Originally posted by hinman That is a wonderful shot. Can you tell us more about the Enna Tele-ennalyt 400/4.5, I was outbid in the last 20 seconds on a fine copy in Pentacon 6 mount from stil22 in ebay. Please don't remind me if you are that guy and please forgive my previous curse that happened about 4 months back in ebay. Is your converted to M42 mount with an adapter. If you can share us your story with the lens as well as the weight and how you used that lens with tripod, I will appreciate.
There isn't much 400mm that is fast at f/4.5.
Warmest,
Hin
I think it was really me. Same seller same time of auction.
stil22 does manage to dig up quite a few of such stuff and a few Prost 50/1.2, so I would not be surprised if he digs one up for sale again.
It was really a last min decision for me on getting this lens. I figured since its not going cost me an arm or leg, I'd give it a try. I lacked a seldom used very long lens anyway. The condition and build quality of the lens was the thing that impressed me from the ebay photos.
Ok. Here's a summary :
M42 mount (using adapter)
Weight :
Heavy. Never weighed it, but I think ~2.5kg (certainly heavier than a Sigma 100-300/4)
Not suitable for hand held shot imho. I tried it initially and very soon the 'macho' aspect of it faded real fast, with all the shaky photos. Its ok if well braced or using a beanbag or other support.
Min focus distance :
4.5m
Build :
Very solid all metal. 16 aperture blades.
Usage :
1. Focusing is heavy but smooth. This is more to do with the weight than with the lubrication.
2. I find that the aperture and focus ring are not that well laid out. The aperture ring is in front of the focusing ring (are all MF telephotos like this?). Its easy to accidentally turn either one when doing the other. (doh!). A tripod eliminates this problem.
3. Focusing w/o a tripod is a pain. The barrel is thick and you'd have to hold on to it and focus and since focus throw is a lot its a tough juggling act.
With a tripod, it frees up one hand to just do the focusing so its a lot better.
Performance :
Frankly, I'm on the fence on it. It does not have the resolution compared to say a Sigma 100-300/4 even with a 1.4x teleconverter on it. Then again that is 4x the price. Photos for normal viewing for this lens is fine, but no blown ups. I'm still learning to use the lens, but initial impressions are at f4.5 is soft. f5.6-8 is probably where I'd usually choose to shoot. Contrast and colors are weak (seems like this is so for most old long telephotos), but this is easily corrected in PP. On the other hand, when focus is right, and color/contrast adjust in PP, it does give a good deal for the money.
I would summarize the lens as such:
1. Use a tripod
2. Try to fill the frame as much as possible (this is to avoid the need to crop and with it a loss of resolution)
3. Crank up the ISO and use f5.6 (though f4.5 is usable, 5.6 is a better bet overall)
4. Not a pixel peeper's lens. Ok for normal viewing and 1024x768 type sizes.
5. Good enough, but not great