500mm for $80??? (Opteka 500mm f/8 "HD")

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

03/20/2010 04:24:49 PM · #1

Hello DPC'ers!

So, I have come across an interesting piece of equipment, I say interesting because it has some very SEVERE LIMITATIONS, but is sold at an absolutely affordable, yet believable price. I've looked at many reviews, and have seen a wild swing of opinions on the quality of the Opteka 500mm f/8 lens (the "HD" variety, not the mirror/cat lens, this is all glass and a mile long).

So, I've decided that I can afford to "take one for the team" here and write a bit of a review on this,,, thing.

As you can see I'm skeptical, but I've seen a few pictures that I thought were really good quality that claim to have passed through this glass, and many, many more that were terrible..
However, I suspect that quite a bit of the terrible is human error, not bad optics... Essentially this is a fully manual lens, that means nothing on your camera is going to help much really, at least that's what I'm told, I'm still curious to see if my metering is anywhere near accurate.

The lens can be purchased with a 2X teleconverter, but as it is this lens is probably going to be a difficult enough beastie, without the difficulty introduced by a crazy small aperture.

So, I've ordered one in, and it should arrive in the next week or so.. When it comes in I'll document all the trials and tribulations with this lens (and maybe a victory or two as well...).

Just in case you're wondering what the heck I think I'm going to be able to do with this lens, here it is-- I've been playing around with catching bottles as they are shot at the range.. Well, let me tell you, that 50 1.8 just isn't doing it (flying glass and all...), so I've decided that I'll try a dedicated 500mm lens for this, obviously the lack of AF and being heavy and long won't really matter too much here, and neither will the f/8, which is where I'd be trying to shoot this anyway..

So, if you'd like to make predictions, feel free, please do! And if you have any specific tasks you'd like me to try with it, please do let me know..
****
UPDATE
****

I like the lens.. See below for test images and review. It does have serious limitations, but can be fun, and does create reasonable quality images..

Here are a few test images:

100% crop

Full Size (Out of Camera)

----

Here are some images of this lens, and a comparison.. :) As you can see, this is a very long lens.

Here is a home built macro, from a broken sigma 24-70mm, for scale ;)

Message edited by author 2010-05-14 02:41:40.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS

03/20/2010 04:42:33 PM · #2

What I really want to know is... is my suspicion correct?
My suspicion is that the optics consist of at most two elements.

Yo_Spiff

Olympus 12-100mm f/4.0 M.Zuiko ED IS PRO

03/20/2010 04:45:21 PM · #3

I'll be interested in your findings on this.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/20/2010 04:55:09 PM · #4

Originally posted by kirbic:

What I really want to know is... is my suspicion correct?
My suspicion is that the optics consist of at most two elements.

Well, unless they are lying to me, I'm quite pleased to say that your suspicion is off this time.

From Amazon: Lens Construction: 7 elements in 5 groups, Angle of View: 5°, Minimum Focus Distance: 33 ft. Focus Modes: Manual focus Minimum Aperture: f/8.0 Maximum Aperture: f/32.0, Filter Size: 67mm

rocket

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

03/20/2010 04:55:47 PM · #5

Originally posted by kirbic:

What I really want to know is... is my suspicion correct?
My suspicion is that the optics consist of at most two elements.

Not according to product description

Lens Construction: 7 elements in 5 groups

Ron

spiritualspatula

Panasonic LUMIX DMC-LX100

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

03/20/2010 05:02:55 PM · #6

I believe it's a mirror reflex lens. I personally would have tried a Canon made one (they do exist) beforehand, since they aren't THAT expensive and the quality is undoubtedly superior.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

03/20/2010 05:15:28 PM · #7

Originally posted by spiritualspatula:

I believe it's a mirror reflex lens. I personally would have tried a Canon made one (they do exist) beforehand, since they aren't THAT expensive and the quality is undoubtedly superior.

No. Opteka makes a pretty lousy Catadioptric (mirror reflex) 500mm, and this isn't it. THis is a big 'ol, classic telephoto-tube :-)

R.

Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux M Aspherical MF - Black

03/20/2010 05:24:40 PM · #8

Manual focus and dark as can be viewfinder. I can't imagine shooting in anything but the brightest of sunlight and with objects that sit very still. Bump up the sharpening on your camera and expect all sorts of soft images.

That is my idea of how that lens will be.

Matt

scarbrd

Leica M10

03/20/2010 05:25:54 PM · #9

If this is like the ones from 30 years ago, it will be a fully manual lens; stopped down metering (meaning the image will get darker through the viewfinder as you stop the lens down), manual focus (of course).

I had one of these back in my college days, I think mine was a 400mm F6.3. The image quality was surprisingly good.

These were taken with it

With a tripod and good lighting conditions, it performed well. I think I paid $69 for it at the time.

03/20/2010 05:28:30 PM · #10

Originally posted by MattO:

For all who read this: :) Please take a look at

MattO's profile, and you'll see that he is likely to be a wee bit biased.. (He owns a ton of really killer fast and long glass..)

ETA: To be fair, everything he said is probably perfectly correct, at least up to the soft images... I've seen some work that looked reasonably sharp, however, to be fair, there is absolutely no expectation of this lens to live up to what a 300 F/2.8 L can do in terms of sharpness.

Still, I'm hoping that (for the price) this will turn out to be a fun addition to my collection that will see an occasional use.

Also note: You can buy a small truckload of these for what an equivalent length L lens will set you back.. :)

Message edited by author 2010-03-20 17:36:32.

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

03/20/2010 05:29:36 PM · #11

Originally posted by scarbrd:

I hope it does this good!

ETA: Here are some of the pictures that really encouraged me to go with this lens: (Article)

Message edited by author 2010-03-20 17:47:31.

MikeO

Fujifilm x100

03/20/2010 05:34:03 PM · #12

I used something very similar with my old Mamiya DSX1000B 35mm SLR years ago. I did manage to get a few decent shots but it was a lot of effort and also f8 being its largest aperture made this only suitable in the brightest of conditions (mostly used with ASA 200). Unusable unless on a tripod or resting on something solid. However, with the advances in high iso settings I can see you could have some fun with this.
Be interesting to see on you get on.

Message edited by author 2010-03-20 17:35:45.

SteveJ

Canon EOS-7D

03/20/2010 05:34:30 PM · #13

I am looking forward to your impressions of this lens. I have read reviews that state the results can be compared with a cardboard tube and the bottoms of two Coke bottles:) However, I have also seen sample pics that were surprisingly good taken with this lens.

I think the biggest problems you face with this lens is getting exposure and focussing just right, Given time and persevence, you may well get some interesting results. I also think you are right not to involve the 2x convertor as you will need extremely good eyesight, bright sunshine and a semi-comatosed subject to get satisfactory results.

Bring on episode two:)

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

03/20/2010 05:38:04 PM · #14

Originally posted by SteveJ:

I also think you are right not to involve the 2x convertor as you will need extremely good eyesight, bright sunshine and a semi-comatosed subject to get satisfactory results.

Now that made me laugh!

SteveJ

Canon EOS-7D

03/20/2010 05:54:16 PM · #15

Originally posted by coryboehne:

Originally posted by scarbrd:
If this is like the ones from 30 years ago, it will be a fully manual lens; stopped down metering (meaning the image will get darker through the viewfinder as you stop the lens down), manual focus (of course).

I had one of these back in my college days, I think mine was a 400mm F6.3. The image quality was surprisingly good.

These were taken with it

With a tripod and good lighting conditions, it performed well. I think I paid $69 for it at the time.

I hope it does this good!

ETA: Here are some of the pictures that really encouraged me to go with this lens: (Article)

Those last two photos? I hope you realise they are both extinct!! That's how long the exposure is with this lens:))

03/20/2010 06:01:05 PM · #16

Originally posted by SteveJ:

Those last two photos? I hope you realise they are both extinct!! That's how long the exposure is with this lens:))

LOL ZING!

You know I was just playing around with my 50D, and I can focus indoors, in low light, just fine @ f/8.. Now, is there something I'm missing? As I understand it f/8 is f/8 is f/8 is f/8 as far as light throughput is concerned..

In essence shouldn't it look exactly the same brightness through the viewfinder as my 28-135 stopped down to f/8? (and yes of course I'm using the DOF preview button..)

Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux M Aspherical MF - Black

03/20/2010 06:04:48 PM · #17

Originally posted by coryboehne:

Originally posted by SteveJ:

Those last two photos? I hope you realise they are both extinct!! That's how long the exposure is with this lens:))

LOL ZING!

You know I was just playing around with my 50D, and I can focus indoors, in low light, just fine @ f/8.. Now, is there something I'm missing? As I understand it f/8 is f/8 is f/8 is f/8 as far as light throughput is concerned..

In essence shouldn't it look exactly the same brightness through the viewfinder as my 28-135 stopped down to f/8? (and yes of course I'm using the DOF preview button..)

Yes there is something you are missing..........what ever lens you are losing at whatever the focal length is the widest aperture of that lens is what you focus at. The lens doesn't stop down until you click the shutter. So an F2.8 lens will be focusing at F2.8 a 5.6 lens will be focusing at 5.6. Your F8 Lens will be F8 all the time. I'm not sure if using the DOF preview will be the same as holding a 500MM lens and having it at F8 all the time will give you the same idea of what you are in for. I've used a couple of Spotting scopes with F8 and F11 apertures using adapters and I was not impressed one bit.

Matt

And no I'm not biased, I'm someone who has a bit of experience with cheap glass and regretted spending any pennies on it.

Edit to add a question. Does the HD in the name mean highly disappointing results? :D

Message edited by author 2010-03-20 18:09:35.

scarbrd

Leica M10

03/20/2010 06:05:14 PM · #18

Originally posted by coryboehne:

yes, the same as using the DOF preview at f8. But also, camera shake is an issue at 500mm, more noticeable than at 135mm.

03/20/2010 06:18:42 PM · #19

Originally posted by MattO:

As per the first bit... I'm using the DOF preview to simulate an f/8 max aperture and then attempting to focus, inside my house, where it's not very bright.. I do wonder though, have you ever tried holding the DOF button while on f/8? Does the viewfinder brightness match what you experienced when using the spotting scope with the f/8 max aperture? Or is the viewfinder just brighter always no matter what the F-stop is when you're using a, say, 2.8L lens..

As per the biased part, I do hope you get it that I'm mostly joking, and simply recognizing that your experience with lenses tends to make it much harder to "put up with" something like this.. Besides, no matter how bad it is, I'm sure I could recover at least 50% of my cost (while being honest!)..

and for the final bit-- Does HD stand for highly disappointing results?? -- I certainly hope not.. But we'll all know soon enough :)

03/20/2010 06:27:07 PM · #20

One thing to consider is this. with the 1.6 crop factor of your lens. you need a 1/800 using the 1x focal length calculation, at F8 what ISO setting will you have to have to achieve this in anything but the brightest of light?

Matt

03/20/2010 06:33:46 PM · #21

Originally posted by MattO:

Yeah, absolutely a wise consideration.. I can shoot pretty OK images up to about 1600ISO, and up to 800ISO they're just fine, while I can't really see much difference at all between 100 and 400..

So with this lens I'm expecting a typical ISO of 400, and I expect to need 800 and above during anything but bright light with a living or moving subject, however, if it will produce sharp images, I expect I'll be able to overcome those limitations with a bit of effort and creativity..

However an observation regarding the 1x calculation, I find that up to 200mm's at least, I can easily pull of sharp shots at about 0.25x, in other words, I don't usually shake too much to pull off a 1/50th shutter @ 200mm. Clearly, I have no idea how this will translate to 500mm lens.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

03/20/2010 06:37:02 PM · #22

BTW: It just struck me that the conversation between MattO and I is analogous to a person who just bought a 1982 ford F-150 4X4 trying to explain to a friend who owns a small fleet of Mercedes and BMW's exactly why he thinks the F-150 is a good choice.. :) Clearly 2 sides of a very wide chasm :)

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

03/20/2010 08:55:07 PM · #23

Originally posted by coryboehne:

Yes......but in this case, the Merc/Bimmer owner has owned the F-150s before and is merely trying to make you aware of what you're likely to encounter....