500mm for 89??


SteveT

Link Posted 12/02/2012 - 15:28
Got to be rubbish at this price but what is it?

link
K20d
DA 12-24 | DA* 16-50 | DA* 50-135 | Sigma 100-300 F4
Lightroom 2, CS3
My FlickR

steven9761

Link Posted 12/02/2012 - 15:40
Did you see what's parked at the back of the lens in the Ebay photo??.. Canon have started using K-mounts, have they??

Given that it's duty/vat paid, plus customs clearance fees would also have been charged, so my best guess is that the original cost of this lens in not more than 40 to buy from South Korea (the brand name suggests it's Korean, at least!).

If you're interested, I sell a lovely range of barge-poles, so that you can touch this item with it!!
Last Edited by steven9761 on 12/02/2012 - 15:45

johnwhit

Link Posted 12/02/2012 - 15:40
Looks like one of the Falcon lenses.

John
PPG link

In LBA hiatus.

SteveT

Link Posted 12/02/2012 - 15:42
steven9761 wrote:
Did you see what's parked at the back of the lens in the Ebay photo??.. Canon have started using K-mounts, have they??

"This t Mount Manual Focus telephoto lens comes with an adapter for your Pentax DSLR Camera. We also have Mount for All major Brands"
K20d
DA 12-24 | DA* 16-50 | DA* 50-135 | Sigma 100-300 F4
Lightroom 2, CS3
My FlickR

steven9761

Link Posted 12/02/2012 - 15:48
SteveT wrote:
steven9761 wrote:
Did you see what's parked at the back of the lens in the Ebay photo??.. Canon have started using K-mounts, have they??

"This t Mount Manual Focus telephoto lens comes with an adapter for your Pentax DSLR Camera. We also have Mount for All major Brands"

I saw that after I'd posted, Steve.. I guess it also fits one of those Russian camcorders that Del-boy was punting in an episode of Only Fools And Horses!! )

alan S

Link Posted 12/02/2012 - 15:51
To quote the specs
"This t Mount Manual Focus telephoto lens comes with an adapter for your Pentax DSLR Camera. We also have Mount for All major Brands"

All singing dancing MANUAL.

being positive it wont have the mirror doughnuts but how good is the glass?

Having used a Tamron mirror with a "A" mount and got few very good results and remember getting better with a Photax "tube" on a Practica LTL3 more often, or is that my memory being positive?
Alan
Pentax A3, IstD, K10 50mm 1.7 M & A, 16-45, 18/35, 18/55(x2), 28/90FA, 80/320FA, AF36FGZ, AF500FTZ
Sigma 24/135, 150/500
Tamrom adaptall2. 500mm mirror. 70-300 DI.

JohnX

Link Posted 12/02/2012 - 16:58
'Opton' brand; pre-set.
Last Edited by JohnX on 12/02/2012 - 16:58

rosesred

Link Posted 12/02/2012 - 17:04
Sold at cash converters.
http://www.cashconverters.co.uk/auction-item/302089/opton-500mm-f8-preset-photo-...
Last Edited by rosesred on 12/02/2012 - 17:05

cbrog

Link Posted 12/02/2012 - 17:32

Actually I was given one of these recently by a well meaning relative...
It is an Opton 500/1000mm made, I believe, in Korea during 2010 at least under the Opton name which is actually the name of an old German lens maker. I wonder if there was litigation over this??

Mine has the T mount and at distance the lens is reasonably sharp! Of course it is VERY slow and the minimum focussing distance is approximately 33 feet....in other words it is, as the T suggests, a telescope?

The photos in the EBay advert were taken from the cark park on the roof of the Belfry Mall in Redhill, Surrey, I reckon

prsjnb

Link Posted 12/02/2012 - 18:09
Whilst not the most convenient of lenses to use, telephoto pre-sets of this type are capable of decent results; especially if one is prepared to shoot in RAW and invest a little time and effort at the PP stage. The image below was taken 'hand-held' using an old Paragon 400mm f/6.3:

Goldfinch (Carduelis carduelis) on feeder by Dr 'B ', on Flickr">[img]http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6019/5889306344_149a0f7a9c_b.jpg" class="comment_image" />

Goldfinch (Carduelis carduelis) on feeder by Dr 'B ', on Flickr" class="comment_image" />


Jon

davidrobinson

Link Posted 12/03/2012 - 09:47
prsjnb wrote:
Whilst not the most convenient of lenses to use, telephoto pre-sets of this type are capable of decent results; especially if one is prepared to shoot in RAW and invest a little time and effort at the PP stage. The image below was taken 'hand-held' using an old Paragon 400mm f/6.3:


Goldfinch (Carduelis carduelis) on feeder by Dr 'B ', on Flickr">[img]http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6019/5889306344_149a0f7a9c_b.jpg" class="comment_image" />


Goldfinch (Carduelis carduelis) on feeder by Dr 'B ', on Flickr" class="comment_image" />


Jon

I'm still trying to achieved a result to match the above photo using a Sigma 150-500. Therefore you have to be careful not to dismiss cheap as always nasty. Can you take the risk that is the question?
Regards David

johnriley

Link Posted 12/03/2012 - 10:06
There are plenty of cheap 400mm and 500mm lenses about, often T mount. T mount is just a simple system to mount lenses on any camera.

500mm lenses come in standard long focus (not necessarily telephoto, hence their length) and mirror types and prices under 100 will be the norm.

I have used mirror lenses on DSLRs but forund even the tamron to be a bit soft and with a tendency to over-expose. This needed quite a bit of exposure compensation.
Best regards, John

prsjnb

Link Posted 12/03/2012 - 10:49
Quote:

I'm still trying to achieved a result to match the above photo using a Sigma 150-500. Therefore you have to be careful not to dismiss cheap as always nasty. Can you take the risk that is the question?
Regards David

Firstly, there is always an element of risk when buying a second-hand lens, especially from auction sites such as ebay. Having said that, I have bought several and, with a couple of exceptions, been delighted. Amongst dealerships I have found SRS, MIFSUDS and LCE to provide excellent service in the event that the lens proves less than satisfactory. With ebay, my experience, unsurprisingly, has been more variable.

The majority of sellers I have had the good fortune to buy from have been beyond reproach when problems arose. A couple have been a real pain but I've just stood my ground, documented my grievance(s)objectively and in detail and relied on ebay/paypal to either coerce the seller into providing a refund or to do so themselves under their guarantee system. This has ben successful even in those cases where the seller has listed the items as 'Returns not accepted'.

Other than determination and perseverence, other factors that have contributed to my success thus far have included a careful consideration of the seller's history, how the item is described and presented and asking pertinent and probing questions that require an unequivocal response before bidding.

In the specific case of the Paragon 400mm pre-set, I just wanted an opportunity to 'play' with a long lens and kenw I would enjoy the challenge of mastering its use (manual focus and stop-down metering). preparation is also key, and best results are like to be obtained where you can set every thing up in anticipation of seeing and photographing the subject; for example in a hide. Where a lens of this type can be a real frustration, is when dealing with a 'grab' or 'once in a lifetime' shot.

Hope some of this helps.

Jon

dcweather

Link Posted 16/03/2012 - 23:06
davidrobinson wrote:
[quote:3496ace15f="prsjnb"]Whilst not the most convenient of lenses to use, telephoto pre-sets of this type are capable of decent results; especially if one is prepared to shoot in RAW and invest a little time and effort at the PP stage. The image below was taken 'hand-held' using an old Paragon 400mm f/6.3:


Goldfinch (Carduelis carduelis) on feeder by Dr 'B ', on Flickr">[img]http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6019/5889306344_149a0f7a9c_b.jpg" class="comment_image" />


Goldfinch (Carduelis carduelis) on feeder by Dr 'B ', on Flickr" class="comment_image" />


Jon

I'm still trying to achieved a result to match the above photo using a Sigma 150-500.

You should easily surpass this image with a Sigma 150-500mm. The edges look sharp but there is very little resolution in the feathers and other detail, which looks may be due to noise reduction after sharpening?
Dave

prsjnb

Link Posted 17/03/2012 - 10:50
dcweather wrote:
[quote:3496ace15f="davidrobinson"]

You should easily surpass this image with a Sigma 150-500mm. The edges look sharp but there is very little resolution in the feathers and other detail, which looks may be due to noise reduction after sharpening?
Dave

You are absolutely right, David, and this is something I should have made clear in my original comment.

I don't recall how the goldfinch image was edited post-capture, but you have highlighted correctly some of its shortcomings. It was never my intention to present said image as being 'exceptional' in any way really. Indeed, it is not even representative of the best that can be achieved with the Paragon pre-set lens. What it does show, however, is that for those of more modest means or whose interest in bird photography is not all consuming, it is possible to obtain perfectly acceptable images for a relatively modest outlay; always providing that one is prepared to forgo the niceties of auto-focus and auto-exposure.

In addition to the Paragon, which was originally purchased for my daughter to capture images of the Moon, I have a Sigma 400mm f/5.6 AF (much underrated, IMHO) and a Sigma APO 100-300mm f/4 EX DG which, in a side-by-side comparison, makes the benefits of advances in modern lens design and materials readily apparent. Despite this, I still make regular use of the Sigma 400mm and and, from time-to-time, the Paragon simply because I enjoy the additional challenge that their use entails.

Yours masochistically ,

Jon
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.