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

Tele-Tokina 600mm/F8 T-mount on FF DSLR Sony A850 & DX
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2015 12:01 pm    Post subject: Tele-Tokina 600mm/F8 T-mount on FF DSLR Sony A850 & DX Reply with quote
As there are ongoing discussions about some different mirror lenses in a comparable focus length I though it might be a good idea to search for my old Tokina normal tele lens which I have already since ages. Finally I've found it again. Smile

This lens was produced in the early 1970's by Tokina and was also available under the "Vivitar" branding. Actually the "Tele-Tokina" lenses are the first lenses which have been not only produced but also branded as "Tokina".

The lens/camera/tripod assembly:



Generally there is not much difference if used open at F8 or stopped down even up to F32. The "quality" doesn't change to a visible extent.
Here are some sample shots (the first two both fully open and stopped down and the last two only at F16).
As usual no PP at all and only re-sized for presentation:








The distance of the flower shots is (according to the scale on the lens) approximately 12m. The building is far away and shot at infinity.
I've noticed some wind blur on the flower pictures and rather extreme influence of the hot air (surplus to some wind blur) in the infinity shots which can be seen here in the crops:




Normally the second picture should be the sharper one but to the contrary due to the longer exposure time at F32 compared to the first one at F8 the modulation of the hot air in between the camera and the object creates some strange looking artifacts and lines are looking like waves. So it is really not recommended to use any long tele lenses in such weather conditions at rather noon time as this will happen to every lens and has nothing to do with the lens quality.

Finally I have encountered slightly vignetting on the very extreme corners of the pictures, as obviously the lens shade may be a little bit over-sized. However, this wouln't be the case on crop size cameras.

This lens was very cheap when I bought it (second hand). I must say that it is nevertheless usable also on digital, although my other experiences with other old Tokina lenses such as the 400mm one was rather disappointing, as it wasn't possible to make contrasty pictures with it. My copy is in a like new and unused condition and comes with the original carrying case (it has to be split into two parts prior to packing). T-mount adapters are available for almost any camera mount in existence. In the old times I used this lens for moon shots and alike which resulted even when converted to 1200mm to decent results. I am finally relatively pleased with the usable results on the A850, though it's portability has it's limits. Wink

Last edited by tb_a on Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:32 pm; edited 3 times in total


PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2015 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Additionally I've done some test shots with my Ricoh GXR-M. All pictures fully open at F8 and without PP:

Distance apprx. 12m:



Distance apprx. 70m:



Distance apprx. 15m:



100% crop or the last picture:



Bear in mind that the label is behind a dirty glass of the lamp. So the sharpness of the label may be even better without glass.

All in all for a "900mm" lens on a crop camera such as the Ricoh GXR a very nice and satisfactory result (at least for my taste).

Negative aspects are only the size of the lens and at F8 there is a little sign of CA (purple fringing) visible at pixel peeping mode which will disappear when stopped down (visible on both sensor sizes).

Somehow the result on the Ricoh is nicer to my eyes compared to the FF Sony A850 pictures. But that's just a matter of taste. Wink


PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2015 1:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Congrats! Looks like it is a good performer. Smile


PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2015 2:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
impressive lens and the results aren't bad either - thanks for sharing. Does it balance reasonably well on the tripod? The 500mm f8's I've tried IMO are a bit susceptible to what I call "bendy ruler syndrome" - vibrations due to eg shutter are exagerated.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2015 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
marcusBMG wrote:
impressive lens and the results aren't bad either - thanks for sharing. Does it balance reasonably well on the tripod? The 500mm f8's I've tried IMO are a bit susceptible to what I call "bendy ruler syndrome" - vibrations due to eg shutter are exagerated.


It's rather good balanced on the tripod and therefore much easier to use than any longer lens without tripod socket.
However, it tends to something what you are calling bendy something. Wink
Therefore it is very recommended to use the self-timer, where the classical 2 seconds for the mirror pre-release may be too short. So either self-timer at 10 seconds like I've done with the A850 or a cable release like I've used on the Ricoh shots and watch the end of the shaky phase. Maybe another tripod without ball head and directly affixed without quick release socket is more appropriate for such heavy and large lens/camera assemblies. I have an old solid "Bilora" tripod (classical movie camera design with handle on the head) somewhere, which may be the far better option than this ball head "Manfrotto" one. Maybe I'll take that the next time. The shutter or mirror movement alone doesn't have any influence on that at all.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2015 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes Thomas your methodology seems good.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2015 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
These are some of the best shots I've seen using this lens. Back in a former life when I was a camera dealer, I would occasionally pick up copies of this two-part lens. It was available in 400mm, 600mm, and 800mm focal lengths, each using the same focusing assembly with a "head" of differing focal lengths. I've owned 600s and 800s. Back then, the general consensus was that they were "just okay" -- nothing special. And as a result, I wasn't able to get much for them when I sold them -- even though I was convinced they were worth more. Of course, there were no digital cameras to record images with them -- this being some 25 years ago or so. Once again, the digital revolution has proved that an old "just okay" lens is actually quite good. Even though there's a lot of distortion caused by convection currents in the air on that second shot of the building's sign, it is clearly much sharper than the first image. So, there is some benefit to be had by stopping it down. Or so it seems to me.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2015 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Now after the rain at sun down (against the light and therefore still somehow difficult). As the air distortion has gone it is clearly sharper for far distance shooting, even in the dark. All lines are straight now, best seen at the cables. Just to proof that the lens is capable for long distance shots if the air is OK. So it's equally sharp as for the flowers and the lamp before.
Shot with Ricoh, therefore smaller FOV (900mm).



Maybe I will try it against my Minolta RF 500/8 mirror lens sometimes. I am not to sure any longer which one the sharper lens will be. Wink
The focusing is much easier with the Tokina, at least in this discipline the winner is already clear.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 13, 2015 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I couldn't resist. The last shot against the last signs of today's sun (same outfit as before):



PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 3:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would like to see some handheld shots of a sporting even please to really show off that little piece of glass...
I'll be waiting.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 4:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
StillSanj wrote:
I would like to see some handheld shots of a sporting even please to really show off that little piece of glass...
I'll be waiting.


I wouldn't recommend to use this lens for sporting events. Actually it's very hard to use any of such lenses hand held and more or less a matter of luck to make sharp pictures handheld. You would need aperture times shorter than e.g. 1/2000 on the Ricoh and the DOF for anything nearer than infinity is rather shallow. But as I neither go to sporting events myself nor shoot something like that I would be the wrong person to ask anyway. "Little piece of glass" is a joke. I would rather name it a "full size weapon". Wink

Check this: http://www.radical.org/aov/

The angle of view for this lens on my Pentax K20D would correspond to 920mm focus length on my Sony A850 (something like 2 degrees).

If you play around with this calculator: http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

You can easily find out that the DOF (area of acceptable sharpness) for the presented flower shots with the A850 is only 0.18m or something like 0.06m on the Ricoh GXR (based on F8 ).

All that is simple physics and there is no way to cheat that somehow.

So actually the only serious way I would see for the usage for a "sporting event" with lenses like this would be to check the possible area for sharpness within the angle of view in advance, put the assembly on a tripod and wait for an object to come and release only by cable or infrared or alike.

That's how most of the professional photographers are doing it. Everything else is just luck.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 7:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I agree with Thomas -- shooting handheld with such a lens is not practical. Substantively, it would not be much different from shooting with a Canon or Nikon 600mm f/4 handheld -- and you never see the pros do that, do you? However, if you have a stout monopod and the ability to rest the monopod on a firm surface, this can often work quite well. Especially if you have everything balanced properly. Ideally with a monopod, you want the lens/camera combination to be balanced atop the monopod, such that you're basically not having to use any effort at all keeping the combination stationary. I've used some large and heavy lens/camera combinations this way before and was able to get my shutter speeds way down there and still maintain good sharpness. That was back when I was doing a lot of motorsports photography. The time would come when I'd have to pan with a long lens, and I knew from experience that my shutter speed could be no faster than 1/125; 1/60 was better. So being able to pan smoothly with a long lens at these low shutter speeds enabled me to maintain sharp images of the vehicles at speed with the tires and background blurred. Sometimes in these situations a tripod wouldn't work as well because of obstructions or just pllain lack of room.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 7:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
I've used some large and heavy lens/camera combinations this way before and was able to get my shutter speeds way down there and still maintain good sharpness. That was back when I was doing a lot of motorsports photography. The time would come when I'd have to pan with a long lens, and I knew from experience that my shutter speed could be no faster than 1/125; 1/60 was better. So being able to pan smoothly with a long lens at these low shutter speeds enabled me to maintain sharp images of the vehicles at speed with the tires and background blurred. Sometimes in these situations a tripod wouldn't work as well because of obstructions or just pllain lack of room.


That's right. With a little bit of practice you can do that. However, this is nothing for pixel peepers! You can achieve ACCEPTABLE sharpness if the picture is presented in a typical size for a newspaper or a holiday picture (max. 10x15cm). If you would look at the same picture at 100% pixel peeping mode it would be for the waste. That should also be clear.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 9:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
cooltouch wrote:
I've used some large and heavy lens/camera combinations this way before and was able to get my shutter speeds way down there and still maintain good sharpness. That was back when I was doing a lot of motorsports photography. The time would come when I'd have to pan with a long lens, and I knew from experience that my shutter speed could be no faster than 1/125; 1/60 was better. So being able to pan smoothly with a long lens at these low shutter speeds enabled me to maintain sharp images of the vehicles at speed with the tires and background blurred. Sometimes in these situations a tripod wouldn't work as well because of obstructions or just pllain lack of room.


That's right. With a little bit of practice you can do that. However, this is nothing for pixel peepers! You can achieve ACCEPTABLE sharpness if the picture is presented in a typical size for a newspaper or a holiday picture (max. 10x15cm). If you would look at the same picture at 100% pixel peeping mode it would be for the waste. That should also be clear.


Well, I dunno about that. I haven't had the occasion to shoot any auto races since I started shooting digital, but I got a lot of sharp pan shots shooting slides back in the day. However, I was shooting with a fairly long optic at a recent airshow, having to pan, shooting with slow shutter speeds to blur the props, and I think I did ok.

Canon XS DSLR, Tamron 300mm f/2.8 LDIF, ISO 100, 1/125 second:


Ditto above:


Nikon F3, Tamron 300mm f/2.8 LDIF, Fujichrome 100:
P-38 Lightning

All the above shots were taken with the Tamron 60B 300mm f/2.8 LDIF without tripod or monopod. Having to sling over 2 kg (over 4.5 lb) of lens around for pans was no picnic, but its weight was sufficient to damp down shake caused by the jitters.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 9:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Impressive work Michael!


PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I was being sarcastic you guys, I thought it would be obvious but I guess sarcasm never conveys on the internet? Smile
my apologies to waste your time with your replies.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 8:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:

Well, I dunno about that. I haven't had the occasion to shoot any auto races since I started shooting digital, but I got a lot of sharp pan shots shooting slides back in the day. However, I was shooting with a fairly long optic at a recent airshow, having to pan, shooting with slow shutter speeds to blur the props, and I think I did ok.

All the above shots were taken with the Tamron 60B 300mm f/2.8 LDIF without tripod or monopod. Having to sling over 2 kg (over 4.5 lb) of lens around for pans was no picnic, but its weight was sufficient to damp down shake caused by the jitters.


Michael, OK. Your pictures are looking good. However, try the same with a 600mm lens. I have also done already some nice birds shots free hand with a 300mm lens both MF and AF. That's feasable. But we are talking here about the double focus length. That makes a big difference.
So please do not compare apples with eggs. My sample pictures of my Minolta AF 300/F4 APO SSM lens published earlier here are all tack sharp even in pixel peeping mode and they have been shot freehand. But I cannot imagine that I would be able to do this with a 600mm lens. Never. Even with my Minolta RF 500mm/F8 mirror lens I was not really able to achieve really sharp pictures free hand, which would allow real big presentations. For small photos still usable like explained before, but not tack sharp.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 8:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
StillSanj wrote:
I was being sarcastic you guys, I thought it would be obvious but I guess sarcasm never conveys on the internet? Smile
my apologies to waste your time with your replies.


No problem. It was quite interesting for me to check the physics again. It even more demonstrated that I was on the right track.
However, the 60mm DOF which I calculated for the crop camera have been also a surprise for me. I had expected a little bit more.
Next time a smiley could eventually help to show how it was meant.
As an act of courtesy I am always adding a little hint when I post some not so serious comments: Wink


PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 4:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:

Michael, OK. Your pictures are looking good. However, try the same with a 600mm lens. I have also done already some nice birds shots free hand with a 300mm lens both MF and AF. That's feasable. But we are talking here about the double focus length. That makes a big difference.
So please do not compare apples with eggs. My sample pictures of my Minolta AF 300/F4 APO SSM lens published earlier here are all tack sharp even in pixel peeping mode and they have been shot freehand. But I cannot imagine that I would be able to do this with a 600mm lens. Never. Even with my Minolta RF 500mm/F8 mirror lens I was not really able to achieve really sharp pictures free hand, which would allow real big presentations. For small photos still usable like explained before, but not tack sharp.


Well, initially I was looking for some shots I took with my old Sigma 600, but I couldn't find any. They're slides, and I don't seem to have any pan shots available at the moment. I know I have some -- I'll just have to dig through my slides archives to find them. Most of the images I shot with the Sigma, didn't involve panning, however. I would choose a spot on the track and focus on it. Then, with the Sigma mounted to a monopod, I'd trip the shutter as soon as the car entered that narrow in-focus window. But I know I've got some pans I did with that Sigma. So, pardon me while I go rummage. I won't be able to get to them until later today, or maybe tonight, though.

I was showing shots taken with the 300/2.8 because of its weight, though, which puts a lot of people off.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The airshow pics are amazing!

Back to the subject: I used to own the 800mm version, bought new in the mid-80s, I was quite pleased with the results on slide film; I even managed to use it once during the Acropolis Rally (in yr 1988, if I recall correctly) mounted on a Cullmann tripod.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excellent samples images posted. Testament to this Tokina and the skills to manipulate it.

I also liked the airshow photos, superb! Having tried to capture airshow demonstrations, it's tough enough with AF, much less a heavy MF beast.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
WNG555 wrote:
Excellent samples images posted. Testament to this Tokina and the skills to manipulate it.


Thanks for the compliment.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2024 6:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Shot this morning using my Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX80 and the ancient Tele-Tokina 600mm/F8 on Tripod.

From several attempts with different cameras and lenses, the best I could get.

Conclusion: The longest available lens without converter delivers the best result.



PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2024 7:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excellent Luna shot!

Like 1 Like 1

-D.S.


PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2024 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
Shot this morning using my Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX80 and the ancient Tele-Tokina 600mm/F8 on Tripod.

From several attempts with different cameras and lenses, the best I could get.

Conclusion: The longest available lens without converter delivers the best result.



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