[lmd91343]

I have a Smayang/Phoenix lens, multicoated, 500 f8, that I bought new about 15 years ago.

I have been very unhappy with the results. They have not been very sharp. I think I do the right thing. Here is my technique:
* use fast shutter speed
* turn off SR
* use heavy duty tripod and head
* hang 10 or 20 pound weight from center of tripod
* use spike feet on soft ground
* use rubber feet on concrete and astronomy vibration isolation pads
* use mirror up
* use cable release
* focus, double check focus, check focus again

I get poor results with my K5 digital and my Canon F1N AE. It can't be the camera. I've checked the collimation of the lens myself. I get great results with my digital slr and a pentax 300/4 and film Canon F1N AE with a Canon 400mm lens, 400mm lens + 1.4X tele, and 400mm lens + 2x tele. It can't be the camera or my technique with conventional long focus lenses.

The best I can get is a full image for a 4 x 6 if I am lucky!

Do I need to know something special for reflex lenses? Do I need to do something special for reflex lenses?

Thanks,
Lance

p.s. Here are a couple of shots of the peak of my neighbor's roof and his tree ( K5 asa 800 speed 640)

Attached Images

   

---

Last edited by lmd91343; 09-05-2011 at 10:13 AM. Reason: added pix info

[GibbyTheMole]

Hi, Lance.

It sounds like you're doing all the right things (and then some) as far as using a long tele lens goes. It might not be the answer you want to hear, but I think you should dump your current mirror lens and look for a better one. I've had several of the cheaper mirror lenses (Kalimar, Samyang, Spiratone) and my results were disappointing. Poor contrast, smeary image quality, muted colors, lousy bokeh... yuck.

I suspected mirror lenses were just junk by design, but I decided to give it one last try & bought a f:8 500mm 3M-5CA Russian mirror lens. That was the one that showed me what a good mirror lens can do. Results like these are typical for this lens. And only the moon shot was taken on a tripod. The others were handheld. I mostly use it handheld, in fact. Nearly every shot I've taken with it has been nice and sharp, with great contrast & color. There's no comparison between the cheap mirrors and the Russian 3M. It's a night and day difference.

Personally, there are only two 500mm mirror lenses I would consider: The Russian lenses or the Tamron SP. Sigma & Tokina supposedly made decent ones too, but not quite up to the standards of the Russian lenses or the Tamron, so I would confine my choices to those first two. Considering you can get either the Russian (Tair) or the Tamron used for under $200, I wouldn't waste my time with anything else.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary and all that stuff.

Cheers & good luck,
Bobbo :-)

[Stone G.]

HI Lance,

I am afraid that I have to agree with the above: No mirror lens (and the Samyang pictures that I have seen aren't after all THAT "terrible") should produce images like these. They are not only un-sharp but strangely ill-defined across the field in all focal planes.

You are doing more than should be needed: Extra weights and pads to stabilize the tripod really shouldn't be needed at all; mirror lock-up is fine for long exposures but shouldn't have any impact on the quality with the shutter speeds you are using; as always, cable release is a good idea with these long focal lengths but again, not strictly needed.

In short: I don't think, you are doing anything wrong - but I am afraid that your mirror/optical system is.

[lmd91343]

Stone, Bobbo,

Thank you for the review. I was afraid it was the lens.

Is there a review comparing these lenses? Are all Russian lenses "good"? Rubinar? Tair? MTO? 3M5CA? ARSAT?

Thanks,
Lance

[GibbyTheMole]

Hi Lance.

I've never been able to find a good concise comparison on mirror lenses, but from what I gather most of the Russian mirrors are well regarded. I can't say for certain about the ones I haven't owned since I don't have personal experience with those, but that's the impression I've gotten based on everything I've read.

My particular lens is the 3M-5CA, which is made by Tair. The earlier version was the 3M-5A, which is optically the same but is larger in diameter with a built in tripod collar & slide-out hood. I would probably stick with the 5CA (like mine) just because depending on which body you have, it may not physically work. The flash housing hangs over too far on some Pentax bodies, and keeps the lens from mounting to the camera in some cases. I haven't heard of the Tamron having that problem.

If you keep your eyes peeled, you should be able to score either the 3M-5CA or the Tamron for under $200, which is actually pretty decent for a good lens of that focal length.

Good luck!
Bobbo :-)

[xjjohnno]

Some pics from my 3M-5CA, a lens I quite like the results from. I use it hand held with a little ISO boost. The gloomy viewfinder makes it not so easy to use in low light situations. One mirror lens I was glad to see the last of was a Soligor 500mm f8, I think built from cast iron by the weight and a lens I was never happy with.

[GibbyTheMole]

xjjohnno

Nice pics, there.

You're right about focusing in low light being a bit tricky with these, at least with the stock focusing screen. A Katz-Eye/Optibrite split prism screen makes focusing these mirror lenses a snap, though.

Cheers,
Bobbo :-)

[GibbyTheMole]

By the way, Lance...

KEH has a bunch of the Tamrons from $89 (ugly but functional) to $235 (excellent condition). Here they are. (Scroll down to the lower half of the page.)

Here's some reviews of the Tamron

And my review & more sample shots from the 3M (Tair).

Cheers,
Bobbo :-)

[kh1234567890]

There are many photo examples taken with various mirror lenses on this long running thread (original in French) Google Translate. There are some pretty crap cat lenses about. The old Tamrons seem the best by far.

A panorama with my cheap Super Paragon 300mm f5.6 :

[GibbyTheMole]

The old Tamrons seem the best by far.

While it's certainly one of the best mirror lenses available, I would say there are a few others that are on par with the Tamron. The Russian lenses are quite good.. (Arguably even just a tad more contrasty than the Tamron.) Sigma, Tokina are ever so slightly less sharp, (maybe not) but still excellent... Pentax also made one, but it's very rare & pricey.

Other very good mirror lenses (that won't fit Pentax, unfortunately) were made by Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Olympus, and even Leitz.

Granted, 90 percent of the mirror lenses you can easily find are cheap crap. But there are some gems if you dig for them.

Cheers,
Bobbo :-)

[kh1234567890]

Super Paragon 300mm f5.6

Being a sunny afternoon I took my cat for a walk.

[tim60]

About 18 months ago I was given a Rubinar 1000/10.5. This is a challenging lens to use. The attachment is one of the first few good shots with it. Before that I had usually used it on days which were too hot, and got magnification of thermal movement in the air. The manual is hard to read - in Russian, but knowing ancient Greek made it readable. The picture was full frame on K100DS, ISO800, 1/1000, handheld (resting on a railing) with SR on at 800mm (longest available). Despite the challenges of using a 2.5kg lens, I like it. s/n 000044. This lens was manufactured for the KGB at Leningrad no 3 Optical Works which spcialised in KGB and military products. This lens was optimised for skin tones, to assist its orinal customer. For a mirror it is unusual in having 116mm front mounted filters - ships with 3 - UV, flouro correction and sodium vapour correction. They look like plumbing fittings. My friends think the whole thing looks like an artillery piece. Does anyone have a picture of the radar signature minimising lens hood that fits it?
BTW: the rear of the lens body just clears the flash housing on the K100DS. The focus action is smooth but very heavy, quite unlike the Takumars I have.
Seagull at Marion Bay, SA, Jan 2011.

[xjjohnno]

Tim, you've just got my LBA off again. Great IQ there. @ f 10.5 you'd need some seriously strong light to get a tidy focus along with decent shutter speed.

[tim60]

xjjohnno, thank you for your compliment. It ook me a while to get to know the lens. Because of its design history, the KGB, I call it the 'portrait' lens. It should be good at the cricket. I should take it this summer. At first I did not like the bokeh, but on seeing other mirror lenses, I think the bokeh of the Rubinar is nicer. But I do like the aesthetic of the super taks, which was fairly consistent across the whole range and frm the late 50s to the mid 70s. Some engineering achievement there!
Soon I will be able to experiment with a split image+micro prism+ grid focusing screen. If it works nicely I will report.

[izash]

Hi,

I made this short film using a Sony NEX5 and a 500mm MC 3M-5CA Russian mirror lens.

Vimeo

Izhar