They Said It Couldn't Be Done! (Taming The Beast)

imtheguy · 06-16-2009, 03:18 PM

Another way to look at the 800mm mirror, think of it as a very nice 400mm that you zoomed up 200% so it looks less sharp. OR....take the 800mm shot and resize it to 50% and after a little PP you may have a pretty hot looking 400mm shot for a $200 lens. I have often taken shots with my 300mm and then the 800mm and resized both to compare quality and I feel pretty good about the 800 when I do that.

It lets me get some shots large enough to be useful that otherwise I would just have to pass on with my 300mm.

Maybe I have too much time on my hands.

*MightyMike* · 06-16-2009, 06:00 PM

Originally posted by imtheguy

Another way to look at the 800mm mirror, think of it as a very nice 400mm that you zoomed up 200% so it looks less sharp. OR....take the 800mm shot and resize it to 50% and after a little PP you may have a pretty hot looking 400mm shot for a $200 lens. I have often taken shots with my 300mm and then the 800mm and resized both to compare quality and I feel pretty good about the 800 when I do that.

It lets me get some shots large enough to be useful that otherwise I would just have to pass on with my 300mm.

Maybe I have too much time on my hands.

Yes it can be seen that way, i already decided its a keeper, now i have to go out and shoot some more with it

Marc Sabatella · 06-17-2009, 01:45 PM

Originally posted by MightyMike

be careful you know what you're getting into if you dare to buy... i'll provide full unedited samples of any of the shots from 800mm F8.0 just so you know what the quality is straight from the camera

I would be curious. But I do know about the contrast issues with a mirror lens, and that somewhat more aggressive than usual sharpening helps. Like I said, I had positive experiences with the Sigma 600/8 mirror I used, but not necessarily straight from the camera!

On the other hand, when I said my wallet is itching, it is actually for one of the lighter 500mm mirrors. If I was going to spend over $200 on a 2 lb mirror, I'd probably just get the Sigma. The value of your post for me was in seeing that good results *are* possible from relatively cheap mirror lenses, if one finds a decent one and is willing to spend the time to understand it and process the images appropriately. So I'm thinking the 500mm version of the same lens could potentially be as good, even if I've seen samples from what appear to be dud copies that are nowhere near as good.

kcmadr · 06-17-2009, 06:59 PM

Nice composition on some of those Rokinon shots. The image quality seems on a par with the price though. But then again, it is 800mm. A lot of noise.

I prefer the shots from the Sigma. Much cleaner. A bit smaller (subject), but filling the frame isn't critical, and a touch of uprezzing won't be noticed.

Choose any two: inexpensive, long focal length, excellent image quality.

*MightyMike* · 06-18-2009, 07:47 AM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

I would be curious. But I do know about the contrast issues with a mirror lens, and that somewhat more aggressive than usual sharpening helps. Like I said, I had positive experiences with the Sigma 600/8 mirror I used, but not necessarily straight from the camera!

On the other hand, when I said my wallet is itching, it is actually for one of the lighter 500mm mirrors. If I was going to spend over $200 on a 2 lb mirror, I'd probably just get the Sigma. The value of your post for me was in seeing that good results *are* possible from relatively cheap mirror lenses, if one finds a decent one and is willing to spend the time to understand it and process the images appropriately. So I'm thinking the 500mm version of the same lens could potentially be as good, even if I've seen samples from what appear to be dud copies that are nowhere near as good.

Well th other one i was interested in was the 500mm F6.3 but with my Sigma 100-300mm F4 and 1.7x AFA adapter i can get 510mm F6.8 so there is no real advantage, but i never had a lens at 800mm making it a worthwhile choice

*MightyMike* · 06-18-2009, 07:49 AM

Originally posted by kcmadr

Nice composition on some of those Rokinon shots. The image quality seems on a par with the price though. But then again, it is 800mm. A lot of noise.

I prefer the shots from the Sigma. Much cleaner. A bit smaller (subject), but filling the frame isn't critical, and a touch of uprezzing won't be noticed.

Choose any two: inexpensive, long focal length, excellent image quality.

well the noise comes from high ISO, heavy sharpening and heavy contrast in camera i decided not to choose... thats why i have both

imtheguy · 07-02-2009, 01:57 PM

Anybody with a Rok, or for that matter any T-mount lens, might be interested in my post in the Lens forum. You may not be able to contribute but the outcome might help you some day.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/65110-t-mount-...next-week.html

Last edited by imtheguy; 07-11-2009 at 12:55 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nature beauty and the beast...	dcmsox2004	Post Your Photos!	4	05-19-2010 06:32 AM
People Belly of the Beast	noahpurdy	Photo Critique	5	04-27-2010 12:19 PM
The Beast is Here!!!	Ari	Photographic Technique	0	10-15-2009 07:03 AM
More With the Beast	Fl_Gulfer	Post Your Photos!	3	01-28-2009 06:15 AM
The Beast Without	Sailor	Post Your Photos!	1	07-14-2007 07:00 PM

06-16-2009, 03:18 PM	#16
imtheguy Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Virginia Beach Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,950	Another way to look at the 800mm mirror, think of it as a very nice 400mm that you zoomed up 200% so it looks less sharp. OR....take the 800mm shot and resize it to 50% and after a little PP you may have a pretty hot looking 400mm shot for a $200 lens. I have often taken shots with my 300mm and then the 800mm and resized both to compare quality and I feel pretty good about the 800 when I do that. It lets me get some shots large enough to be useful that otherwise I would just have to pass on with my 300mm. Maybe I have too much time on my hands.

06-16-2009, 06:00 PM	#17
MightyMike Marketplace Reseller Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Canada Posts: 9,322 Original Poster	Originally posted by imtheguy Another way to look at the 800mm mirror, think of it as a very nice 400mm that you zoomed up 200% so it looks less sharp. OR....take the 800mm shot and resize it to 50% and after a little PP you may have a pretty hot looking 400mm shot for a $200 lens. I have often taken shots with my 300mm and then the 800mm and resized both to compare quality and I feel pretty good about the 800 when I do that. It lets me get some shots large enough to be useful that otherwise I would just have to pass on with my 300mm. Maybe I have too much time on my hands. Yes it can be seen that way, i already decided its a keeper, now i have to go out and shoot some more with it

06-17-2009, 01:45 PM	#18
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by MightyMike be careful you know what you're getting into if you dare to buy... i'll provide full unedited samples of any of the shots from 800mm F8.0 just so you know what the quality is straight from the camera I would be curious. But I do know about the contrast issues with a mirror lens, and that somewhat more aggressive than usual sharpening helps. Like I said, I had positive experiences with the Sigma 600/8 mirror I used, but not necessarily straight from the camera! On the other hand, when I said my wallet is itching, it is actually for one of the lighter 500mm mirrors. If I was going to spend over $200 on a 2 lb mirror, I'd probably just get the Sigma. The value of your post for me was in seeing that good results are possible from relatively cheap mirror lenses, if one finds a decent one and is willing to spend the time to understand it and process the images appropriately. So I'm thinking the 500mm version of the same lens could potentially be as good, even if I've seen samples from what appear to be dud copies that are nowhere near as good.

06-17-2009, 06:59 PM	#19
kcmadr Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Vancouver, BC Photos: Albums Posts: 614	Nice composition on some of those Rokinon shots. The image quality seems on a par with the price though. But then again, it is 800mm. A lot of noise. I prefer the shots from the Sigma. Much cleaner. A bit smaller (subject), but filling the frame isn't critical, and a touch of uprezzing won't be noticed. Choose any two: inexpensive, long focal length, excellent image quality.

06-18-2009, 07:47 AM	#20
MightyMike Marketplace Reseller Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Canada Posts: 9,322 Original Poster	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella I would be curious. But I do know about the contrast issues with a mirror lens, and that somewhat more aggressive than usual sharpening helps. Like I said, I had positive experiences with the Sigma 600/8 mirror I used, but not necessarily straight from the camera! On the other hand, when I said my wallet is itching, it is actually for one of the lighter 500mm mirrors. If I was going to spend over $200 on a 2 lb mirror, I'd probably just get the Sigma. The value of your post for me was in seeing that good results are possible from relatively cheap mirror lenses, if one finds a decent one and is willing to spend the time to understand it and process the images appropriately. So I'm thinking the 500mm version of the same lens could potentially be as good, even if I've seen samples from what appear to be dud copies that are nowhere near as good. Well th other one i was interested in was the 500mm F6.3 but with my Sigma 100-300mm F4 and 1.7x AFA adapter i can get 510mm F6.8 so there is no real advantage, but i never had a lens at 800mm making it a worthwhile choice

06-18-2009, 07:49 AM	#21
MightyMike Marketplace Reseller Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Canada Posts: 9,322 Original Poster	Originally posted by kcmadr Nice composition on some of those Rokinon shots. The image quality seems on a par with the price though. But then again, it is 800mm. A lot of noise. I prefer the shots from the Sigma. Much cleaner. A bit smaller (subject), but filling the frame isn't critical, and a touch of uprezzing won't be noticed. Choose any two: inexpensive, long focal length, excellent image quality. well the noise comes from high ISO, heavy sharpening and heavy contrast in camera i decided not to choose... thats why i have both

07-02-2009, 01:57 PM	#22
imtheguy Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Virginia Beach Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,950	Anybody with a Rok, or for that matter any T-mount lens, might be interested in my post in the Lens forum. You may not be able to contribute but the outcome might help you some day. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/65110-t-mount-...next-week.html Last edited by imtheguy; 07-11-2009 at 12:55 AM.