Originally posted by rjbrett
When I went looking for older budget teles a few years ago I had trouble finding one I liked, and eventually came to the conclusion that I was as well off going for a more recent standard second hand zoom for that reach. One side benefit, beyond clarity and rendering was the addition of autofocus, which I've found good for quickly locating the focal plane around insects and birds.
I started off with a few 80-200mm telezooms, and soon added a Beroflex 500mm F/8 "Wundertüte".
My favourite so far is a Vivitar 75-205mm F/3.8, so I was surprised that I actually liked it more in full zoom than the 200mm, expecting a prime to have slightly better image quality.
So far my only use for tele's were birds, though I may expand to other animals at one point. I've gotten a few decent images with manual zoom, but automatic surely would be better for those in flight. Maybe I'll get a 55-300mm one day, they seem to be very decent performers.
Originally posted by rjbrett I remember reading, as you probably have, that a number of Revuenon lenses were quite good as they sourced from other well respected suppliers, as did Porst and others such as Carena. I have a Porst Enna Munchen 35mm that I think the world of.
I also have a Porst, a 135mm F/2.8, the first "tele" I bought shortly after I got my K10D. Also a very beautiful specimen
hasn't seen much use lately, with all the new lenses I got, but I definitely like its feel, so I'm bound to return.
Originally posted by rjbrett My fastest lenses are only f1.7, but from my experience and what I've read most f1.4 lenses are soft, low contrast, and/or glowy wide open. This was seen as an advantage when many of these older lenses were made and marketed, as soft focus was quite popular and fashionable. I still think it can be an advantage for subjects such as flowers, or aesthetic effect in other compositions, but fixing the narrow plane of focus of these faster lenses on your subject will take some skill and practice. I work with what I've got but am willing to credit luck as much as skill to any success I've had. Many of these will start sharpening up somewhere above f2.
I also like my SMC 50mm F/1.7 very much, maybe even more than the Revuenon F/1.4. It makes me a bit sad, because after all, what's the purpose of having such a fast lens if I'm not using it wide open....both are very sharp and produce great images at 2.8 or 4.0
Time will tell which one I'll keep.
Originally posted by rjbrett I was also surprised when I first started using the tele lenses at how much extra skill was needed to get a decent photo, and even with all the good advice available online (I'm sure you'll have found some) it still needed practice.
It's been similar for me - I've had to delete most images I took with my 500mm, because the subjects were over- or underexposed, or mostly, just not properly in focus. I'll still have to get one of those split prism viewfinder plates.
Originally posted by rjbrett In the meantime a rose and bokeh from the K10 & a Riconar 55mm f2.2:
Absolutely beautiful! I'm fond of roses in particular, and the separation from the background is just perfect in your image.
For me a large part of liking the lens is also down to feel, as long as the images it takes are somewhat decent.
For some reason I love my new 35-100mm Auto Revuenon even though it's huge and heavy (I opened it up, and found a huge, thick glass lens as its first element), but there's something about its boxy shape that just pleases me, like heavy-duty machinery. Not beautiful, and yet it has a certain beauty of use.
I'll try to get warmer with the 200mm and 50 F/1.4, and see to which images they lead me
Cheers!
Leon