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: Sat Feb 15, 2014 9:06 pm    Post subject: Best Option for 400-500 range Reply with quote
hi,

I am looking to get a long-telephoto for lunar shots and some landscape. I don't do birds, so that isn't a concern. I've had some bad luck with the 300mm range lately. Almost all but 1 300mm lens I bought off ebay arrived with some serious problems and I did buy quiet a few! I gave up trying to buy a working 300mm, feeling jinxed at that range, so I did buy another for repair, but it came with a tad more than fungus problem / stuck aperature, it was missing its whole front element! It is AF 300 ED 4.0 Nikon. I am mentioning this because...

My options to break through the barriers are:

Sigma 400mm APO rebranded via 3rd party
Tamron 500mm 55bb Adaptall mirror
Tamron sp 200-500mm adaptall

Fix the AF 300 ED and put a doubler on it to get a 600mm range.

A whole other option for my Nikon 800 that I didn't consider...

Thoughts anyone?


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 9:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I like 400mm Sigma APO and Tamron from above list, no really good 400-500mm lens on affordable price level (bellow 500 USD).
some expensive not very good either, hard to make these long lenses in excellent quality, may even for lot more you can't get significantly better one than above lenses. Some telescope is affordable, and far better for Lunar shoots than affordable photographic lenses , member Forenseil ? have good experience with 3000mm telescope if I remember well.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It seems like you should first overcome the problem of buying busted lenses. Smile

But seriously, many people come up with creative solutions. How close do you want to get to the moon? I've seen people stacking extenders (2x + 1.4x) onto 500mm glass for lunar shots and get pretty good results. The key is you need a decent clean prime to start with and then maybe use quality extenders, and those are hit and miss.

I can't recommend specific models. The only long tele I've had was the Meyer Telemegor 400mm and it gave me some nice moon shots, however a bit soft. Maybe a good quality 200mm with an extender or two mounted on a stable tripod would do well for you plus give some added versatility for landscapes. I don't think there's necessarily a one-stop solution.

FYI, here's a sample from the Telemegor on a crop body, daytime moon shot:


Last edited by frenched on Sat Feb 15, 2014 9:44 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX DG HSM APO Lens is sometimes found in that price range as is the 150-500.
Can both be used MF if you want and are both very good and under-rated.
OH


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oldhand wrote:
The Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX DG HSM APO Lens is sometimes found in that price range as is the 150-500.
Can both be used MF if you want and are both very good and under-rated.
OH


Are you recommending the Sigma zooms over the Mirror Lenses and Tamron Adaptall?


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
maldaye wrote:
Oldhand wrote:
The Sigma 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX DG HSM APO Lens is sometimes found in that price range as is the 150-500.
Can both be used MF if you want and are both very good and under-rated.
OH


Are you recommending the Sigma zooms over the Mirror Lenses and Tamron Adaptall?

Not necessarily, only as another option in your price range.
If it was me I would get one of the Sigmas over the others for their AF function alone, as they are optically not much different to your other options and faster than the mirror lens 55BB.
The AF makes getting moving objects so much easier if you should choose to ever shoot them.
OH


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
frenched wrote:
It seems like you should first overcome the problem of buying busted lenses. Smile

But seriously, many people come up with creative solutions. How close do you want to get to the moon? I've seen people stacking extenders (2x + 1.4x) onto 500mm glass for lunar shots and get pretty good results. The key is you need a decent clean prime to start with and then maybe use quality extenders, and those are hit and miss.

I can't recommend specific models. The only long tele I've had was the Meyer Telemegor 400mm and it gave me some nice moon shots, however a bit soft. Maybe a good quality 200mm with an extender or two mounted on a stable tripod would do well for you plus give some added versatility for landscapes. I don't think there's necessarily a one-stop solution.

FYI, here's a sample from the Telemegor on a crop body, daytime moon shot:


Thankfully, busted lenses ain't that common. Sadly, it is a risk when you buy on ebay even from sellers with good ratings that say the lens is EXCELLENT shape till they are confronted and admit they never tested it and knew nothing about them.

How close do I want to get? I am not going to get what I want. I'll settle for a good topography shot. I also don't want to throw my money into telescopes and full astro gear just yet. Once I go that route, I'll spend a LOT of money to make sure I get the shot I want, so best avoid the tempation and just focus on a good long telephoto that can double for nature as well.

I like your shot. I took these shots with one of my Nikon 300 AIS (my only working 300) PLUS an extender.


#1

#2


I want BETTER in both resolution, sharpness, and levels of detail.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
maldaye wrote:

How close do I want to get? I am not going to get what I want.


Yes you will. It's not always about gear. Technique counts for most of it.

maldaye wrote:

I took these shots with one of my Nikon 300 AIS (my only working 300) PLUS an extender.


Seriously, that should work. What I see in your shots is some sort of camera shake or too-long exposure that captures the moon movement. Use mirror-lockup, remote trigger, live view. What ISO are you using?


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
frenched wrote:
maldaye wrote:

How close do I want to get? I am not going to get what I want.


Yes you will. It's not always about gear. Technique counts for most of it.

maldaye wrote:

I took these shots with one of my Nikon 300 AIS (my only working 300) PLUS an extender.


Seriously, that should work. What I see in your shots is some sort of camera shake or too-long exposure that captures the moon movement. Use mirror-lockup, remote trigger, live view. What ISO are you using?


I didn't have mirror lock up. I was using ISO 1000 and f4. The shake issue comes from my stupid cheap tripod. It just wouldn't stay pointed at the Moon. I had to hold the lens and the camera and the tripod together to force it to be pointed at the moon. I had the speed at f1/320 so it should have been fine for that minor level of jitter, but when it comes to the Moon, it requires something more steady. A new tripod is on the list.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Tripod stability is a key factor and can't be stressed enough. I have a middle-of-the-road quality tripod and noticed when taking the shot I posted even a single step I took produced significant shake. (I was set up on my back deck, all wood so lots of vibration.)

It may seem counterintuitive, but shoot at low ISO, like 100/200, f/11 and shutter speed 125 or 250. Set focus to infinity or adjust in live view (put on your glasses!).

Don't touch the camera. Stay completely motionless and fire. You'll be amazed.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
frenched wrote:
Tripod stability is a key factor and can't be stressed enough. I have a middle-of-the-road quality tripod and noticed when taking the shot I posted even a single step I took produced significant shake. (I was set up on my back deck, all wood so lots of vibration.)

It may seem counterintuitive, but shoot at low ISO, like 100/200, f/11 and shutter speed 125 or 250. Set focus to infinity or adjust in live view (put on your glasses!).

Don't touch the camera. Stay completely motionless and fire. You'll be amazed.


It isn't counter intuitive. It makes absolute sense. If i was thinking that would have been exactly what I would have done. My normal camera setting is ISO 100, f/11, 1/250 and I just modify the light as needed. It would have easy to adapt that for the Moon, but instead I just let it rip whatever whatever cause I wanted to rush back inside for dinner Smile

Tripod Tripod Tripod.... A $15 tripod from China ain't cutting it anymore... (new song by Weird Al)

Still wouldn't I get MORE level of detail and clarity with higher zooms (500+ range) or would the difference be minimal compared to 300 on extender?


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
maldaye wrote:
A $15 tripod from China ain't cutting it anymore... (new song by Weird Al)


They never do. Smile


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Longer length lenses have improved massively over the last 20 years or so, and a Sigma 120-400mm, 50-500mm or 150-500mm will likely blow away an old Sigma prime or Tamron mirror lens for resolution. My Canon 300/4L + 1.4x tc is a lot sharper wide open, and with less CA than any older long lenses I've tried.

If you really want something long and cheap, the Tamron Nestar 400/6.9 is pretty decent.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Longer length lenses have improved massively over the last 20 years or so, and a Sigma 120-400mm, 50-500mm or 150-500mm will likely blow away an old Sigma prime or Tamron mirror lens for resolution. My Canon 300/4L + 1.4x tc is a lot sharper wide open, and with less CA than any older long lenses I've tried.

If you really want something long and cheap, the Tamron Nestar 400/6.9 is pretty decent.


I was considering Prospec 400mm f/4.6 Auto Focus Lens. My understanding is that it is a rebranded Sigma 400mm f4.6 APO and it is AF as well. It can be had for less than $100. I've had a bit of hate relationship with Sigma. I bought 2 lenses from them and they both were meh. That is why I prefer my Tamrons and Nikons. However, I am not going to be brand stuck. I want good quality/price ratio.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 11:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I am also considering a TV Berlin 600mm that is Nikon converted.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 12:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'd go for older MF Nikon or Canon glass like AIS 400/2.8 , 500/4 or 600/4
Excellent optics and relatively inexpensive.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 12:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Igor wrote:
I'd go for older MF Nikon or Canon glass like AIS 400/2.8 , 500/4 or 600/4
Excellent optics and relatively inexpensive.


Yum ....wouldn't we all like one of those ........ but .........
not going to find any of those within coo-ee of $500
OH


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 1:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I believe I got this shot with an older Nikon 300mm. One thing I have learned while trying to shoot the moon is that it is much brighter than you think. I used a good tripod and a remote trigger.



PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 2:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
I like 400mm Sigma APO and Tamron from above list, no really good 400-500mm lens on affordable price level (bellow 500 USD).
some expensive not very good either, hard to make these long lenses in excellent quality, may even for lot more you can't get significantly better one than above lenses. Some telescope is affordable, and far better for Lunar shoots than affordable photographic lenses , member Forenseil ? have good experience with 3000mm telescope if I remember well.

+1
And yup it was me, but "only" 2000mm and not 3000mm Wink

For moon shots Celestron C130 (2000mm F15.4) I had was simply awesome. About 150-250€ used and about 450€ new if still available. 2000mm is a great focal length to photograph the moon with APS-C or FF sized sensors btw. and for moon and planets F16 is bright enough.

Here one sample with it under mediocre seeing conditions (out of my window), single exposure with NEX-3


I also have an Celestron C8 (2000mm F10) and it's an almost diffraction limited mega beast, but due ultra large physical aperture (20cm diameter!) it's even more sensitive to heat flickering (air column above it is quite large, no chance to use it through an opened window etc.). But you can literally read a newspaper in 100m distance with it if seeing is good and it's bright enough to see a few deep sky objects. Check google for sample pics or Youtube for moon videos made with it (EDIT http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlKfG-sEwAI - here you can also see some heat flickering ) I got mine for ~370€ used together with an heavy tripod on Ebay.

Is also had an cheap quite old 900mm F14.75 (d=60mm) simple doublet refractor telescope by Meade and it was suprisingly good, nice resolution, nice contrast, low CAs and less sensitive to heat flickering. For moon shots it would beat the crap out of any cheap 200-600mm lens I know. Such a telescope can be had for 50-120€ used with tripod.

There are also many good and affordable telescopes in the 400mm-600mm range.
I also had an Celestron "Comet Catcher" (500m F3.6, I got mine for 180€) but as Zeiss Jena 500/4 I wouldn't recommend that as even as they have nice IQ and awesome speed it's quite hard to handle and carry them due size; at 500mm there are easier options like Tamron SP 500mm Mirror or Minolta/Sony/Leitz 500mm Reflex, which are 1/4 of that size with similar IQ.

There are also very good ~400mm ED refractors with very high center resolution and precise crayford focusing system (so easier to use I think) but I've never had one as they appear only quite rarely used on Ebay. Sometimes they also go less than 200€ bucks which is amazing considering their focal length and resolution.

(Hint: For most less expensive (non ED- and non-APO) telescopes and lenses, especially doublets and triplets, there's the general rule slower F = better IQ, try not to buy faster than ~F8; and you should avoid cheap all catadioptric mirror telescopes - they are generally as crappy as cheap mirror lenses with only a few exceptions)

For moon shots there's nothing better than telescopes imho.
Even a 50€ (used) telescope usually produces better IQ than any ~500mm you can get for less than 500 bucks I think.


Despite moon shots for 500mm I would recommend Minolta, Sony or Leitz Mirror lenses - these are the best compact photographic lenses you can get. The Leitz is adaptable to Nikon, though not always easy to find for less than 500€. Tarmon SP 500mm F8 is the best cheap mirror lens I know, very good price performacne ratio and easy to adapt to Nikon due Tamron adaptall mount. But a few others like Rubinars/MTO which are usually T2 mount are also not bad.

Last edited by ForenSeil on Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:14 am; edited 9 times in total


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 2:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Edited

Last edited by bernhardas on Mon May 09, 2016 6:05 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Novoflex 600mm F8 (and 400/5.6) is a very nice lens aswell and easily adaptable to Nikon. Optically it's one of the better cheap lenses around 500mm you can get. Lightweight, quick focusing and you can easily take into quite small pieces. Can be had for 120-220€ only.
Nice for birding. It looks more like a rocket launcher than like a lens due a pistol grip though, passers-by may run away scared and call the police Wink

There are several versions but optically they are all the same I think.
https://www.google.de/search?q=Novoflex+600mm+F8&client=firefox-a&hs=SOa&rls=org.mozilla:de:official&channel=rcs&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=XD8AU-a4N4abtAawu4GIBA&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAg&biw=1525&bih=712&dpr=0.9


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I tried it again with my Nikon 300 AIS F4. I used 2 Tamron doublers and 1 Tokina doubler. That is 3 doublers together. I am getting gunk on my sensor from so much lens change, so I am taking it to the repair shop tomorrow, so ignore any gunk on the image.



PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
maldaye wrote:
I tried it again with my Nikon 300 AIS F4. I used 2 Tamron doublers and 1 Tokina doubler. That is 3 doublers together. I am getting gunk on my sensor from so much lens change, so I am taking it to the repair shop tomorrow, so ignore any gunk on the image.



I should add that due to my frustration with the Tripod I did this hand held with some wife support Smile


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Others may disagree, but I would shoot without the extenders/doublers. Unless you are using extremely high quality items, everything that you add will affect IQ. High detail images can be captured with shorter lenses. Of course, it will take a larger crop to see it Wink

Adapting to a telescope does seem to be a good choice. I think I will look into that.


PostPosted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
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
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3