on 8/29/03 1:30 AM, Thomas Haegin at haegint@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Who of you, dear fellow members, has first-hand field
> experience with this Vivitar Series 1 600mm F8 Cat
> telelens? Particularly if any of you has taken it on
> hiking trips and shot wildlife and nature photos with
> it, would much appreciate his/her input.
I am holding one in my hand as I type... well, its on the desk right next to
me. I have used mine only a bit, as its a specialized lens. I don't think
you can effectively use this lens without a tripod, although it is smaller
and lighter (I think) than the Zuiko 600/5.6 it is not a 'hand-holdable'
lens. Perhaps on a monopod with care...
>
> I would think in terms of handling and weight it is a
> much nicer lens to take with you and use than the
> Zuiko 600mm. Aperture difference is not much and focus
> is quicker I would think. Besides it is much, much
> cheaper.
The lens weight is 48.6oz, how that compares to the Zuiko I don't know...
probably that info is in the eSif and someone will offer it. Focus is done
by turning a wide ring, the same direction of turn as the (smaller focal
length) Zuikos. "Lock-to-lock" focus takes just under 180 degrees of turn...
note that this lens, like many telephotos focuses 'beyond' infinity for some
design reason. Though I have not used the Zuiko 600/5.6, I believe it uses a
rack-and-pinion focus mechanism which someone posted here is not too
convenient in use. This is not a lens you will be able to 'follow-focus' on
a moving race car, though.
>
> It has a T2 adapall mount, has it not? Which way does
> it focus? Like the Zuikos (infinity on the far right)?
The mount is a standard 'T' mount, there is no aperture mechanism so there
is no need for aperture coupling or meter coupling.
>
> Have you used it on a monopod? What focusing screen do
> you recommend (1-7 and the 2's I would think)? What
> (color) films you use it with (chrome or print)? I
> guess pushing the film becomes inevitable pretty
> quickly in less than bright sunlight.
I have used it with the 1-7 screen and with the 2-13. Brightness is
adequate, though it is an f8.0 lens. My few 'try it out' snapshots were from
a tripod with Fuji Superia 100 print film, the exposures were pretty slow
even in full sunlight. I think for real pictures I wouldn't use any film
slower than 400 with this lens. For maximum exposure flexibility you can
insert filters on the back (mount) side of the lens, but getting in there to
do it requires unscrewing the T-mount. This is similar to many mirror
telephoto lenses. In bright sunlight with 400 speed film, I would use this
with an OM-4 body, as the extra shutter speeds available between 1/1000
(nominal) and 1/2000 (nominal) would come in handy.
>
> Have you used it with a 1.4x or 2x converter? Which
> one? Is it not getting too dark then?
I haven't tried this lens with my 2X-A, and though I wish I could I can't
afford a 1.4X-A at this time. I think there might be interference fit
problems using the 1.4X-A converter with it, judging from the appearance of
the mount end... there is a lens element quite close to the mount, and this
is where the (mandatory) filter fits as well.
>
> So overall good quality and results? Bad? Any other
> alternatives recommended? I know there is a similar
> Vivitar 800mm lens, as well as a Tamron SP 500mm
> mirror and this Sigma 600mm that is being discussed
> right now as well. And of course there is the Zuiko
> 500mm mirror. OTOH I'm somewhat reluctant to consider
> a 500mm as I feel it may often be too short for
> wildlife animal photography.
The image quality was quite good for quick snapshots, but the usual caveats
of extreme telephoto use apply. A very sturdy tripod, weight on the camera
to quell vibrations, fast shutter speeds, etc. The non-solid mirror
telephotos would probably be lighter and easier to handle, as would a 500mm
focal length (slightly). The Zuiko 500mm is much lighter and physically
about an inch smaller in diameter, my sample shots with mine seem to be
'crisper' which might be better contrast. The cost of trying out a Tamron SP
500/8.0 or Sigma 600/8.0 will be much less than the Vivitar (based on my
memory of e*ay prices). The Zuiko 500/8.0 will probably cost more than the
Vivitar, but might be a better lens in resolution and contrast.
>
> Again, any inputs I would much appreciate as I would
> like to obtain one high quality long tele lens of SOME
> kind, but it need not necessarily be a Zuiko. Write me
> offline if you prefer.
At some point I hope to get a Tamron 300/2.8 or a 400/4.0 (I'd -love- a
Zuiko 250/2.0 but I don't see that in the cards...). I would use these
lenses with the 1.4X-A, and although these would be larger and heavier
probably, I think the 300/2.8 or 400/4.0, with and without the converter,
would offer more flexibility and at least equal quality (probably better) to
any of the mirror telephoto solutions. Cost would be quite a bit higher,
though, which is why I don't have one now :-(
>
> Many thanks,
> Thomas
--
Jim Brokaw
OM-'s of all sorts, and no OM-oney...
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|