On 3/9/2017 4:54 PM, Jan Steinman wrote:
From: Sandy Harris <sandyinchina@xxxxxxxxx>
Neither zoom nor autofocus, but Rokinon, Samyang, Tokina (& for all I
know others) have a 300mm F6.3 mirror lens. My guess is they are the
same lens with different labels, but I could be wrong.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/news/new-rokinon-reflex-300mm-f63-lens-brings-mirror-mirrorless
These would tempt me since they are relatively cheap & lightweight.
Can anyone report experience with them?
I don’t have experience with the specific mirrors mentioned, but I’ve shot a lot of mirrors,
and they are, well, “different.”
First off, there’s the fixed aperture, which might not bother you.
What Jan said (Hi Jan!) Mirror lenses often focus closer than conventional lenses, magnifying things a lot. That means
shallow DoF, and there's just no way around it. Using f8 longer mirror lenses at considerable distances, I often found
the DoF insufficient.
I did have a Tamron 350/5.6 mirror. As it was close focusing, I was hoping for some close-ups with long working distance
(recognize a still ongoing theme?) I was quite disappointed with the results for that purpose, not particularly sharp
and too little DoF.
Second would be the odd bokeh, which many think look “bad.”
Here's some "interesting" bokeh from the 350/5.6.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Lenses/Tam_350f56/3649_16nn.jpg>
All sorts of interesting, if not particularly attractive, OoF effects in front of and behind the focal plane. MikeL was
also interested, so the lens went on to him. I imagine its gone on from there.
It can look great if carefully worked -
Far away, all in focus things can look good, even spectacular.
<http://galleries.moosemystic.net/MooseFoto/index.php?gallery=California/Yosemite/Yosemite_2011/Yosemite_Valley&image=_MG_0382oof80m.jpg>
Shot through eight miles of 6-8,000 foot, rather still, clear air. Good for the
Moon, too.
the doughnut of single specular highlights look interesting, but I must agree
that the bokeh of non-point-source things look bad.
It seems to me that even point sources can be very distracting in the background.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/MPhotos/Maine/Sigma600/pages/12_1695lces.htm>
And OTOH, some non-point source bokeh isn't bad.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/MPhotos/Maine/Sigma600/pages/05_1682e.htm>
Finally, mirrors are notoriously low-contrast and flat-looking. No “punch.”
Much less of a problem since scanned film, then digital. With 16 bit files (even if the Raw was 12), there's usually
enough data to spread out the tones for normal contrast. The shot of Half Dome above didn't look like that out of the
camera. :-)
Here's another example, under less good conditions. Hot day, lower altitude, agriculture and dust, so the air was moving
and had more 'stuff' in it. Still, the result is better than the view at the time through good binocs.
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/Sigma%20600f8/_MG_0419.htm>
The OM Zuiko mirror is rated one of the best, and I love using it in
specialized situations, but even it is lacking when compared to even cheap
refractive lenses of the same focal length.
I have a Meade 1000/11 and Sigma 600/8 that I've used to occasional good effect. I acquired an OM 500/8 fairly recently,
but haven't given it much work yet. I may be spoiled by sharp AF 800 mm eq. with variable aperture and normal to good
bokeh. Hmmm. I didn't have a FF host for it then . . . :-)
But hey, they’re cheap! And probably fun, too! Just don’t expect anything like
Olympus performance out of them.
I thought that about the Tammy 350/5.6, but really, it wasn't much fun. I found it frustrating in a way that the longer
mirrors aren't - for me.
For futzing around, sure a 300/6.3 might be fun for someone. For serious conventional results, Oly 75-300 or Panny
100-300 is a better, much more flexible choice. As I think about it, the OM 300/4.5, other than size/weight, would be a
better MF choice, as well. Pretty decent IQ - and - you can stop it down.
Lens Longing Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
