@@kurmanbekdzhenaliev6786 Not all modern cameras are mirrorless. All the big mfgrs still make DSLRs. It’s just a different beast, granted, dslr days may be numbered. I sold off my Canon 5D4’s for R5’s because I prefer Zeiss manual focus lenses and Canon took away interchangeable focus screens. Focus peaking to the rescue there and Leica SL2, but also on my Leica M10’s with fast (Summilux 50) and longer lenses (90 Summicron). If I wanted AF lenses, I’d stick with DSLRs.
A mirror less lens just means the sensor can directly display an image to the viewfinder and simotaniously take photos. Mirrored lenses have an actual view of the outside while mirrorless is digital
@@dimitrijekrstic7567 every lense would be a refractor telescope, this one however is built like a maksutov telescope which is very unusual for a normal lens
@@ivg6 If you have no image stabilization, your best bet is to use 1/[focal length] Of course some people have more steady hands or more shaky ones so it varies but something in that ballpark is good. IIRC, image stabilization gives you 2-3 stops more leeway in average.
An entry level telescope would be a 4 inch Newtonian reflector on a rickety Dobson base for 150 bucks. Focal length is not what makes a telescope a telescope, but instead how much light it can collect. I have telescopes less than 1000mm in focal length, and there's some out there with less than 500.
@@EMPERORakshaypatil yes. it will always be 900mm. it's like saying if i crop all of my pictures in lightroom to match 1500mm fov, that my 900mm is now a 1500mm.
I got a 500mm f8 mirror lens for 15€ on ebay. I used it at an airshow. If i wanted to go that close with a glass lens id have to pay at least 200€ + a 2x tele converter and the image quality in the end would still look better on the mirror lens. No CAs
These lenses are difficult to use and don't produce sharp images. I have a Nikor 500mm mirror...I almost never use it. What are they good for other than taking advantage of the unique bokeh?
@@ApoorvaIyerNot sure which particular design. Afaik Mak has the Glas bowl as front element and my Minolta 500mm mirror lens looks like it's flat like a window.
Based on my Minolta 500mm Reflex (with AF) there are sharper knives in the drawer but it's more the contrast and that long focal length often means that there's a lot of atmosphere between object and camera.
@@jochenkraus7016 I have the tamron 500mm f8 which is supposedly one of the sharper mirror lenses, however even that one is not that great on a 25MP fullframe. Contrast is a bit low and you just notice that it lacks detail, even when shooting objects closer. CA is non existant tho and the colors are really quite beautiful. I'm still quite eager to get my hands on Tamrons 350mm F5.6 as people claim it to be one of the sharpest mirror lenses out there. Unfortunately the price is quite steep as well.
@@jochenkraus7016 that is true but this softness is really there for every distance you shoot when you use mirror lenses. I have several, from a 500 f,6.3 to 600 f/8 and all have the same issue. Depends on the mirrors used. Never had a good one. Now... I also have Sigma 150-600 f/5-6.3 DG DN S (sports) for sony (the newest model) and the Sony 200-600 f/5.6-6.3 OSS G and the 2.0x and the 1.4x teleconverters for sony... any combination of the TCs and the 200-600 at 600mm on any foggy day with ANY of these lenses are 10 times sharper at least than any photo taken with these mirror lenses on a sunny day. Atmospheric heat or not. :)
What about contrast? By eliminating the fundamental waves (first order) you eliminate a major part of the resolution. This can be compensated for but is usually not.
To be honest a manual focus only isn't much of a concern for me as with such a focal length you're most likely better off with doing everything manually. But then again I'm mostly using MF since I also do a lot of analog photography with a camera, that doesn't even have AF in the first place😅 And trust me when you get used to it you can get pretty fast with it too, although not as fast the latest AF cameras, but still faster, than what most people would imagine 😊
Close, but not right. It has two mirrors inside, one at the back (you can see through the front) and one at the front (behind that black disc) that reflects the image back through the centre hole in the rear mirror.
With 'telescopes' the only way to have a bigger aperture is to have a bigger mirror or a much shorter focal length. It's a size limitation more than anything else with this lens.
What weird or new about that ... I've got a 17-year-old mirror lens, and they have been used for years by pre digital shooters such as myself. The best deal is the Rokinon 300mm f8 which is absolutely tiny, and used on a Micro Four Thirds body makes it a 600mm.
@@redracerb18 ISO800 for 1350mm f/11 1/200? Not only will it be too dark, but there's alot of camera shake. You've got to have atleast 1/2700 if you're going handheld APSC. From there, you can estimate the ISO.
@@faaizrosli you don't seem to think about image stabilizers in bodies. secondly your shooting something within a single degree of your field of view. Third is that the physical heat emenating from the earth will cause warping in the image anyway. Forth, There is no autofocus on this lens and normally a fixed aperture. Didn't think anyone would try this as a sports lens. Finally Canon themselves released an 800 f11 lens if you need reference.
Try the old Minolta or Sony A-mount 500mm f8 Reflex. You'll get AF when used with the LA -EA4 (Sony A7iii or older) or LA-EA5 (A7iv and later) adapters. Great lens, great quality. And even quick to focus :)
Or if you has new sony camera, you can buy Minolta AF 500mm F8, and LA-EA5 adapter. And you will have AF lens, yes it is not so long? but it is a little brighter
Actually the 900mm will only you give the field of view of 1350mm lens, not the compression or the actual characteristic of a 1350mm. At the end of the day…a crop is just a crop
compression of background is fixed by the field of view, not by focal length, so for compression it is a 1350mm equivalent lens. What you don't have is the f11 bokeh/depth blur of a 1350mm lens, you just got this of the 900mm lens. Weirdly misunderstood thought of Full Frame shooters. if you shoot a 100 mm lens and crop it by factor 2 in x and y-axis, you have the exact same as a 200mm lens with less bokeh. So stop down the 200mm and you have the same image (yeah darker but you know what I mean)
@@jonathanhoelz515 a 900mm full frame lense with its 900mm compression does not magically become a 1350mm lense with 1350mm compression a dx sensor, that’s why photography RUclipsrs that understand use the word “equivalent” and the ones that ACTUALLY also know use the term “field of view” a crop is a crop
Not a Newton because the secondary mirror isn't flat and doesn't reflect to the side. More like Maksutov style or similar but I don't know which design it really is.
🔽PRODUCT LINK HERE 🔽
linktr.ee/tomcalton
Which mount
"zed"
@@pro_videos_realnope, E-mount in this video. He put it on a Sony.
@@ourplane8 yeah this is key info missing from the video!
I love the onion rings bokeh
I prefer ai bokeh
@@addy405meh
Especially with garlic powder. 😋
@@addy405you are the devil
Why are you making me hungry at this hour?!!!😅
So does that mean that you no longer have a mirrorless camera, but a mirror camera
Or you can use it to convert your dslr into a ddlr
Lens is where all the glass should be, modern cameras don’t require a mirror in its body
No.
@@kurmanbekdzhenaliev6786 Not all modern cameras are mirrorless. All the big mfgrs still make DSLRs. It’s just a different beast, granted, dslr days may be numbered. I sold off my Canon 5D4’s for R5’s because I prefer Zeiss manual focus lenses and Canon took away interchangeable focus screens. Focus peaking to the rescue there and Leica SL2, but also on my Leica M10’s with fast (Summilux 50) and longer lenses (90 Summicron). If I wanted AF lenses, I’d stick with DSLRs.
A mirror less lens just means the sensor can directly display an image to the viewfinder and simotaniously take photos. Mirrored lenses have an actual view of the outside while mirrorless is digital
so basically its a mini telescope
Yeah, kinda!
Yeah buddy by that logic any lens is a mini telescope
@@dimitrijekrstic7567 every lense would be a refractor telescope, this one however is built like a maksutov telescope which is very unusual for a normal lens
@@dimitrijekrstic7567He’s referring to the mirror reflecting it, “buddy.”
So smart huh?
@@dimitrijekrstic7567yeah buddy so by that logic my 7mm lens is a telescope.
When a professional photographer calls something "affordable" you know its not affordable.
It’s relatively affordable
Ye, a 900mm at that size usually over $1.5k I think
@draphty9258
The Sarblue Mak70 is 1000mm for $200, but you need a t-adapter to attach it to your camera. 👍
When a higher end lens with half the reach costs around $12k, yeah, this lens is pretty affordable.
Good job showing more image samples
-"Is your camera mirrorless?"
-"Yes but no"
And if you don't have in-body image stabilization, you better use a tripod with a lens like this
haha exactly... i used a6000 handheld with the 400mm tamron lens and cant take clear pict if shutter below 1/300
@@ivg6focal length really deminishes any steady hands 😂 1/300 is already kind fast
truthfully you need both
@@ivg6 If you have no image stabilization, your best bet is to use 1/[focal length]
Of course some people have more steady hands or more shaky ones so it varies but something in that ballpark is good. IIRC, image stabilization gives you 2-3 stops more leeway in average.
It’s basically a mini Schmidt Cassegrain telescope
That's what I was thinking!
Exactly my thoughts
Yeah! The moment I saw it through the front of the lens it clicked for me. This thing is a miniature hubble.
@@candle_eatist hubble's design is more akin to a Ritchey-Chretien
1350mm is not a lens it is a entry level telescope)))
its 900mm don't let the crop factor fool you
An entry level telescope would be a 4 inch Newtonian reflector on a rickety Dobson base for 150 bucks. Focal length is not what makes a telescope a telescope, but instead how much light it can collect. I have telescopes less than 1000mm in focal length, and there's some out there with less than 500.
@@starmanxvi Didn't Orion recently shut down? That design is basically the Orion SkyScanner
@@GRAVESGGS so crop factor not going to apply on this lens 🤔 and is it 900mm fix
@@EMPERORakshaypatil yes. it will always be 900mm. it's like saying if i crop all of my pictures in lightroom to match 1500mm fov, that my 900mm is now a 1500mm.
I got a 500mm f8 mirror lens for 15€ on ebay. I used it at an airshow. If i wanted to go that close with a glass lens id have to pay at least 200€ + a 2x tele converter and the image quality in the end would still look better on the mirror lens. No CAs
was your lens also manual-only?
You should try the f/6.3 ones.
@@Histogramas i found a 100mm f1.5 mirror lens on ebay for 20€. It was made for night vision
These lenses are difficult to use and don't produce sharp images. I have a Nikor 500mm mirror...I almost never use it. What are they good for other than taking advantage of the unique bokeh?
Wait till he hears about Schmidt cassegrain telescopes
came here to say this
So it is just a mini-Sct telescope then
Close. It's a Maksutov Cassegrain. But yes - telescope design.
Also *ahem ☝️🤓, SCT is short for Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope so the telescope at the end is redundant
@emmybee5189 exactly, it's like saying atm machine. Atm stands for automated teller machine, so it would be automated teller machine machine.
@@Sentient-cassette-player RAS Syndrome: Redundant acronym syndrome
@@ApoorvaIyerNot sure which particular design. Afaik Mak has the Glas bowl as front element and my Minolta 500mm mirror lens looks like it's flat like a window.
And soft and soft and soft.. did I mentioned SOFT????
Good for photojournalism in areas very well lit.
Super important to mention that. I love these lenses because they are just so lightweight, but their IQ is just not good.
Based on my Minolta 500mm Reflex (with AF) there are sharper knives in the drawer but it's more the contrast and that long focal length often means that there's a lot of atmosphere between object and camera.
@@jochenkraus7016 I have the tamron 500mm f8 which is supposedly one of the sharper mirror lenses, however even that one is not that great on a 25MP fullframe. Contrast is a bit low and you just notice that it lacks detail, even when shooting objects closer. CA is non existant tho and the colors are really quite beautiful.
I'm still quite eager to get my hands on Tamrons 350mm F5.6 as people claim it to be one of the sharpest mirror lenses out there. Unfortunately the price is quite steep as well.
@@jochenkraus7016 that is true but this softness is really there for every distance you shoot when you use mirror lenses. I have several, from a 500 f,6.3 to 600 f/8 and all have the same issue. Depends on the mirrors used. Never had a good one.
Now... I also have Sigma 150-600 f/5-6.3 DG DN S (sports) for sony (the newest model) and the Sony 200-600 f/5.6-6.3 OSS G and the 2.0x and the 1.4x teleconverters for sony... any combination of the TCs and the 200-600 at 600mm on any foggy day with ANY of these lenses are 10 times sharper at least than any photo taken with these mirror lenses on a sunny day.
Atmospheric heat or not.
:)
What about contrast? By eliminating the fundamental waves (first order) you eliminate a major part of the resolution. This can be compensated for but is usually not.
I have a 500mm Nikor mirror lens and yes it is relatively low in contrast.
or 800mm f8 samyang for 200/300$
Just like a catadioptric telescope! Cool!
(the word "katoptron" means "mirror" in Greek)
Please don't throw the lens again. I almost died.
It was a light toss get over it.
@@mikerodgers7535 Thank you mikerodgers7535. I was able to get over it. Thanks to you.
😂
Basically just a mini sct, thats pretty cool
Nice to see Stamford represented!
I have the celestron 11inch sct 2800mm at f10. Good for astrophotography
bro can see aliens with that
I love that *Wow!* guy haha he makes me laugh whenever he pops up.
"pretty affordable at 650$"
Oh... Photography isn't for me
Thanks for all the sample images
teleskopes often use this , there used to be a lot bigger mirror´s
they are easy to manufactur
its just a mirror, round and a certain pitch
You can use it to watch the aliens colonizing the moon
To be honest a manual focus only isn't much of a concern for me as with such a focal length you're most likely better off with doing everything manually.
But then again I'm mostly using MF since I also do a lot of analog photography with a camera, that doesn't even have AF in the first place😅
And trust me when you get used to it you can get pretty fast with it too, although not as fast the latest AF cameras, but still faster, than what most people would imagine 😊
Close, but not right. It has two mirrors inside, one at the back (you can see through the front) and one at the front (behind that black disc) that reflects the image back through the centre hole in the rear mirror.
Catadioptric lenses needn't be manual focus only.
Minolta made a 500 mm AF lens, that Sony continued - and later discontinued. One of a kind, sadly.
It is light weight because of the aperture of F11... ;)
Canon has an 800mm f11 for $1000 USD. This is smaller and lighter as well as being a 6/10ths the price.
With 'telescopes' the only way to have a bigger aperture is to have a bigger mirror or a much shorter focal length. It's a size limitation more than anything else with this lens.
Lenses of this design. Were big in the 70's through 90's. From 400 mm and longer.
Yep that's a miniature reflecting telescope right there
just a smaller version of maksutov telescope with lower aperture
Schmidt-Cassegrain entered the chat
The way i panicked when he caught the lens
Finally I can see the Moon with full depth of field
Depth of field is not an issue with the moon.
S24 Ultra: Finally! A worthy opponent!
"Pretty affordable"
"Really? How much?"
"Just $630"
That’s affordable for a lens…
@@DeezBMemesnot a good one though
@@DeezBMemesSony a6700, Sony a7c ii
@@DeezBMemesbro compare with other tele lens plz
@@ivg6 okay, i'm not talking about high-end.
What weird or new about that ... I've got a 17-year-old mirror lens, and they have been used for years by pre digital shooters such as myself.
The best deal is the Rokinon 300mm f8 which is absolutely tiny, and used on a Micro Four Thirds body makes it a 600mm.
That's absolutely wild
You should make a video of trying film photography
Awesome! Now, let's talk about the 16000 ISO in broad daylight.
+ a tripod that has to be as sturdy as a house.
F/11 😂
No, maybe iso 800 if your trying a shutter speed faster then 1/200
@@redracerb18 ISO800 for 1350mm f/11 1/200? Not only will it be too dark, but there's alot of camera shake. You've got to have atleast 1/2700 if you're going handheld APSC. From there, you can estimate the ISO.
@@faaizrosli you don't seem to think about image stabilizers in bodies. secondly your shooting something within a single degree of your field of view. Third is that the physical heat emenating from the earth will cause warping in the image anyway. Forth, There is no autofocus on this lens and normally a fixed aperture. Didn't think anyone would try this as a sports lens. Finally Canon themselves released an 800 f11 lens if you need reference.
Astro Togs are going to love this
I’d def give it a try for the distance you could get with it
Try the old Minolta or Sony A-mount 500mm f8 Reflex. You'll get AF when used with the LA -EA4 (Sony A7iii or older) or LA-EA5 (A7iv and later) adapters. Great lens, great quality. And even quick to focus :)
It also has AF with A-mount cameras despite being only F8. But only the center AF point.
Minolta 500 Reflex AF for Sony A forever! + LEA4 converter for sony E
Affordable is either subjective for some or relative. $650, I hope one day I can see that as a very small price. 😊
And it's actually pretty sharp if you ask me
How is 630$ affordable because for 630$ you can get 2 gopros 🤧😵📷
You can't do 900mm prime photography with a gopro.
pretty affordable n then says 630$ 😭😭
It isnrelatively affordable since canon's 1200mm f/8 costs 25k
That's pretty affordable considering that you're buying a full frame lenses instead of shitty glasses.
Bro. 630 for any lens is mostly cheap, let alone a 900 mm. That’s the cheapest on the market. Closest thing I’ve seen in canon 800 mm f/11 for 999
$630 is a bargain at 900mm. In fact anything around $500 is considered a bargain lens regardless of focal length.
Now that I'm into photography, anything less than $1500cad feels like no big deal for equipment 😂
I thought you were holding a tumbler in the thumbnail 😅
I've been thinking about this for a while, but i think he looks like younger DanTDM.
Wish it had autofocus.
But beyond that, which camera mounts does it fit?
According to Tokina EF-M, E and X.
Affordable is more than all my cameras combined
Can you make a video about some cheap macro lenses that I can use on fossils? I have been learning a lot from your channel.
The Pro Reflex Lenses have a mount for my camera, cool.
Have a lens like that
It Works well once
Getting used to its
Character
I have their 500mm on a Nikon z6 and enjoy the challenge of manual focus and takes unique pictures
That is amazing.
Bro got a baby telescope to keep his camera feeling spicy
Or if you has new sony camera, you can buy Minolta AF 500mm F8, and LA-EA5 adapter. And you will have AF lens, yes it is not so long? but it is a little brighter
Reminds me of catadioptric telescope
Eddy Wally in the end
Anyone saying it's affordable should look up older mirror lenses in M42 lens mount. You can get 800mm for like 200USD.
What about the high resolution image sharpness ? coz my old Minolta 500 mirror lacks sharpness in photo; looks like taken with 5MP camera !!
Bro bought a freakin telescope 💀
Will this work for astrophotography? Like deep sky objects like nebulas
Nice loop!
F11 😢 you gotta shoot at 2000 ISO
perfect for Deep sky astrophotography
Anything but "perfect". lol
I got the af minola mirror lens. I can't wait to try it.
That's a damn reflector telescope
I have a Samyang 800mm f/8 and for static objects it's stupidly good. Which is pretty much the only use it has 🤣
Mirror lens on mirrorless camera 😅
so fun it's not that expensive cause it"s based on the Schmitt-Cassegrin telescope, that are the most expensive
He neglects to mention that contrast is terrible.
I shall keep my Soviet 1100mm MTO lens thanks.
Eddy Wally 😂
Mini schmidt-cassegrain telescope.
Actually the 900mm will only you give the field of view of 1350mm lens, not the compression or the actual characteristic of a 1350mm. At the end of the day…a crop is just a crop
compression of background is fixed by the field of view, not by focal length, so for compression it is a 1350mm equivalent lens. What you don't have is the f11 bokeh/depth blur of a 1350mm lens, you just got this of the 900mm lens.
Weirdly misunderstood thought of Full Frame shooters. if you shoot a 100 mm lens and crop it by factor 2 in x and y-axis, you have the exact same as a 200mm lens with less bokeh. So stop down the 200mm and you have the same image (yeah darker but you know what I mean)
@@jonathanhoelz515 a 900mm full frame lense with its 900mm compression does not magically become a 1350mm lense with 1350mm compression a dx sensor, that’s why photography RUclipsrs that understand use the word “equivalent” and the ones that ACTUALLY also know use the term “field of view”
a crop is a crop
Getting rid of the mirror from camera now adds mirror to the lens.
Was that shot in Stamford?
Sure was 😁
They really made a newtonian telescope on camera
That's basically a tiny Newtonian telescope 😅
Not a Newton because the secondary mirror isn't flat and doesn't reflect to the side.
More like Maksutov style or similar but I don't know which design it really is.
Mini telescope. I like it
Schmidt-Cassegrain or Maksutov-Cassegrain? ... got it ... Schmidt!
Almost a telescope
Ooooh it works like a reflector Telescope why no one over thought of that 🤔
Show me the moon 😃
All he had to say was f11
Attach it to a mft body to get a 1800 mm equivalent
So a Lumix m4/3 would give an 1800mm f11?
Cool.
I used to use a Tokina 500mm f8 Cat back in the 35mm Nikon days...
Wait for $630 is actually cheap asf, I’m saving for the 70-200mm at $2500 💀
i wonder what percentage of people that ow a camera think 630 is cheap. i now it is in camera world but for moest folks it's not that affordable
If you put this on a mirrorless, does it still make it a mirrorless?
"affordable" and it's 2 months rent worth for me
Does it come in M42 screwmount? 😁
Will it fit Sony cameras? Is it ideal for far away or close up?
Newbie and don’t understand the high numbers yets
Yep, it's available in Sony E-Mount. And really only good for distant subjects. It can be a little tricky to use though, particularly for beginners.
When you use this lens with your mirrorless camera, does it make your camera mirrored again? 😅😅
Good point 😂
Its just the lens, not the Camera 🙄
@@marcel4203 Are you a Debbie who takes everything seriously, or a troll?
What camera brand is it designed for?