DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Opteka 650-1300mm - Opinions?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 28, (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/21/2006 03:43:10 AM · #1
Opteka 650-1300mm - At Amazon.com for $249

Anyone has any opinions on this one? I find it surprising how such a long lens is so cheap?

Just out of curiosity.
09/21/2006 03:48:23 AM · #2
F8 - F16...ouch!
09/21/2006 03:50:41 AM · #3
yeah, forget a tripod, you'll have to build a shelter for your camera, open the shutter and come back in 10 years to get a decent exposure!
09/21/2006 03:57:58 AM · #4
F8-16 at 1300mm

what shutter speed would you need to be using and how close does the earth have to be to the sun before you can use 1/1300 sec ... I would reckon it would need to be 150km above the space station and it would have to be a cloudless day ;-)
09/21/2006 03:59:26 AM · #5
I really wonder who would use these. I cant imagine it of much use unless you're shooting the moon or trying to watch the game from a really tall building next to the stadium.

Read somewhere else that they have the PF and CA problems in addition to the obvious vignetting.

But I wonder if anyone has ever used them here. I'm interested in knowing how do they keep it so low? And why the Nikon/Canon with much less tele are so so high.(almost 5-6 times as much)

I read about the recent Zeiss lens... and boy you need a truck to carry it back home. Now there's the lens for which you need to have its own little room :-)
09/21/2006 04:12:05 AM · #6
I wouldn't mind giving it a shot if I'm on a tight budget.
I mean, with some dSLR with low-noise sensor at high ISO, we could easily get away with faster shutter speeds. I wonder how far can 1300mm go? Anyone got any idea? curious
09/21/2006 04:37:33 AM · #7
F/16 would not be too much of a problem, exposure-wise on a bright day, especially if using a decent tripod. What would be difficult, however, woulod be focussing, even manually, as the viewfinder would be very dim. For instance, dial in f/16 and press the DOF preview button.
09/21/2006 04:57:49 AM · #8
Originally posted by AJAger:

F/16 would not be too much of a problem, exposure-wise on a bright day, especially if using a decent tripod. What would be difficult, however, woulod be focussing, even manually, as the viewfinder would be very dim. For instance, dial in f/16 and press the DOF preview button.


The view in the viewfinder is always with the aperture wide open so in this case f/8 not f/16.
09/21/2006 05:06:36 AM · #9
If you zoomed in all the way to 1300mm and the aperture at 1300mm was f/16, the aperture wide open would be f/16. That is what you would see through the viewfinder.

Still might be livable on a bright day... Never played around on a bright day with my aperture preview button at f/16...

Still probably only suitable for just a very few types of shots.
09/21/2006 07:40:33 AM · #10
that would make one helluva macro lens!
09/21/2006 01:54:40 PM · #11
"high definition"... sure... it *might* outperform the 480i CCD on my old Sony video camera, but I wouldn't count on it for any SLR ever made :P

Some of the mirror lenses, like the Vivitar 600mm 8.0, are supposed to be OK, but the bokeh is really weird since there's a piece of plastic in the midle of the lens, everything out of focus looks like a donut.
09/21/2006 02:02:54 PM · #12
I shot the moon with the 100-400 @ 400 and a 2x teleconverter. With the 1.6x crop factor I was almost 1300mm.

The moon pretty much filled the frame!
09/21/2006 02:12:14 PM · #13
From the Opteka Website:

"The Opteka 650-1300mm high definition super telephoto zoom lens is perfect for the professional and amateur photographer alike. There is a built-in, rotating tripod mount for easily attaching to your tripod or monopod. It's an extremely powerful telephoto zoom lens with the versatility that you need. This lens is great for the wildlife or nature photographer who wants to be hidden while taking photos of the subject.

Advances in ultra high-index / low-dispersion optical glasses, new barrel materials, and exotic anti-reflection coatings, along with the latest in computer-aided-design / computer-aided-manufacturing), are combined to produce lenses of unprecedented quality. Diamond-cut from crystal-clear, water-white optical glass, Opteka lenses are ground and polished to a precise precision."

Boldface added: not just "precision", but "precise precision"... Eat your heart out, Canon :-)

Plus, of course, it's "perfect" for the pro! Farewell, expensive "L" glass!

R.

BTW, on a 1.6 crop sensor that's a 1040-2080mm equivalent lens...

Message edited by author 2006-09-21 14:13:38.
09/21/2006 02:22:37 PM · #14
Opteka also makes a 2x converter for it. So you'll get 2600mm at f/64. Guess its ok if you want to take pictures of sunspots :-)
09/21/2006 03:03:49 PM · #15
I think this would be perfect for my hobby taking pictures of the lit filaments of my neighbour's light bulbs.

So nice when companies listen.
09/21/2006 03:09:06 PM · #16
Originally posted by zarniwoop:

I think this would be perfect for my hobby taking pictures of the lit filaments of my neighbour's light bulbs.

So nice when companies listen.


I donno, the lens is so slow the bulbs may burn out before the exposure is finished, jejeje™

R.
09/21/2006 03:15:05 PM · #17
I have one. only for the soul purpose of the extra zoom and moon shots.

Image quality sucks... A great amount of CA and other distortions. If you like to take pictures of distant objects and do not have a telescope.

Oh, I use two tripods. One for the body and one for the lens.

But its fun to use!

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a129/hallbilly/moon/moonsep2nd2006.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a129/hallbilly/moon/moondec132005.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a129/hallbilly/moon/mooncorner.jpg

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a129/hallbilly/moon/moon01dec1205small.jpg

Message edited by frisca - large images changed to links.
09/21/2006 03:29:17 PM · #18
WOW - SOME OF THOSE MOON SHOTS LOOK DAMN FINE TO ME!!!
09/22/2006 04:41:32 AM · #19
Originally posted by zarniwoop:

I think this would be perfect for my hobby taking pictures of the lit filaments of my neighbour's light bulbs.

So nice when companies listen.


Haha, really LMAO!!!

Now, wheres that 10-1000 mm F/1.0 IS with no CA or vignetting they were taling about?
09/22/2006 05:41:17 AM · #20
I have seen loads of Opteka gear on Ebay over the years, and the general consensus is that its all complete garbage - thats what I have read at least.

I remember I asked about Opteka because I wanted a wide angle lense for my old Nikon 5700. Was warned not to touch, there is a reason they are so cheap you know!
09/22/2006 07:18:00 AM · #21
Or how about this: Sigmonster Sigma 300-800mm f5.6
03/25/2008 04:14:45 AM · #22
Hi, I've just bought the Opteka 650-1300mm lens with the 2x, they is nothing wrong with it, people saying you get blurry shots, that to me is just the focusing or camera set-up for this lens, how ever you do need steady hand when focusing as it's sensitive to every hundredth of mm. I use a Canon 400D and it's fine, i never need to use any mirrow lock up or out, i be getting some filters for it thou. I would say just check out your camrea setting and be steady when focusing.
03/25/2008 04:34:00 AM · #23
Originally posted by yanko:

Originally posted by AJAger:

F/16 would not be too much of a problem, exposure-wise on a bright day, especially if using a decent tripod. What would be difficult, however, woulod be focussing, even manually, as the viewfinder would be very dim. For instance, dial in f/16 and press the DOF preview button.


The view in the viewfinder is always with the aperture wide open so in this case f/8 not f/16.


I was actually referring to trying out the view through another lens before trying the Opteka. I should have made myself clear.
06/27/2011 11:39:44 AM · #24
While I can not vouch for this lens I DO have another of Opteka\'s lenses. the 800mm Reflector.

it is NOT garbage. it is a STUNNING piece of equipment.

its it a royal pain in the butt to use? Oh yeah
is it VERY hard to get the focus clear? Oh heck yeah

but when you DO nail it you NAIL IT HARD. the results are spectacular. I wish I had some of my shots online to show you.

I shot a ducks orange foot from some 30ft away with it. The shot looks like a 3 inch macro shot. you can see the individual droplets of water glistening on the bright amazingly clear orange webbed foot and even see reflections in those drops.

made my jaw drop when I got that shot. I must have fired off 15-20 tries to get that shot. WELL worth it.

sun above the space station? your kidding right? I had NO problem with shutter speed. (although I do have an unusually steady hand all my shots are free handed)

this lens while a pain (the 800mm one I have) is spectacular because it lets mere mortals like me who DO NOT HAVE $13,000 to buy a canon 800mm lens get some amazing otherwise impossible shots.

I shot a ground team recovering a rocket from half a mile away. it looks like I was standing among them. its not the greatest shot (humidity made atmospheric distortion IMMENSE but it was \"good enough\" to use.

here is a VERY highly compressed online copy (the original looks a lot better) this is UNCROPPED

I shot this in my van engine running one handed stuck the camera out the window and snapped is so the focus is NOT ultra sharp. in cleaning it up in photoshop I mangled it pretty good but \"good enough\" for tossing it online.

and this is one of my WORST shots with this lens (I way over processed it in photoshop I was in a rush)

rocketrylive.com/2009-0425/IMG_2380.JPG

I need to find some of my park shots to show you guys. these lenses ARE capable of good shots they just require a lot more work and patience.

but the compromise is I save $12,800 dollars that I don\'t have :-)

I have been UNSUCCESSFUL shooting the moon with it however. I suspect the depth of field is SO NARROW at that distance that its smaller than half the moon IE can\'t get the \"Whole moon\" in focus with it with the doubler.

I have not had shudder speed problems even in partial cloudy conditions. my cheap xti shoots decent pics to ISO400 but I can usually get away with shooting ISO200 and when its sunny ISO 100 is no problem.

Remember your not shooting \"action\" with this lens you could never FOCUS on a moving object with any sort of reliability.

why you would NEED to use 1/1300th is beyond me. anything requiring you to use 1300th of a second is moving TOO FAST for you to ever be able to maintain the manual focus lock on anyway.

its a VERY limited use lens. its an EXTRA PITA to use but man when it DOES work the results are spectacular.

I even got some decent shots at a nascar race once using it. it lets you do on a budget what nothing else can let you do.

REALLY reach out there.

here are some shots with THIS lens from flickr. I don't know about you but "I" am impressed

flickr.com/groups/opteka-650-1300/

I can tell this right now

this shot

flickr.com/photos/valterpatrial/5773717702/in/pool-opteka-650-1300#/photos/valterpatrial/5773717702/in/pool-887713@N23/

that shot right there has convinced me. I want this lens.

Message edited by author 2011-06-27 11:56:30.
06/27/2011 02:39:39 PM · #25
Nice piece of necromancy. One wonders if "neryn" happens to sell these lenses on e-bay or something, but what the heck... My main quibble with his exposition is how he suggests that the lens won't work for full-moon shots because DOF when focused at a quarter-million miles is not adequate to the task, LOL...

R.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 10/22/2017 10:38:05 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2017 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 10/22/2017 10:38:05 AM EDT.