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

Best Option for 400-500 range
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have recently compared three "affordable" 500mm lenses on the 5D.

# Beroflex 5/800 ("Wundertüte")
# Tamron SP 8/500 (mirror lens)
# Sigma 7.2/500 (oldish AF-lens which cannot be stopped down on a DSLR)

The results were somewhat surprising.

Ranking for mid-distance shots (approx. 10m)

1. Sigma AF 7.2/500
2. Tamron SP 8/500
3. Beroflex 8/500

Ranking for long-distance shots (distance approx. 200m)

1. Tamron SP 8/500
2. Beroflex 8/500
3. Sigma AF 7.2/500

I would call the Tamron mirror lens the best allrounder, if you can cope with the donut-bokeh highlights. Wink

And this photo shows another advantage of the Tamron:


I will try the Sigma 7.2/500 on my film EOS 5 as soon as it arrives. This is a cam that lens was meant for. Laughing


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 6:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Tamron 55BB with matching 2x converter, on a NEX 5N (1500mm equivalent)



My experience of the Sigma 150-500 is that it is a useful lens, especially for the OS and reasonably good AF, but not sharpest at 500mm. I wouldn't bother with a 2x converter on it, I think the result would be soft (and slow)[/img]


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 7:54 pm    Post subject: adaptall 200-500 Reply with quote
I have just acquired a tamron 31A (which is the one to get if your looking at the adaptall 200-500mm lenses. It is considered to be well ahead of the earlier f6.9 ones). Only had a brief bit of use with it so far, but I can say it was sufficient to have a bit of WOW factor compared to pics of the channel marker with my other lenses (it's a perennial "test subject").



This 100% crop at 500mm (OtC jpg) shows the lens's strengths and weakness: sharp, but prone to CA.

FYI there are two great reviews:


http://makingnottaking.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/tamron-sp-200-500mm-f56-31a.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=55303


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 9:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Pontus wrote:
Slightly longer but very compact for what it is. And very good. The Nikkor 600/5.6

http://forum.mflenses.com/seagulls-with-nikkor-600-5-6-ai-s-t59253,highlight,%2Bnikkor+%2B600.html


That is an awesome lens! It is also a $2500 lens. The same cost of a nikoor 800 AIS on ebay too. I can't afford it. I can drool, but that is about it. If I am going to pay that much money I am best served by buying a backup camera body or some accessories for my studio since I rarely shoot at those lengths to justify it.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 11:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
LucisPictor wrote:
Ranking for long-distance shots (distance approx. 200m)


Did you also compare these lenses at 500m to 1000m (or more)?


PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cheap, compact and very sharp: Tamron Nestar 400/6.9


PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ForenSeil wrote:
Novoflex 600mm F8 (and 400/5.6)
...
There are several versions but optically they are all the same I think.
...


From what I remember the "T" versions have three lenses, those without "T" only two lenses inside. The third lense helps for a flatter field - so it can be used on 6x6 cameras as well.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 1:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ZoneV wrote:
ForenSeil wrote:
Novoflex 600mm F8 (and 400/5.6)
...
There are several versions but optically they are all the same I think.
...


From what I remember the "T" versions have three lenses, those without "T" only two lenses inside. The third lense helps for a flatter field - so it can be used on 6x6 cameras as well.


Only the 400mm came in both doublet and triplet (T) versions AFAIK, the 600mm was only doublet. I like using the Leitz Telyt 560/6,.8 lenshead for the Novoflex.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 7:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here is what got listed so far as recommendations:

Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX DG HSM APO
Sigma 150-500mm
Sigma 120-400mm
Benefit of AF and good resolution

Tamron Nestar 400 f/6.9
Cheap and Sharp


Nikon AIS 400/2.8 500/4 600/4
Expensive but good

Tamron SP 500mm F8
Best and cheapest mirror lens - Beroflex 500 f8 second best

Tokina 600 f8


Novoflex 600mm f8 and 400mm f5.6

Tamron adaptall SP 200-500mm
Very sharp but strong CA

Next is to check ebay and keh for both availability and prices.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
maldaye wrote:
Here is what got listed so far as recommendations:

Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX DG HSM APO
Sigma 150-500mm
Sigma 120-400mm
Benefit of AF and good resolution

Tamron Nestar 400 f/6.9
Cheap and Sharp


Nikon AIS 400/2.8 500/4 600/4
Expensive but good

Tamron SP 500mm F8
Best and cheapest mirror lens - Beroflex 500 f8 second best

Tokina 600 f8


Novoflex 600mm f8 and 400mm f5.6

Tamron adaptall SP 200-500mm
Very sharp but strong CA

Next is to check ebay and keh for both availability and prices.


After a bit of ebaying I've decided on:


Tamron Nestor as Option A
Tamron SP 500mm mirror, Nikkor 1000mm mirror as Option B

The thing about the Tamron Nestor is that a ebay are showing them with m42 mounts and screw mounts. My understanding is that they were T/T2 mount adaptable to Nikon. Are the ones coming with the m42 mounts, etc fixed mounts or are those coming with an adapter that can be removed?


PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
maldaye wrote:
Here is what got listed so far as recommendations:
Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX DG HSM APO
Sigma 150-500mm
Sigma 120-400mm
Benefit of AF and good resolution


Of these three I'd recommend the 50-500mm. If you want a prime AF lens I'd recommend the Sigma Apo Macro 400mm f/5.6, a very good lens. Don't get the Sigma Apo 400mm f/5.6 versions, the macro version is a lot sharper and doesn't suffer from the fogging of an internal lens element many non-macro versions seem to suffer from.

maldaye wrote:
Tamron Nestar 400 f/6.9
Cheap and Sharp

Nikon AIS 400/2.8 500/4 600/4
Expensive but good


No comment on these as I've never used them.

maldaye wrote:
Tamron SP 500mm F8
Best and cheapest mirror lens - Beroflex 500 f8 second best


The Beroflex is not a mirror lens.

maldaye wrote:
Tokina 600 f8

Novoflex 600mm f8 and 400mm f5.6


The T-Noflexar 400mm f/5.6 I'd recommend along with the Leitz 560mm f/6.8.

maldaye wrote:
Tamron adaptall SP 200-500mm
Very sharp but strong CA

Next is to check ebay and keh for both availability and prices.



You are listing very different types of lenses. If you are considering mirror lenses, consider whether the doughnut bokeh is something you can live with. Maybe getting a very good shorter telephoto and a converter may be the best route, that way you also get a good medium telephoto. I like using my Canons 300/2.8 with or without converter. Often I only take a 70-200/2.8 with a 2x converter with me. 400/2.8 lenses are great but heavy and so are the matching tripods.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
maldaye wrote:

The thing about the Tamron Nestor is that a ebay are showing them with m42 mounts and screw mounts. My understanding is that they were T/T2 mount adaptable to Nikon. Are the ones coming with the m42 mounts, etc fixed mounts or are those coming with an adapter that can be removed?

Only one showing up on ebay UK at the moment, it has a T2 mounting that's M42 and is buy-it-now for £100.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
norland wrote:
maldaye wrote:

The thing about the Tamron Nestor is that a ebay are showing them with m42 mounts and screw mounts. My understanding is that they were T/T2 mount adaptable to Nikon. Are the ones coming with the m42 mounts, etc fixed mounts or are those coming with an adapter that can be removed?

Only one showing up on ebay UK at the moment, it has a T2 mounting that's M42 and is buy-it-now for £100.


T2 mounting that's M42 which means it will not work on Nikon and I can't just take off the mounting easily and put on a Nikon adapter right?


PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
dickb wrote:
Here is what got listed so far as recommendations:

You are listing very different types of lenses. If you are considering mirror lenses, consider whether the doughnut bokeh is something you can live with. Maybe getting a very good shorter telephoto and a converter may be the best route, that way you also get a good medium telephoto. I like using my Canons 300/2.8 with or without converter. Often I only take a 70-200/2.8 with a 2x converter with me. 400/2.8 lenses are great but heavy and so are the matching tripods.


I am listing the lenses recommended to me here by other posters in sequential order with summary of comments made. I am aware they are very different type. It all started after I looked at my lens list and realized I am very heavy on the 70-300 part. I own over 65 lenses. I figured I can break the barrier by getting a good long telephoto. Of course, I have lots of extenders lying around Vivitar, Tamron, Tokina, so I can stack them all up and change a 300mm prime into a 600 or 900 or more, but I am always told that is a bad idea!


PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Tamron Nestar is actually the compact version of the old T-mount Tamron 400/6.9 which is more common.
A very similar lens and at least as good is the old preset Tokina 400/6.3, also found in many brands. Look for the tele-Tokina version to get an idea what it looks like, so you know what to look for under other names, the look is distinctive.

Both of these are a bit better than the more common pair of 400/6.3s, one made by Kawakami/Kawanon but usually seen in the Astranar brand and the other the very familiar Spiratone, of course not made by Fred Spira, maker is still unknown. But this same lens is available in dozens of brands.

Any of these can give excellent results used correctly (Well focused in good light they will stand up to pixel peeping) and they are cheap. They are a great way to get used to long MF tele work. If you decide you can deal with the learning curve and that long tele is more fun than painful then maybe its time to get something better.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
Tamron Nestar is actually the compact version of the old T-mount Tamron 400/6.9 which is more common.
A very similar lens and at least as good is the old preset Tokina 400/6.3, also found in many brands. Look for the tele-Tokina version to get an idea what it looks like, so you know what to look for under other names, the look is distinctive.

Both of these are a bit better than the more common pair of 400/6.3s, one made by Kawakami/Kawanon but usually seen in the Astranar brand and the other the very familiar Spiratone, of course not made by Fred Spira, maker is still unknown. But this same lens is available in dozens of brands.

Any of these can give excellent results used correctly (Well focused in good light they will stand up to pixel peeping) and they are cheap. They are a great way to get used to long MF tele work. If you decide you can deal with the learning curve and that long tele is more fun than painful then maybe its time to get something better.


Best advice!!!! Start with something cheap and see if it is something I am willing to work on and with before investing into more expensive long-tele glass!


PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
maldaye wrote:
dickb wrote:
Here is what got listed so far as recommendations:

You are listing very different types of lenses. If you are considering mirror lenses, consider whether the doughnut bokeh is something you can live with. Maybe getting a very good shorter telephoto and a converter may be the best route, that way you also get a good medium telephoto. I like using my Canons 300/2.8 with or without converter. Often I only take a 70-200/2.8 with a 2x converter with me. 400/2.8 lenses are great but heavy and so are the matching tripods.


I am listing the lenses recommended to me here by other posters in sequential order with summary of comments made. I am aware they are very different type. It all started after I looked at my lens list and realized I am very heavy on the 70-300 part. I own over 65 lenses. I figured I can break the barrier by getting a good long telephoto. Of course, I have lots of extenders lying around Vivitar, Tamron, Tokina, so I can stack them all up and change a 300mm prime into a 600 or 900 or more, but I am always told that is a bad idea!


Using a teleconverter is only a good idea if the lens you combine it with is very high quality to begin with and reasonably fast. So combining a Mamiya apo 200mm f2.8 or 300mm f2.8, the best manual focus lenses in that bracket I know of that can be used on a Nikon is a good idea. I don,t know enough about Nikon zoom lenses to be sure but I assume they have a very good and expensive 70 200 2.8 lens that is good enough to be used with converters. The Nikon 300mm f2.8 manual focus lens apparently as a lot of CA, so that would be less ideal.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The best solution is not a photographic lens but a telescope.
For exemple, an Orion / Sky Watcher 80 ED : 400 EUR new.
600mm f7.5, simple doublet refractor (Apochromatic) with ED lenses.
Cheap, excellent results, easily adaptable to your DSLR with a T2 ring, also usable for birding for example (with a solid tripod), but you still have purple fringing sometimes.

If you don't want AC, you have to move to a triplet Apochromatic, ED lenses, like, for example, the ORION ED80T CF : 480mm f6.
The price is now 850 EUR new Crying or Very sad . But the quality is very close to a CANON EF 500/4...(if not better, in short words, and without all the automation, of course)

Here's a quick & dirty test with a Maksutov-Cassegrain RUBINAR 1000mm f10 on a G1 (2000mm 24x36)
No crop, basic pp, sharpening after downsizing, B&W and color





For the record, excellent results also with Digiscoping ;
Digiscoping is a digital camera on a spotting scope;
If the digital camera is cheap, I can't tell you the price of good spotting scope, Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski... Wink


PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 2:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
maldaye wrote:
T2 mounting that's M42 which means it will not work on Nikon
and I can't just take off the mounting easily and put on a Nikon adapter right?

Should be ok to replace the T2 that's M42 with a Nikon fitting T2.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/T2-T-mount-Lens-to-NIKON-mount-adapter-D7000-D3200-D3100-D3000-/120977783767?pt=UK_Photography_CameraLenses_Lens_caps_hoods_adaptors_ET&hash=item1c2ad67bd7


PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 6:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
maldaye wrote:
...
Nikon AIS 400/2.8 500/4 600/4
Expensive but good
...


Don´t forget the Canon FD tele lenses (in case you use not a Nikon camera):
nFD 300/2.8 L
nFD 300/4 L
nFD 400/2.8 L
nFD 400/4.5
nFD 500/4.5 L
nFD 600/4.5
nFD 800/5.6 L

The 300mm/2.8L, 400/2.8L and 500/4.5L are very good lenses. I think they will be about equal to the Nikkor counterparts. But at the moment sometimes much cheaper (exept the 300mm).
From my experience the SSC FD 800/5.6 is bad, but my lens has probably delamination (and was badly used), what could be a cause of this.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Phenix jc wrote:
The best solution is not a photographic lens but a telescope.

...


I cannot agree more ! I have an Astro Professional doublet ED 560mm f7, and this is wonderful. Resolution is there but this is not something easy to walk around with. You also need a good tripod. I got it for... ~280€ and no AC visible.

As Phenix jc said, triplet APO are of course better but you won't get it that "cheap".

If someone wish, I can post some samples when I got home. I'll be pleased Smile


PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 5:41 pm    Post subject: nestar vs 400-6.3's Reply with quote
I wrote the review of the Nestar on pentax Forums.

The most practical thing I can say about it here is it was much superior to the 400 f6.3's that I tried, particularly wide open.

As far as that ad on ebay goes, it looks like a better example than mine, but I don't know that its worth 3x what I paid for mine.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Adrien171 wrote:

If someone wish, I can post some samples when I got home. I'll be pleased Smile

Please, do !
A picture is worth 1000 words Wink

I think that your Astro Professionnal is barely usable in the field ;
The ORION I quoted are both perfectly usable for birding for example ;
They are not heavier nor bulkier than any 500/4 or equivalent
(forget hand held however)


PostPosted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 11:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Found one taken with my Nestar and a 1.4x converter. Took a bit of sharpening to bring out the detail if I remember correctly Smile


Moon by <<BackToTheFuture>>, on Flickr


PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Found one taken with my Nestar and a 1.4x converter. Took a bit of sharpening to bring out the detail if I remember correctly Smile


Moon by <<BackToTheFuture>>, on Flickr

Best moonshot Ive seen posted in the thread so far....
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3