Older Nikon 500mm f/8 mirror lenses vs modern Opteka version

[Ed_Ingold]

Are you looking for a shooter, or do you juat have to have a mirror (catadioptic) lens? Collectors don't need a reason. Shooters can do a lot better with a standard telephoto or zoom lens. Cat lenses are lightweight and only about 1/3rd the length of you would expect of that focal length. However they have a fixed aperture, awkward focusing mechanism, terrible bokeh (doughnuts, and mediocre image quality. They're great for gathering light for deep space objects, and tack sharp for stars. However any object, terrestrial or otherwise, with a visible diameter has vestiges of those doughnuts caused by the secondary mirror in every detail.

 

I wouldn't worry about atmospheric disturbance in applications suited to this lens - birds and beasts. A 500 (or 1000) mm lens is not your go-to choice for landscapes. Judging from my 4" telescope, mirror lenses have surprisingly little tendency to flare. Their optics are very simple, and the long, empty body doesn't reflect much light inside. Their angle of acceptance is very small.

 

If you can get this out of your system, I suggest looking at at a tele-zoom, like the Nikon 200-500 or Sigma 150-600. I'm in Sony-land, but I like my 100-400 and 200-600. If I did sports or beasties, I'd consider a fixed 400 or 600, but probably take a pass over the cost, size and weight vs questionable justification.

Edited December 8, 2019 by Ed_Ingold

[Rick Helmke]

The 500/8 mirror lens is easily and effectively handheld. I've kept one around since my newspaper days. It was pretty sharp, compact and lightweight. In short it would fit in my camera bag and was there when I needed it which happened often enough. By way of example, when I photographed the fourth shuttle launch, STS-4, I had a motor driven F2 and a 1000/11 mirror on a tripod and the 500 on another F2 handheld. I was able to go through two 36 exposure rolls of Ektachrome in about 10 seconds and with excellent results. Those older Nikkors may not have been the absolute sharpest in the world but they did everything I needed with good results and decent pricing.

 

Rick H

[2Oceans]

Eric, my first venture into telephoto was a 600mm Vivitar Series 1 cat. It was very well made and retained its value 7 years after I purchased it. I regret selling it in 1999.

[scott_murphy5]

The 500/8 mirror lens is easily and effectively handheld. I've kept one around since my newspaper days. It was pretty sharp, compact and lightweight. In short it would fit in my camera bag and was there when I needed it which happened often enough. By way of example, when I photographed the fourth shuttle launch, STS-4, I had a motor driven F2 and a 1000/11 mirror on a tripod and the 500 on another F2 handheld. I was able to go through two 36 exposure rolls of Ektachrome in about 10 seconds and with excellent results. Those older Nikkors may not have been the absolute sharpest in the world but they did everything I needed with good results and decent pricing.

 

Rick H

 

Ah the good old days of F2' and MD-2's! I still have one with the MD-2, having gotten rid of 2 others and I still love it. In my opinion, still the best 35mm camera ever made. My avatar is that camera I still have, though I have swapped out the DP-1 head for a DP-11. I have both the 500mm f/8 (New version, a recent purchase) and the 1000mm f/11 Nikkors and I will never get rid of either one of them. As long as you pick a background without a lot of specular highlights, the "donuts" are usually not a problem. For the ones there, that is what the PS patch tool is for!