Kalimar 500mm Mirror lens

Screamin Scott · Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 11:09 pm Post subject: Kalimar 500mm Mirror lens

Got it in the mail today. Just went out & took some quick snaps handheld...Results are not very sharp (I'm using it on a Nikon D70s DX format, thus equivalent size is 750mm view)....Needless to say, it needs to be on a tripod...Obtaining focus is difficult, especially with the split microprism screen I have installed...Here are a few unsharp photos, I'll post more with it on a tripod for comparison...No cropping or any other PP

Farside · Expire: 2013-12-27

Whoah... nasty.
At 1/90th second I'm not surprised.

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

One thing I've noticed, is that at both ends of the focal lenghts range, the gap between average lenses and best lenses widens. In other words, it becomes more and more expensive to obtain quality pictures. In fact, I only have two lenses under the 20mm (the Zenitar 16mm Canon mount and the Distagon 18mm Contax) and two lenses above the 200mm (the Jupiter 250mm and the CZJ Sonnar 300mm both for Pentacon 6).
Compared to the number of the lenses that I have in the other focal lenghts, this tells a lot.

Screamin Scott · Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 11:41 pm Post subject:

aoleg · Joined: 22 Feb 2008 Posts: 1387 Location: Berlin, DE

My experience with Samyang 500/8 is similar, although I can get sharper pictures by using a tripod, remote release and mirror lockup on a sunny day. Contrast is just like that on your pictures, always. No CA, but plenty of spherical aberrations (halos around highlights). It's never sharper than, say, a Nikkor*ED 300/4.5 after being cropped and interpolated (upsized) to represent the same field of view at the same resolution. It can be fun as a cheap 'specialty' lens, but as a general use one... nope.

All pictures sharpened, fully processed in the RAW converter for contrast and black point, and resized to show the kind of best possible end result that can be had with this lens.

Alphan · Joined: 17 Jun 2009 Posts: 28 Location: Malaysia

Being a newbie myself, I can't comment much except that I read somewhere that Kalimar is soft but to what extend I don't know. Thus I bought an SP500 instead as I can't afford the Minolta or Sony AF 500.

I am uploading a few test shots shortly after receiving my SP500 for your evaluation and comparison. Alll without PP or resizing. I am using Sony A200 original screeen so focusing may be out.

1/2.5sec ISO400 Normal room fluorescent lighting on tripod

1/500sec ISO200 Tripod

rick_oleson · Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:32 am Post subject:

I have some experience with cheap lenses. My standard of sharpness has been (and remains) a 400mm f/6.3 Spiratone preset. In mirrors I've tried a 250/5.6 Lentar, a 300/5.6 Quantaray and a 500/8 Samyang ... among these, I couldn't call any of them sharp, and the unsarpness seems to run in proportion to the focal length: the 250 was usable, the 300 less sharp but I've kept it because it was so handy, and the 500 was really bad. Better results could be obtained by shooting with any average 135 and cropping.

Recently I have gotten two 500mm mirrors that are much better, and each cost me less than $100. The best of these is an f/6.3 3M-6A, a Soviet Maksutov type by Lytkino; the other is an f/8 Tokina RMC. Both have much better sharpness than any of the cheaper mirrors, and surprisingly good contrast. Both of these lenses are noticeably less sharp than the Spiratone, but they are good enough to be very satisfying to use.

Here is a comparison of the Tokina and Maksutov mirrors and the Spiratone preset:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/26262745@N08/3676731355/sizes/o/

I have some other examples taken with both of these mirrors on my Flickr page if you feel like poking around.

Screamin Scott · Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:48 am Post subject:

Rick,
I also have the Spiratone 400mm....I had never shot with a Mirror lens & since it was cheap enough, I went for it....I'll have to set it up on a tripod though as it really can't be handheld effectively...

rick_oleson · Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 3:07 am Post subject:

The Spiratone is not a bad handholding lens: lean against a tree or something... if you have a solid support at both the front and back ends of the lens, it can be at least as solid as a tripod. I've shot a lot more handheld than on a tripod with my 400.

Rolf · Expire: 2015-12-26

Hi,

I own the Zuiko 500mm mirror and I´m not unhappy with this lens.

But it is as Orio said the prices increase at both end. This shots were handhelded and it is a really nice and light lens - but in fact normally you need a tripod or minimum a monopod and then you lose a little bit of this advantage.

Rolf

Screamin Scott · Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 10:28 pm Post subject:

Here are some shots from today with it mounted on a tripod...Sharpness is better, contrast still flat...Street sign is much better & the woodpile is pretty good. The figurine on the birdbath I think I just missed focus on...

rick_oleson · Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 10:48 pm Post subject:

On lunch hour today I took a street sign shot with the Tokina, similar to yours so you could make a comparison between the two lenses. The Zuiko would be better than this in sharpness and contrast, certainly, but the price difference becomes significant as you go up.

http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/img_1795.jpg
(it opens up small if you left-click on the link, but if you right-click and click "open" it will come up full size)

(this is handheld at 1/500, which is a bit slow for a 500 on a dslr, but there's not a lot of visible shake)

rick

luisalegria · Expire: 2018-01-18

I agree 100% on the Spiratone 6.3/400. It is long but very hand-holdable (on my Pentax) and quite light, and gives excellent results. I wish I knew who made those.

The Pentax IS feature removes the normal requirement for a tripod, it is really wonderful on tele lenses. It changes entirely how one can use 300-500mm lenses.

My only mirror lens is a Pentax spotting scope, which I doubt was made by Pentax. Its really similar to the Kalimar, and quite poor in contrast. I am not very satisfied with it.

rick_oleson · Posted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 11:21 pm Post subject:

Any long lens faces challenges. In the case of long glass lenses the big issue is usually color fringing from chromatic aberration, which is present in the Spiratone but generally not bad ... whether it's a problem depends on your subject and your standards of acceptable performance.

Mirrors generally don't have this problem (although they do still have refractive elements in them so it isn't 100% gone), but they have other issues that are to some degree inherent in the concept: the depth of field is shallower in a 500/8 mirror than in a 500/8 refractor because the diameter of the objective is increased to make up for the blockage of the secondary mirror in the center ... this means that even if your plane of focus is very sharp you have to be more precise to put it where you want it to be. Contrast is another issue, there is a huge gap in the barrel of a mirror lens where the light path passes from the primary to the secondary mirror. Olympus mentions its special barrel blackening materials as well as its multicoating as a factor in the contrast performance of the 500/8 Reflex Zuiko... the smallest source of internal reflection or stray light can have a significant affect on contrast in a mirror. Then there's the small size - the mirror's biggest attraction can also make it harder to hold steady, and most mirrors don't have a tripod socket on them.

Having said all that, though, the small size IS a definite attraction. Although I know that my Spiratone is sharper than any of my mirrors, and that I can't afford a better mirror than I've already got, they are still fun to use and worth hanging on to. Everyone has to decide for himself where that line is between good enough and not.

Farside · Expire: 2013-12-27

Screamin Scott · Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 2:08 am Post subject:

Focusing is difficult with the split microprism I installed on my camera....I'm not going to change out the screen to another one as my main niche is macro shots, not telephoto....I'll just have to live with it I guess...

casualcollector · Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 12:37 pm Post subject:

I've been quite happy with the results from my Canon FD 500/8 mirror lens. Maybe I'm just using it in the right conditions. This photo is nearly 5 years old, shot on Fuji 400 print film, handheld with my Canon F-1.

I've since found that the 500 is easiest to use with the brighter finder of the Canon A-1. Adding the MA motor give me a better grip and lets me concentrate more on focus.

tanheis · Joined: 05 Sep 2007 Posts: 507 Location: Finland

Some mirrors are actually sharp.

Tamron SP 500/8 mirror lens is actually quite sharp.
At least if enough light or used with tripod (focused corretctly)

Here is one Stalker photo from last summer Smile

http://koti.mbnet.fi/tanheis/large.jpg
1:1 photo

There's the tower in the horizon... distance couple of km's.
Shot with 50mm lens.
http://koti.mbnet.fi/tanheis/kuvia/tamronSP500/nasari1.jpg
With Tamron SP 500/8

rick_oleson · Posted: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:59 pm Post subject:

yep! most of those tend not to be in the $100 range though.

Screamin Scott · Posted: Thu Jul 16, 2009 10:36 pm Post subject:

I'll gladly trade even up my Kalimar with the 3 filters & custom case for your Tamron or a Nikkor ... Laughing

rick_oleson · Posted: Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:00 am Post subject:

tanheis · Joined: 05 Sep 2007 Posts: 507 Location: Finland

rick_oleson · Posted: Sun Jul 19, 2009 2:07 am Post subject:

certainly a terrific lens. not a bad subject either

: ) =

tanheis · Joined: 05 Sep 2007 Posts: 507 Location: Finland

Here are few old test shots with the lens. Tamron SP 500/8 - mirror

Bokeh may be without rings or most part if background and distance to the subject is choosen.
http://koti.mbnet.fi/tanheis/kuvia/tamronSP500/bokeh-bike.jpg
http://koti.mbnet.fi/tanheis/kuvia/tamronSP500/bokeh-bike2.jpg

These are almost free of rings... focused close enough may be the reason.
And there is not so much things in the background which could cause rings
http://koti.mbnet.fi/tanheis/kuvia/tamronSP500/bokeh-fountain.jpg
http://koti.mbnet.fi/tanheis/kuvia/tamronSP500/bokeh.jpg

In this photo you see lot's of small rings front and rear of the focused area.
http://koti.mbnet.fi/tanheis/kuvia/tamronSP500/bokeh-ball.jpg

There is quite a lot of rings behind the girl but it could be worse in some conditions
http://koti.mbnet.fi/tanheis/kuvia/tamronSP500/bokeh-girl.jpg

This has totally black background and focused very close so no rings... Smile

http://koti.mbnet.fi/tanheis/kuvia/tamronSP500/closefocus.jpg