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

Super-telephoto lenses on a budget?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:16 am    Post subject: Super-telephoto lenses on a budget? Reply with quote
I love the perspective I get with long telephoto lenses for landscapes... but I just can't afford the new, stabilized ultra-sharp gems that Canon produces these days. My longest lens is a Canon 4/300 L IS which is good, and with a 1.4x extender it's acceptable. Anything beyond 300mm is really expensive. Canon's 5.6/400mm is not much longer but has no IS.

What I am looking for are lenses beyond 400mm, and of course, a stabilizer is not in my budget, and I better forget about AF as well. I own a very stable tripod and know how to use mirror lockup.

I owned Novoflex 400and 600 lenses and a Leitz Telyt 560mm head for it. They are good, but not great. I tried a Tamron 8/500mm mirror lens which is not bad either but I would not call it super-sharp... and it's not very useful in backlight situations.

What kind of super-telephoto lenses would you recommend if the main aspect is "sharpness and contrast on a budget"?


PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'll be frank with you, long lenses have really advanced in the last few years. Older ones are not going to give you the results you are after, given that you think the 300/4L with 1.4x TC is just "good". For reference, my 300/4L with 1.4x TC is better than my 100-400/4.5-5.6L wide open.

The only old long lens I have which doesn't suffer bad fringing and gives decent enough images is the Tamron Nesstar 400/6.9.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 12:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
....given that you think the 300/4L with 1.4x TC is just "good".


That is the curse of full format 21MP sensors.

Of course, I don't think I can get a decent lens for two hundred Euros.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ditto here - if the Telyt doesn't do it for you, there are no "cheap" lenses that would.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 3:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
PS - 21mp full frame isn't that dense a sensor btw - it is full frame.
There are lots of cheap APS cameras as dense or more, and just as likely to find image problems when pixel-peeping.

My Pentax K-x certainly is at least as dense, at only 12.4mp but on less than half the surface area.

As a practical matter it may be best to just avoid pixel peeping.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
As a good tele photo lens the Canon FD 500mm f/4.5 L comes to mind - but this is not cheap. And one need Ed Mikas adapter / DIY adapter or a lens mount conversion.
Here you could see my mount conversion and some full resolution test images:
http://www.4photos.de/camera-diy/Canon-FD500-4.5L-EF-mount-conversion.html

The Canon FD SSC 800/5.6 (without L) seems cheaper - at least the one I got. But image quality is not everytime great. On very contrasty edges - for example tree branches and the bright sky - there is a lot of CA. And I mean really much of it, in some cases you see it at 400pixel full image width.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 12:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
As a practical matter it may be best to just avoid pixel peeping.


I am actually not a pixel peeper. I am a guy who often creates very large prints.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 2:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
Ditto here - if the Telyt doesn't do it for you, there are no "cheap" lenses that would.


+1 why you not sharp result in PP that is works well on good enough lenses.

sharpest long lens what I try was MTO 500mm f6.3 mirror , but huge!


PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ZoneV wrote:
As a good tele photo lens the Canon FD 500mm f/4.5 L comes to mind - but this is not cheap. And one need Ed Mikas adapter / DIY adapter or a lens mount conversion.
Here you could see my mount conversion and some full resolution test images:
http://www.4photos.de/camera-diy/Canon-FD500-4.5L-EF-mount-conversion.html

The Canon FD SSC 800/5.6 (without L) seems cheaper - at least the one I got. But image quality is not everytime great. On very contrasty edges - for example tree branches and the bright sky - there is a lot of CA. And I mean really much of it, in some cases you see it at 400pixel full image width.


I would second the FD 500/4.5L. A great lens, especially for the price it commands these days (i come from a Pentax background where a similar lens would cost double).


PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Daniel, I only found one FD 500 and that was almost as expensive as a used 500 EF. Where would you look for such a lens?


PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 1:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
They pop up on ebay from time to time.

I may be selling mine in the future, but I am still hoping I can use a 500mm. Went out with a Pentax 67 M*400/4 today and that was too much for me, both the bulk, the weight and the difficulty tracking the birds and focusing, though I did get a couple of reasonable pics in the end.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nikkors deserve mention.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, but getting the good manual ED Nikkors on a budget is not simple either.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
You used already some of the best.
ZoneV is right, have a look into the FD whites.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 11:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
How are the Century Precision Tele Athenars?


PostPosted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cxo wrote:
How are the Century Precision Tele Athenars?


I've had two.

500/5.6 TA-II, sold years ago. Achromatic doublet in a long tube with a piece of flat glass somewhere in the tube. Bought in poor condition, restored to as-new, they said, by Century. Strong central hot spot, strong chromatic aberration. Not recommended.

300/5.6 TA, still in the case with my Beaulieus. Same construction, not quite as bad but also not recommended.

These aren't telephoto lenses, they are long lenses.

OP, if tinkering, small maximum apertures, and lack of diaphragm automation don't bother you, look for a used process lens in the focal length you want. Most are quite good at all distances.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 09, 2012 2:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Anything better than a Telyt 560/6.8 is going to be quite expensive. What is it you don't like about it? I use mine on a 5DmkII when I want a lightweight telephoto. It is lower in contrast than more complex modern optical designs, but sharp and with a bit of post processing the images look very good. Alternatives may be Canon FD 300mm f/2.8 lenses with a teleconverter. From what I've seen the Canons are better with CA than comparable Nikons. Other good telephoto lenses I've got are the Minolta Apo Rokkor 400mm f/5.6 and a non-rechipped Sigma Apo Tele Macro 400mm f/5.6, only to be used at f/5.6.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
What I would like to achieve is more contrast and sharpness, especially in the corners.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Super-Telephoto + budget doesn't seem to come together except when it happens like this.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1028384/0

I paid way more for mine 800 5.6L Sad


PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cxo wrote:
What I would like to achieve is more contrast and sharpness, especially in the corners.


Then you will need to buy modern L lenses I'm afraid.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
i have a spiratone minitel 500/8 mirror and thought it was great, for what it is, a compact super tele mirror at a reasonable price...
i think we need to be reasonable on our expectations of these type lenses.
tony


PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 12:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
cxo wrote:
What I would like to achieve is more contrast and sharpness, especially in the corners.


Then you will need to buy modern L lenses I'm afraid.


As I can't afford that I look for alternatives. I am ready to do without IS and AF.

How are the 500mm lenses for the Mamiya 645?


PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2012 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cxo wrote:
ManualFocus-G wrote:
cxo wrote:
What I would like to achieve is more contrast and sharpness, especially in the corners.


Then you will need to buy modern L lenses I'm afraid.


As I can't afford that I look for alternatives. I am ready to do without IS and AF.

How are the 500mm lenses for the Mamiya 645?


Canon FD 400 2.8L?
Seems to be a good lens Smile

VERY heavy like FD 800 5.6L but a lot more speed if 400mm is enough.
Extenders give more reach if needed.

No IS no AF but good optical quality.

taken from: http://www.mir.com.my


Lens construction: 8 groups 10 elements (including 2 protective glasses and 2 UD glasses - lens elements illustrated in light green color at left)

FD 800 5.6L lens is like this. (Again no IS or AF but forget handholding and focusing)

UD element seems to be the green one.

This is one of the fastest lens of its class in the world. It utilized an Ultra low-dispersion optical glass element in its design to hold the secondary spectrum to a minimum and to prevent deterioration in picture quality from chromatic aberration. This lens also incorporates the light and smooth Rear-group focusing system in which only the rearmost lens element moves internally for focusing. Thus, good balance of the lens is maintained when using a tripod. This lens also comes with a device for fine adjustment of focusing torque and the focus can be locked. A revolving mechanism to facilitate format changing when using a tripod is incorporated as well.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 12:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cxo wrote:
ManualFocus-G wrote:
cxo wrote:
What I would like to achieve is more contrast and sharpness, especially in the corners.


Then you will need to buy modern L lenses I'm afraid.


As I can't afford that I look for alternatives. I am ready to do without IS and AF.

How are the 500mm lenses for the Mamiya 645?


But there really aren't alternatives at low prices. The FD L lenses are also great but will need a lot of work to make them function on a Canon Eos DSLR. You are really going to struggle to better a Canon 300/4L + 1.4x tc with a much older lens.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 2:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
...
But there really aren't alternatives at low prices. The FD L lenses are also great but will need a lot of work to make them function on a Canon Eos DSLR. You are really going to struggle to better a Canon 300/4L + 1.4x tc with a much older lens.


The old Nikon 800mm f/5.6 is easier to adapt to EOS DSLRs, but:

1) I don't know if it's as good as the Canon FD L 800/5.6
2) People who have tried the Leica Telyt series lenses (APO-Telyt-R 800/5.6 in this case) and the Nikon 800/5.6 say the Leica Telyt lenses ares sharper, but also more expensive.
3) It's not really cheap, and I don't know if it will fit in your budget

The results I get (moonshots) are better than the modern Canon 400/5.6L + 2x TC (effective f/11), but still somewhat fuzzy at 100% crop:

- Canon 400/5.6 + 2X TC http://www.flickr.com/photos/s58y/4144691620/sizes/o/in/set-72157622760163239/

- Nikon 800/5.6 http://www.flickr.com/photos/s58y/7016151869/sizes/o/in/set-72157622760163239/


Some of the difference may be due to improved camera (smaller pixels) and more elaborate technique and processing. In some cases technique is more important than lens quality at these ultra long focal lengths.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2