Need Help with 500mm lens

<p>Im almost definitely purchasing a used canon 20d next week, and Im looking at 3 possible 500 mm lenses.<br>

I will solely be using the 500mm lens for surfing photos only (Taken from beach) and dont have a problem using tripod or having a heavy lens. Ofcourse auto lenses would be nice but most likely out of the question for my price range.<br>

I would really appreciate if you can tell me which lens would be a better quality and better price/quality ratio.<br>

I dont have a big budget, so these are the 3 lenses im looking at.</p>

<p>Tokina 500mm f/8.0<br>

Phoenix 500mm<br>

takumar 500mm f4.5</p>

<p>Any other suggestions in the same price range would be great.</p>

<p>One concern I have in considering these lenses is that 50% of the time the surfer and the face of the wave will be back lit or side lit with the surfer and face of the wave not as bright as the rest of the frame. Will there be contrast issues to consider when choosing one of these lenses?<br>

Your help is greatly appreciated</p>

<p>Make certain that you really need a 500mm lens. I've shot the moon with one and can tell you that it's fairly long. Check this site <a href="http://www.fredparker.com/vislize.htm">http://www.fredparker.com/vislize.htm</a> Basically if you hold your hands at arms length your thumbnail is all that a 500mm lens will see. Is that too narrow?</p>

<p>For about the same price as the three lenses you've listed you could pick up an autofocus 75-300 in EX condition. Autofocus is nice, but it's almost necessary on longer lenses with moving targets. Also, the longer the lens, the worse camera shake is.<br /> http://www.keh.com/OnLineStore/ProductDetail.aspx?groupsku=CE07999008080N&brandcategoryname=35MM&Mode=searchproducts&item=150&ActivateTOC2=false&ID=&BC=CE&BCC=1&CC=&CCC=2&BCL=&GBC=&GCC=&KW=</p>

<p>You'll still want to use a good tripod.</p>

<p>Thanks Dan, yes the surfing frame is about thumbnail size at arms length, and Ive seen some surf photos shot with a 500mm. Any suggestions on those three lenses or can someone rank them 1-3 ?<br>

Also, for my situation, does anyone think I'd get better images with purchasing a new Canon EOS Rebel XS instead of a used Canon 20d, while using one of the above mentioned 500mm lenses for surf photography.<br>

much thanks</p>

<p>As for your lenses you listed you would be smart to read this article on <a href="../learn/optics/mirrors">500mm lenses</a> .<br>

You would be better off getting an olympus E-510, E-520, or E-620 with in-body Image stabilization. That way no matter what lens you buy it will have stabilization. So you don't have to pay extra for a lens with optical image stabilization in it. Plus you can adapt almost any lens to fit on it.</p>

<p>If you really must have 500mm, try to find a used Sigma 500 mm f7.2 autofocus lens. Be sure it is electronically compatible with the model camera you are getting. I think for surfing photos you would want autofocus. A manual 500, especially an f8, is difficult enough to focus quickly on manual focus cameras, but the focusing screens on most AF cameras (both film and digital) are not designed with manual focus in mind. If you are firm in sticking with the three, the Takumar would likely be the sharpest and easiest to focus, but since you would need an adapter to mount it on a Canon you would have to stop the lens down to shooting aperture to take meter readings.<br>

Also, avoid the budget priced 500 mm mirrror lenses. Many of them will not produce sharp images regardless of focus setting.</p>

<p>Hey Brad,<br>

Check out this link <a href="../classic-cameras-forum/00RaKy">http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00RaKy</a> for some good information on 500mm's. They are hard to effectively shoot with, limited in use, and frustrating to shoot until you get a good eye for focusing and composing with one.</p>

<p>Phoenix seems to be on the budget-end of the imaging hierarchy. That fact alone should tell you not to spend a lot of money on their stuff. The others... Eh... Not sure.</p>

<p>I tried a Phoenix recently and I returned it - a 500mm f/8. It's actually made in Korea by Samyang. Build quality was good and I liked the feel of the lens, but IQ was very bad. Very low contrast. Might have been a sample issue, but I didn't had the time to test more samples, so I just returned it. I've seen some good results from an f/6.3 version here: <a href="http://www.photo.net/pentax-camera-forum/00UFLI">http://www.photo.net/pentax-camera-forum/00UFLI</a>. The f/8 I tried was nowhere close to that.</p>

<p>Laurentiu, are you referring to the Phoenix mirror lens 500 or the preset refractive 500? The factory that made the mirror lens for Phoenix also made the Vivitar which really sucked. Couldn't really find a sharp point of focus. The 500 mm f8 preset which Samyang also makes should be better than the mirror version, although I haven't tried one. I think the design is based on the 500 f8 that was made in Japan for many years. I have a Japanese made Tele-Astronar 500 mm f8 preset that is quite good for an inexpensive lens.</p><div></div>

<p>try renting those lenses from somewhere. maybe adorama camera has them? you also might want to try a fast super-tele, far less blur.</p>

<p>I would rather suggest you consider a Tamron 200-500mm Lens than a strictly 500mm lens<br>

I beleive its a darn good lens since Iown one and have shot with hand holding no problems for this old goat At 69 see attached hawk fotos</p><div></div>

<p>@Mike - yes, I meant the mirror version. Like dan before me, I assumed the OP was referring to mirror lenses. Interesting that the Vivitar was also bad - I wondered whether a Vivitar version would have behaved better. I am also wondering why the Rokinon from the thread I linked to was so good - could it be that the f/6.3 versions are better manufactured than the f/8 ones?<br>

That Astronar preset image looks very good btw. The Samyang/Phoenix mirror lens was attractive to me because of its small size and weight - I've never looked at presets because of their size. I'd still be interested in a mirror lens, but one that actually works. Anyone has any experience with the Russian versions that are listed on rugift?</p>

<p>Has anyone tried a Tokina 500mm f/8 mirror? How good is that?</p>

<p>Laurentiu, I'm not sure who made the Tokina 500 mm f8 mirror, but I think it's been out of production for a while so it likely came from Japan rather than the same factory that made the Samyang/Phoenix/Vivitar version. Because I do own a preset Tele-Astranar 500 and a preset 400mm, I'm not really in the market for a 500mm mirror, but if I were, I'd stick with the camera maker brand. I've actually tested the Minolta Rokkor 500mm mirror and seen photos from a friend's 500mm Reflex Nikkor and found them both good. I'm wondering about the Tamron Adaptall 500mm f8 mirror- it has also been out of production a while, but I still see them on the used market. The older Soligar mirror lenses, IIRC, were reasonably sharp, but tended to have a hot spots thar were more prounouncec than others. It's really important to test mirror optics before buying and preferably at the distance you will use them. The optimum optical correction for a mirror lens only holds true for a specific spacing betweent the primary and secondary mirrors. A lens that is at its best at infinety might be only so-so in the close up range.<br>

Brad-still wouldn't recommend a 500 mirror for surfing photos. If, however, you need the compactness of one, you could find a used Maxxum 500mm AF mirror and a used Maxxum/Sony digital body. Maxxum made the only autofocus 500mm mirror.</p>

<p>I shoot Pentax and while they made some mirror lenses, I haven't seen any for sale at the places I'd buy used from. I just noticed the Tokina yesterday, used of course. I'm wondering whether I should risk it or not - can't try it though. I heard very good things about the Tamron, but I haven't seen that either. I wish Tamron or Sigma would bring up a new model. I don't expect any first party camera makers will make one again in the near future.</p>

<p>The only new mirror lenses I've seen are the 500 mm f6.3 and 800 mm f8 that are offered by a several independent manufacturers. The f6.3 version gets its speed at the expense of a larger, but less convex, secondary mirror, which reduces contrast even more. Celestron once marketed a 500 f5.6 which had much lower contrast the the f8 versions. IIRC, the 500 f5.6 shared the same primary mirror as Celestron's very good 1000 mm f11. <br>

Laurentiu- maybe someone who ones a Tokina will eventually reply to this post. I've been checking some of my back issues of Modern/Popular Photography to see if this lens was ever tested, but so far have found nothing. As far as taking a chance I'm not sure if I would on the Tokina. Maybe I would on a Tamron if the price was right. FWIW, I haven't found a test report on the Tamron either.</p>

<p>To my knowledge, both the 500/6.3 and the 800/8 are Samyang designs that are produced in South Korea for a variety of brands. See their catalog on their site: <a href="http://www.syopt.co.kr/">http://www.syopt.co.kr/</a>. Interestingly, the photos I've seen online from the f/6.3 looked to have much more contrast than I've got from the f/8 I tried - bad sample maybe?<br>

The harm is done - I've decided to give a try to the Tokina. I'll post again here once I get to try it out.</p>

<p>Got the Tokina RMC 500mm f/8 reflex today.<br>

BTW, I just rediscovered that photozone.de has a page on mirrors that features a great shot taken with this lens: <a href="http://www.photozone.de/mirror-lenses">http://www.photozone.de/mirror-lenses</a>.<br>

Some early impresions:<br>

The Tokina is very well-built - all metal (with rubber on the focus ring) and heavier than the equivalent Samyang/Phoenix, which was also all metal. It has a very nice metalic hood that can be reverse mounted on the camera to save space (it screws on, it's not a bayonet type). The focus ring rotates almost 360 degrees - maybe 350 - I think this is more than the Samyang focus ring rotated. The distance scale goes from 1.5m to 30m, to infinity. The lens came in Pentax K-mount - no adapter is needed - I really liked that.<br>

Optically, this is miles ahead of the Samyang I tried before - maybe I got a bad sample of that lens, but its contrast and resolution were really awful. I spent a lot of time with the Samyang trying to get the best out of it, but I only needed a few minutes with the Tokina to get much better shots. Depth of field is as expected very shallow, but the focus ring is really good.<br>

I tried the Tokina on my Pentax K10D (1.5 crop factor) - I'll attach a scaled down unprocessed shot of a currency bill and also a 100% crop of the region I focused on. I just set the white balance to tungsten before saving the DNG as JPG - I had no special settings for contrast or any special curve applied, so what you'll see is the output at the blandest settings. Keep in mind that I was more preoccupied with estimating resolution than with getting a proper exposure.<br>

So far, I am very happy with this lens. I'll have to also try it outside, hopefully this weekend, if the weather permits. I'll post some more impressions after that.</p><div></div>

<p>And the 100% crop of Enescu's eyes (known as Enesco abroad).</p><div></div>

<p>Looks pretty sharp. Can't wait to see some outdoor pics.</p>

<p>It's pouring outside. I think it will take some time until I'll be able to go for a photo stroll. Until then, I've shot some shots through the balcony door when the rain had stopped a bit. Again, I'm showing these with no post processing and with default settings. This time, I've used the K-7 so the resolution of these shots is higher - almost 50% higher.<br>

First shot - a tree trunk, also, you can see the distinct doughnuts forming in the out of focus area.</p><div></div>

<p>And a 100% crop from the previous shot...</p><div></div>

<p>Second shot - a branch - it might have been moving a bit due to the wind.</p><div></div>

<p>And the 100% crop:</p><div></div>

<p>Brad,<br>

Hey get published in the surf magazines and sites such as surfer and now espn and I use a 30d canon and some decent canon lenses but my main lense is a 500mm 4.5 sigma. Its a great lense but a new one costs $4800 or lists for that. I must say if you want a good sports setup get a canon or nikon and don't buy these cheaper manual focus lenses. save up and or buy used to get a better lense. and get a good tripod if possible. You basically need good af speed, and a f8 lense is very limited unless shooting direct sun. I would say a sigma lense or a tamron is a good lense or some other decent brand that will work well with your camera. Unless your really good at manual focus I wouldn't suggest a manual focus lense on a af camera. matter of fact you can probably get away with a 70-300 or a 70-200 for surfing. you dont need all 500mm all the time for surfing. well hope this helps.</p><div></div>

<p>Finally got around to use the Tokina a bit. Here are a couple of samples:<br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/10433108-md.jpg" alt="" width="679" height="511" /><br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/10433115-md.jpg" alt="" /></p>