Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

500mm fixed lens

  • 21-12-2010 5:26pm
    #1
    Andrew42
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 137 ✭✭


    Hi, I'm thinking of chucking €100-150 away on a 500mm lens for my 450D, some names of never heard of, samyang, falcon, etc.
    Has anybody any experience of these brands?
    Obviously I'd love a 35-500mm (ish) "L" series (when I win the lotto!) but I just want to fool around with a long lens for a while before investing heavily in a more upmarket brand.


Comments

  • #2
    Effects
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,760 ✭✭✭Effects


    Chucking away your money sounds about right.


  • #3
    5uspect
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 10,520 Mod ✭✭✭✭5uspect


    You might be better off getting a half decent telescope and mounting your camera.


  • #4
    PCPhoto
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,584 ✭✭✭PCPhoto


    i assume you are talking about a mirror lens - which is normally around f8 as a max aperture.

    not very good when you have low light - only suitable for bright days...also I believe they also give a halo type effect in the bokeh.


  • #5
    Andrew42
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 137 ✭✭Andrew42


    That bad huh?


  • #6
    Andrew42
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 137 ✭✭Andrew42


    PCPhoto wrote: »
    i assume you are talking about a mirror lens - which is normally around f8 as a max aperture.

    not very good when you have low light - only suitable for bright days...also I believe they also give a halo type effect in the bokeh.

    The samyang(?) is a mirror type but the falcon is a big long fixed jobbie. I figured they'd be pretty rubbish based on the "You get what you pay for" principle.
    What's BOKEH???


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Ricky91t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,281 ✭✭✭Ricky91t


    If I were you, I'd go for a sigma 400 f/5.6 or something. I was shooting today with my 100-300 f/4 and a 1.4 TC (making it 420mm f/5.6) and it performed well in the lighting. Although the 100-300 is meant to be a pretty good lens...


  • #8
    challengemaster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,930 ✭✭✭✭challengemaster


    I think theres something wrong with "35-500mm L lens" idea.... :pac:


  • #9
    5uspect
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 10,520 Mod ✭✭✭✭5uspect


    Andrew42 wrote: »
    What's BOKEH???

    I think you need to figure this out before you go spending any more money on lenses.


  • #10
    Andrew42
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 137 ✭✭Andrew42


    5uspect wrote: »
    I think you need to figure this out before you go spending any more money on lenses.

    <snip>


  • #11
    Andrew42
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 137 ✭✭Andrew42


    challengemaster wrote: »
    I think theres something wrong with "35-500mm L lens" idea.... :pac:

    Didn't mean those exact lengths which is why I put "ish" in brackets after it?

    Yiz are all soooo wonderfully helpful.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    PCPhoto
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,584 ✭✭✭PCPhoto


    sigma do a 170-500mm which might be worth considering.

    Bokeh is the blur in the background of your pic....lenses like a 500mm f8 tend to give a halo or ring type design in the background of the images....some people like it - some dont.

    I've heard the Canon 35-350 is not meant to be the sharpest (I cant say anything about the sigma 170-500mm ... prob not pin sharp either)


  • #13
    5uspect
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 10,520 Mod ✭✭✭✭5uspect


    Andrew42 wrote: »
    Stick your superior attitude up your hole pal. Muppet.

    WTF? You come here looking for advise, which I provided, and it turns out you don't know the first thing about optics and you jump down the throat when it is suggested you learn a little more before wasting your money.

    Nice guy ain't ya?


  • #14
    CabanSail
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 9,047 CMod ✭✭✭✭CabanSail


    A short holiday has been won by Andrew42.


  • #15
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 50,895 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Andrew42 wrote: »
    What's BOKEH???
    the shot below was shot with a mirror lens - what PCPhoto is referring to is the out of focus doughnut shaped highlights caused by the optics.

    alsaa05.jpg


  • #16
    Diabhal_Glas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 468 ✭✭Diabhal_Glas


    http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikekingphoto/3807893270/

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikekingphoto/4080938587/

    Two interesting flickr shot from the one and only British Sports Photog - Mike King


  • #17
    pullandbang
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 4,948 ✭✭✭pullandbang


    PCPhoto wrote: »
    I've heard the Canon 35-350 is not meant to be the sharpest

    I picked up a 35-350 L and it's not bad. Haven't really had a chance to use it much yet but the few shots I've taken are ok. Will give it a rattle over the holidays and get some shots posted.


Advertisement