Question about Mirror Lens

[ianmandy]

I can't afford a new 500mm or 600mm lens at the moment. What do you think of the mirror lens? Please don't just say rubbish!! tell me why. I am thinking of getting a 600mm mirror lens of now and with the Canon DSLR will give me 960mm. OK it is manual but I'm ok with manual I know it will be f8. I used the mirror lens about 20years ago on my old pentax and it was ok. I was wondering if anyone has tried them on a DSLR and results.

[zharca]

Hi, I think the reason mirror lenses have such a bad reputation is that so many were cheap third-party ones. They do have lenses inside as well as mirrors and if thse aren't well made then the results will be poor.

I think a mirror lens is always likely to have lower contrast than a refracting lens (not such a problem with digital) and mirrors also seem to do some odd things in the out-of focus areas - tiny false sharp bits and little "donut" highlights. Also, you're always focussing at f8 which is rather dull and means no autofocus.

On the plus side, the fact that they're very light for their focal length may help when hand-holding, and of course you are getting a lot for your money, so at the same price point a really good quality mirror might be a better lens that a cheap refractor.

Don't have experience of many, but the Tamron 500mm was OK and the Olympus Zuiko 500mm is about as good as they get. You can get Canon EOS adapters for them but the Zuikos still fetch a higher price than most other mirrors if they show up for sale.

[kshotton45]

I thought I had bought in to the cheap end of telephotos with my Sigma 175-500mm Lens !

But I've just had a quick whizz round our favorite online auction site and you buy a new 500mm mirror lens for £76.95 - this includes a free 2X TC !!

I think the trend is your friend - stick to glass.

Keith

[glsammy]

I've seen some excellent images taken with mirror lenses. Provided your aware of the limitations, nicely put by zharca. The cost is such that your not risking too much, well worth a try.

[HowlinWolf]

Originally Posted by kshotton45

I thought I had bought in to the cheap end of telephotos with my Sigma 175-500mm Lens !

But I've just had a quick whizz round our favorite online auction site and you buy a new 500mm mirror lens for £76.95 - this includes a free 2X TC !!

I think the trend is your friend - stick to glass.

Keith

If the money means nothing to you, go ahead and buy it and have some fun, but for anything remotely approaching serious use, steer well clear. There are very few mirror lenses that have been produced that give good results: most are dreadful.
If you get one, please post some images. I'd like to see the result of a 1000mm catadioptric f/16(?) lens!
Seriously, to coin a cliché, avoid like the plague.

HW

[HowlinWolf]

As a follow-up to my last post, I just researched the "auction site" to check out the lens.
They ask the question: "Why The Pros Choose Opteka High Definition".
Answer: They don't.
The sales pitch ends with the quote "Your pictures are only as good as the glass in your lens". Quite. You don't get much glass for £76.95, especially when that includes a x2 converter! No wonder it comes with a 10 year guarantee: you'll use it once and then it will collect dust until the warranty expires.
OK, it's an easy target, but this lens is a piece of junk (but I think you already knew that....didn't you?)

HW

[kshotton45]

Hi HW ! I think you may have misread my original post.
I'm advocating buying glass ! Not mirrors !
I agree with you 100%.


Keith.

[HowlinWolf]

Originally Posted by kshotton45

Hi HW ! I think you may have misread my original post.
I'm advocating buying glass ! Not mirrors !
I agree with you 100%.


Keith.

Yes, I understood that, and I'm not questioning your standpoint, Keith.
It was just a post to make others think twice about buying one of these lenses in the hope it will solve their telephoto requirements.

HW

[ianmandy]

Howlinwolf; You say if money means nothing to you go ahead and buy one. I think some-one who spends over £6K for a lens (Canon EF 600mm f/4.0L USM Image Stabilised £6400 at jessops ) for a hobby either has to much money to know what to spend it on, or is a look at me photographer. Only pro's need something like that. As a hobby I want to experiment with cheaper options rather than just discard them because they are not the morn. These older lenses must of taken good pictures in there day. Some great photographers didn't have the technology we have today. How did they take such great pics.

[zharca]

Hi,
Trouble is, there's no such thing as a good, cheap extreme telephoto lens of any kind. Even old manual long focus lenses of any quality - Nikon/Takumar/Zuiko/Zeiss etc - are still expensive to buy 'cos they were very rare when new and few of the older "aftermarket" ones are really any good.

I think you've got to be looking at maybe £150+ for a secondhand 500mm Nikkor "c" or 500mm zuiko f8 mirror and they're the kind of lenses that will give good quality and might be worth buying. Even at that price, I think you'd be very pushed to find any equivalent refractor for the same kind of money.