The el cheapo 650-1300mm zoom, for those who care

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Dec 31, 2009.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Just some info. Wow!! Genuine "optic glass" (as opposed to coke
    bottle bottoms?)

    http://www.samyang.pl/product,147,category,5,samyang_6501300mm_mc_if_f816

    The example moon shot they show with it is pathetic. No doubt linked
    as much to seeing changes during the inordinantly long exposure needed
    with an f16 focal length as much as the horrible optics.

    A better choice would be the 500mm they offer since it has ED glass at
    least:

    http://www.samyang.pl/product,80,category,5,samyang_500mm_f8_preset_ed_if_mc
     
    RichA, Dec 31, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    RustY © Guest

    What?
     
    RustY ©, Dec 31, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    Bruce Guest


    Given that it has been translated from Korean and is displayed on a
    Polish web site, I would expect a few mistakes here and there.

    Still, I'm very happy with my Samyang 85mm f/1.4. I broke the plastic
    bayonet mount lens hood after only a few uses so replaced it with a
    nice metal hood. I thought you would be pleased. ;-)
     
    Bruce, Dec 31, 2009
    #3
  4. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    :
    : : > long exposure needed
    : > with an f16 focal length ...............
    :
    : What?

    Don't be snarky. Rich has no particular reason to know the difference berween
    aperture and focal length. Neither of them is made of plastic.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Dec 31, 2009
    #4
  5. RichA

    Bristolian Guest

    Bruce, do you really have one of those, or were you just baiting the troll?

    If you do have one, I'd be interested in your views on it as I've been
    offered one at a reasonable price.
     
    Bristolian, Dec 31, 2009
    #5
  6. RichA

    Bruce Guest


    Yes, I do have one, and it was very reasonably priced. I thought it
    would be too good to be true, but it is actually a very fine lens.

    I also have an 85mm f/1.4 AF-D Nikkor costing about four times more
    and until recently used a Carl Zeiss (for Contax) 85mm f/1.4 on my
    Canon EOS 5D with an adapter. I have previously owned an 85mm f/1.4
    AIS Nikkor and several 85mm f/1.8 AF Nikkors which are good, but not
    in the same league as the f/1.4 lenses.

    You will have realised by now that I am a fan of 85mm lenses. ;-)

    My Samyang lens has Nikon AI mount and is used on the 5D with an
    adapter and on a Nikon D700 without. I also use it on a Nikon F100 to
    shoot black and white film.

    The Samyang is an amazing lens for the money. It is optically better
    than the Zeiss (Contax) and the AIS Nikkor but not quite as good as
    the AF-D Nikkor which has better contrast and is slightly sharper at
    the edges from f/1.4 to f/2.8 and in the centre at f/1.4. But the
    differences are small, and the Samyang therefore offers spectacular
    value for money. The background bokeh is very smooth and is about the
    best of any 85mm lens I have ever used.

    The build quality is excellent - better than the Zeiss and AF-D Nikkor
    but not quite as good as the tank-like AIS Nikkor. The focusing ring
    is smooth and even after a lot of use it has a beautiful feel. The
    aperture ring works well and the click stops are still clear.

    As I stated previously, the plastic bayonet lens hood is flimsy. It
    also gives poor shading giving rise to some unnecessary flare and loss
    of contrast. I replaced that with a cheap generic screw-in metal hood
    that offers perfect shading and excellent resistance to flare.

    The Samyang is my first choice 85mm lens ahead of the AF-D Nikkor
    because of its smooth manual focusing action. The AF-D Nikkor is a
    fine AF lens but at f/1.4, there is no room for error in portraiture
    due to the extremely shallow depth of field, so manual focusing is a
    must. And the Samyang just feels a lot better than the AF-D Nikkor in
    manual mode.

    I would not hesitate to recommend this lens. It is a joy to use. In
    terms of bang for the buck, it cannot be beaten, and it would still be
    excellent value at twice or even three times the price. I use it for
    wedding and portrait photography and for general telephoto use, and it
    gets a lot of work.

    Buy one and enjoy!
     
    Bruce, Dec 31, 2009
    #6
  7. On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:55:02 +0000, Bruce wrote:

    [...]
    How about internal reflections, like with bright lights in the frame? In
    all the images I've seen of the lens, it doesn't seem to have any coating
    at all.
     
    Robert Spanjaard, Dec 31, 2009
    #7
  8. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Sound policy. Which is why old metal screw-in hoods from Nikon etc.,
    command good prices on Ebay. And the Chinese have started making
    metal screw-in hood copies.
     
    RichA, Jan 1, 2010
    #8
  9. RichA

    Bob Williams Guest

     
    Bob Williams, Jan 1, 2010
    #9
  10. RichA

    Bob Williams Guest

    Yep!
    It seems pretty stupid to me to try to sell the quality of your lens by
    displaying a whopping .06 MP image
    Even the cheapest P&S could could have produced an image of that quality
    What were they thinking?
    Bob Williams
     
    Bob Williams, Jan 1, 2010
    #10
  11. RichA

    Bristolian Guest

    Bruce,

    Many thanks for the appraisal of the Samyang, it sounds like a good
    lens. Like you, I was wondering if - at the prices being offered - it
    would be any good at all but your experience certainly reduces those fears.

    I plan to use it indoors to shoot judo competitions - my grandson is in
    the GB squad - where the light is invariably poor and I end up with
    either too much grain (from high ISO) or motion blur due to long shutter
    speeds with my f/3.5-5.6 lens.

    I think I might just give this one a try. Cheers :)
     
    Bristolian, Jan 1, 2010
    #11
  12. RichA

    RustY © Guest

    I think you will find that Steel is the best material to cast focal lengths
    out of. I understand from reading this group that plastic breaks too easily
    [ and of course expansion plays havoc with focal lengths ]
     
    RustY ©, Jan 1, 2010
    #12
  13. RichA

    Bruce Guest


    You're very welcome.

    Just a word of warning when shooting sports; at f/1.4 there is almost
    no depth of field, so any movement that takes your subject away from
    the plane of focus can result in horribly out of focus shots. Even in
    wedding photography and portraiture (not exactly action shots!) I have
    to ask people to keep still, but at least with digital I can check the
    shot immediately afterwards to ensure that they are in sharp focus,
    and re-shoot if not.

    Of course if you are using an APS-C DSLR, you will have slightly more
    depth of field to work with, and the extra magnification (making it
    effectively a 135mm f/1.4) will be useful. Also, using the lens wide
    open will effectively defocus even the most obtrusive background,
    which may be quite useful in a sports hall.

    One thing I didn't get an opportunity to say is that the lens is an
    outstanding performer at f/8 or f/11 with biting sharpness across the
    frame, excellent contrast and distortion that is almost too low to
    measure. It's just an amazing lens for the money.
     
    Bruce, Jan 1, 2010
    #13
  14. RichA

    Bruce Guest


    Anyone who points a very wide aperture telephoto lens (of any brand)
    directly at a light source is in need of some very basic tuition.
     
    Bruce, Jan 1, 2010
    #14
  15. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    :
    : : >
    : > Don't be snarky. Rich has no particular reason to know the difference
    : > berween aperture and focal length. Neither of them is made of plastic.
    : >
    : > Bob
    :
    : I think you will find that Steel is the best material to cast focal lengths
    : out of. I understand from reading this group that plastic breaks too easily
    : [ and of course expansion plays havoc with focal lengths ]

    That shows how little you know about it. You can make focal lengths out of
    rolled steel, but castings are never used.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jan 1, 2010
    #15
  16. Thanks, Bruce. You just answered _two_ questions.
     
    Robert Spanjaard, Jan 1, 2010
    #16
  17. RichA

    Paul Furman Guest

    I disassembled a 28-200 old-ish film super-zoom and it has plastic
    aperture blades. I wouldn't be surprised if that's used in high end
    lenses too.

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Jan 2, 2010
    #17
  18. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    : Robert Coe wrote:
    : > RustY © wrote:
    : > : RichA wrote
    : > :
    : > : > long exposure needed
    : > : > with an f16 focal length ...............
    : > :
    : > : What?
    : >
    : > Don't be snarky. Rich has no particular reason to know the difference
    : > berween aperture and focal length. Neither of them is made of plastic.
    :
    : I disassembled a 28-200 old-ish film super-zoom and it has plastic
    : aperture blades. I wouldn't be surprised if that's used in high end
    : lenses too.

    They wouldn't rust, and you might not have to oil them. And oil that isn't
    there won't drip onto a lens element.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jan 2, 2010
    #18
  19. RichA

    RustY © Guest

    I happen to have it on good authority that steel [and copper] are used by
    the best camera casters - according to experts on this very information
    site. I am also told that all focal lenses are always cast - so there!
     
    RustY ©, Jan 2, 2010
    #19
  20. RichA

    Bruce Guest


    I think you'll find that ED lenses are forged.
     
    Bruce, Jan 2, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.