD 2.8/400mm L. First a 100% corner crop from a JPG taken at f2.8 (wide open). I have been focusing the center of image - so this proves that there's no visible field curvature here. Already at f2.8 (and center-focused) the Canon has much more detail than the Noflexar-T at f11 (and corner-focused). I think that says it all ... lateral CAs however are pretty visible:


Finally a quick Photoshop RAW conversion with CAs removed and some sharpening applied (sharpening 40d and radius 0.7) - look at that!!


I hope that these 100% crops can give an idea of how these two huge and venerable vintage lenses are performing on 24MP FF cameras.

For my purposes usually the nFD 28/400mm L is the right lens. However for animals and maybe sports the Noflexar-T could be a viable lens as well - as well as for landscapes, as long as you can cope with f11!

S


EDIT The Noflexar-T is MUCH better than the common cheap vintage 400mm doublets (often 6.3/400mm or 6.8/400mm lenses, sometimes with a third lens for a correction of field curvature). Just to make that clear!!


PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2022 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Good testing. It would be useful to keep track of all of these somehow.

I would be interested for you to test the cheap 400mm f/6.3 'wundertute' against some contemporaries. Or even test all the preset lenses of this style they made (135/200/300/400/500).


PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2022 6:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
eggplant wrote:
Good testing. It would be useful to keep track of all of these somehow.

I would be interested for you to test the cheap 400mm f/6.3 'wundertute' against some contemporaries. Or even test all the preset lenses of this style they made (135/200/300/400/500).


Like 1 Like 1 Me too! Both! My experiences with 400mm "Girl Watcher", "Wundertube", "Sharpshooter", & 500mm f/8 & like-style lenses show they are very sharp in center, not so much near outside perimeter, compared to Super-Multi-Coated 1:4.5 / 500. I'll try to dig up some old photos. They do imho out-perform many 500mm mirror lenses, except maybe Tamron 1:8 / 500 which I didn't have at the time.

There are times of day and days where atmospheric turbulence is so little as to be invisible -- early morning perhaps? Certainly not in the afternoon!

Last edited by visualopsins on Fri Sep 02, 2022 9:32 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2022 9:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
eggplant wrote:
Good testing. It would be useful to keep track of all of these somehow.
I would be interested for you to test the cheap 400mm f/6.3 'wundertute' against some contemporaries.


I have a few of them in the 400mm / 500mm range (e. g. Soligor 6.3/400mm and 6.3/500mm as well as Vivitar 5.6/400mm and 6.3/500mm), but also a few other 400mm lenses starting with the venerable Meyer Görlitz Tele Megor 5.6/40cm (and the Schneider Tele Xenar 5.5/36cm). Some of them might be of interest, too, such as the Enna Tele Ennalyt 4.5/400mm, the Konica Hexanon AR 45/400mm, the Canon FD 4.5/400mm, or even the Tamron SP 5.6/200-500mm.

If tomorrow the weather conditions are as favorable as today I may compare some of them to the Canon nFD 2.8/400mm L. Actually I tried comparing my "long" lenses several times, but never managed to do a reliable test due to changing (=deteriorating) weather conditions while testing. Quite often it's possible to compare two or three long lenses - but inevitable after that some wind starts blowing, or other problems arise ...

S


PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2022 10:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
eggplant wrote:
Good testing. It would be useful to keep track of all of these somehow.
I would be interested for you to test the cheap 400mm f/6.3 'wundertute' against some contemporaries.


I have a few of them in the 400mm / 500mm range (e. g. Soligor 6.3/400mm and 6.3/500mm as well as Vivitar 5.6/400mm and 6.3/500mm), but also a few other 400mm lenses starting with the venerable Meyer Görlitz Tele Megor 5.6/40cm (and the Schneider Tele Xenar 5.5/36cm). Some of them might be of interest, too, such as the Enna Tele Ennalyt 4.5/400mm, the Konica Hexanon AR 45/400mm, the Canon FD 4.5/400mm, or even the Tamron SP 5.6/200-500mm.

If tomorrow the weather conditions are as favorable as today I may compare some of them to the Canon nFD 2.8/400mm L. Actually I tried comparing my "long" lenses several times, but never managed to do a reliable test due to changing (=deteriorating) weather conditions while testing. Quite often it's possible to compare two or three long lenses - but inevitable after that some wind starts blowing, or other problems arise ...

S


Maybe I should've been more specific- the lenses I've bolded are pretty interesting in their own right, particularly the one stop faster 500mm ones, but fairly different to the 500mm f/8 preset that's been produced for years I was thinking of. I can't find any pictures of a Soligor 500mm f/6.3 though...

The lenses you're describing:

Soligor 400mm 6.3:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/data/134/large/soligorKino-900.jpg

(Soligor 500mm f6.3 - no pictures found)

Vivitar 600mm f6.3:
https://live.staticflickr.com/7029/6632956271_a7a268fb68_b.jpg





The preset lenses I'm looking for:

500mm f8 ('older' model that disassembles in three parts):


400mm f6.3:



300mm f6.3:




200mm f4.5? I am going off the distinct " O -> C" preset control ring, and the font + colours on the focuser. It's quite consistent in a way I've not seen between other third party lenses. Then again I could just be stupid. I have not found an element count on these lenses online but I have undoubtedly seen at least one catalogue with something similar in them which should tell me.

I'm going to guess this is where the similar optical designs stop, also going on my previous experience reading catalogues for lenses of this vintage. The overlap is 200-500mm:




135mm f3.5? This is where it gets a fair bit difficult, because there are a lot of 135mm preset lenses about that go for a similar appearance, or even the ones I think fit in this group have their own changes, like 'short' depth of field aperture markings.

I regardless think they are all Sonnars, or some form of triplet. There is a Promura 135mm f3.5 that's a long tube seen below, but all the elements are up front, which makes me think a generic Cooke triplet, but more likely a simplified Sonnar design:





There is a Paragon 135mm f3.5 with similar styling to above lenses, but I don't think the optical design will overlap.



There's a Vivitar 135mm f3.5 preset which also looks close, but it and basically all other 135mm lenses from this era are Sonnars (see https://web.archive.org/web/20160824101757/http://boggys.myzen.co.uk/pdfmaster/Vivitar_T-Mount_Preset_Lenses_DS_400dpi.pdf + other brochures I've read/own listing 135mm preset lenses). I'm not sure you're going to find one with a similar structure to the 500/400/300mm lenses.

So to conclude- check out the 500/400/300mm for now, and think about the 200mm f4.5.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2022 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
eggplant wrote:

The preset lenses I'm looking for:

500mm f8 ('older' model that disassembles in three parts):

400mm f6.3:

300mm f6.3:

200mm f4.5?

135mm f3.5?

So to conclude- check out the 500/400/300mm for now, and think about the 200mm f4.5.


OK I understand ... I probably have seen the 500 f8 on some occasions here in Switzerland (but never bought one); the others seem to be completely unknown here. So no, I can't help you with test results ...

S


PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2022 6:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
This lens would be my recommendation: http://forum.mflenses.com/tele-tokina-600mm-f8-t-mount-on-ff-dslr-sony-a850-and-dx-t71561.html
It's also available in various brandings like Vivitar, Lentar, Mamiya, etc.
Correctly used, it's able to provide decent and very usable results, particularly when optimized in PP.

I'll post some examples shot with my A7R II also in combination with an 1.4X converter (840mm on FF or 1260mm FF equ. on APSC) later.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2022 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here are the promised example pictures, shot with the Tele-Tokina 600/8 on Sony A7R II on Manfrotto tripod, optimized in LR:



#1 infinity landscape


#2 Minolta AF 1.4x Tele Converter-II APO added (840mm)


#3 another Scenery with 50mm lens


#4 roof out of this scenery with 840mm like above


#5 rose out of the same scenery (left side), again with 840mm



Alternatively, Minolta AF REFLEX 500/8 on Monster modified LA-EA4 taken yesterday at different light situation late afternoon FREEHAND:



All clickable for better quality viewing.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2022 2:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
Here are the promised example pictures, shot with the Tele-Tokina 600/8 on Sony A7R II on Manfrotto tripod, optimized in LR:


The Tokina is not bad at all, but the Minolta mirror looks amazing, even if the backlight plays its role, I suspect.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2022 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ultrapix wrote:
tb_a wrote:
Here are the promised example pictures, shot with the Tele-Tokina 600/8 on Sony A7R II on Manfrotto tripod, optimized in LR:


The Tokina is not bad at all, but the Minolta mirror looks amazing, even if the backlight plays its role, I suspect.


The Minolta mirror would be my lens of choice, particularly because of it's AF capabilities when used with the Monster adapter, it's size and weight and usability without tripod.
Unfortunately, the Minolta APO tele converter doesn't fit and my Kenko one isn't supported by the Monster adapter.
However, the APSC mode delivers similar magnification from the naked lens compared to the lens/converter combination on FF.

Here's what you get from the mirror lens in APSC mode; i.e. FOV equivalence 750mm (focus on glass roof):

#1


Last edited by tb_a on Sat Sep 03, 2022 3:44 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2022 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
Here are the promised example pictures, shot with the Tele-Tokina 600/8 on Sony A7R II on Manfrotto tripod, optimized in LR:
...


Are your samples shown above A) 100% crops or B) re-sized entire images?

S


PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2022 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
Are your samples shown above A) 100% crops or B) re-sized entire images?


Images downsized to 2048px on long side, no crops.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2022 4:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Another "budget" recommendation. This camera was € 400.- brand new incl. pancake zoom. My most favorite one for travelling and hiking.

MFT doubles the magnification: Panasonic Lumix GX80 with Lumix Zoom 100-300 @ 300/5.6 resulting in FOV 600mm on FF (any better 300mm lens would deliver similar result):

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3