Long lenses, who uses them? Which do you like?

[noone]

I love my ancient 300mm 2.8 Tamron adaptall. 

Not the best 300 2.8 made but probably the lightest (and there were NO bad 300 2.8s ever).   Still over 2 kilos though!

Even so, as I get older I have to seriously think about if I am going to take this lens anywhere (usually walking and usually will have it in a backpack).

It is getting close to the time when I will have to give it away (to a relative) but maybe not for a year or three yet.     I just might have to limit it to trips to the zoo and festivals now and for video, just outdoor music festivals on a tripod.

My old Fuji superzoom will have to do when i want a long lens otherwise if not now, soon enough.

I have had a few others over the years but this old Tamron 2.8 has been with me across systems for must be going on twenty years.   I still have an old Tamron zoom to 350mm but none have been to my liking more than this old Tamron 2.8

IF I had the time and the room, this would be my first choice as a portrait lens most of the time too (though being MF, a lot of misses for every hit).

I can not afford a newer better lens but this will do me fine for now (would love a 200 f2).

I nearly got a Nikon 300 f2 many years ago, glad I didn't as that would be too heavy for me now (though might have made a tidy profit selling it).

I have had several greyhound racing pics in a national (Australian) Greyhound racing paper and Australian football pics in a regional daily from it and even though i dropped it a few feet onto a hard ground that made it very hard to remove or replace the adaptall, still works fine for me.

A couple of zoo shots from today (glad i took it instead of the Fuji superzoom).

The Kangaroo shot was also with a bit of clearzoom for more "reach".

What longer lenses are you using?

[noone]

Crop at full size from the Kanagroo shot.

Then downsized a bit.

You can still make out single hairs!   Even from a lowly 12mp camera!

Would love to try a more modern less abused 300 2.8 though again, this one will do me.

 

[leslie]

not sure how i missed this thread until now. 

However i'm quite literally throwing the "cat" amongst the pigeons.  One canon fd 500mm mirror lens, found a mint one out of japan and couldn't help myself. For a good price as well nearly had to pinch myself. Main issue is my tripod isn't up to the task. Too much play sadly. Thats an issue i'll have to address shortly. This kinda fulfills some deep unconscious desire from a bygone era. Probably doesn't make a lot of sense an f8 mirror lens, but what the hell. I have set up a bird feeder out the front, the 500mm should bring them in a little closer 😀

[noone]

7 hours ago, leslie said:

 

 Probably doesn't make a lot of sense an f8 mirror lens, but what the hell. I have set up a bird feeder out the front, the 500mm should bring them in a little closer 😀

 

Makes a lot of sense to me.

Cheaper and works well and a lot lighter and smaller than otherwise.

I did have a mirror lens years ago (forgot about it) though it was not for long since I destroyed it but it was ok.

Makes more sense to me than the new Canon long lens pair though they are still good.

When I still had a LA-EA4 adapter I considered the Minolta 500mm auto focus mirror lens but since i have always had the old Tamron I passed.

[leslie]

part of my devious plan is to exploit that lightness and pair it with a small light weight camera then mount said contraption on a astro tracker i have.  I presume stars will be out of  " reach "  with f8 but i 'm more interested in catching moon rises and sunsets with some foreground object and time lapse the whole thing. I do have two canon fd  2x teleconverters from the days of film. Been watching for a fd 1.4 teleconverter but their a fair bit pricier than the 2x. 

Oddly enough, donuts don't seem to bother me, yet i don't like swirly bokeh, go figure 🙄

[IronFilm]

 

[kye]

GH5 with Canon FD 70-210/4 and 2X FD TC sitting on a packet of oats for lens support and stabilisation.

I shoot a lot with long lenses for sports.  Here's some random pics...

I haven't been that enamoured with the FD as it's a bit soft at the longest end, although I'm being super picky as I'm recording on MFT, using a 2X TC, and sometimes using the digital 2X zoom or ETC mode to crop in further.  This is equivalent to expecting the lens to have a resolution of ~250Mpixels, which is obviously ridiculous for a vintage zoom lens!  I was contemplating getting a better L-series zoom from the same time, but have since re-evaluated and now I'm not so sure.

My latest "long lens" setup is my Voigtlander 42.5mm / f0.95, which on MFT is an 85/1.9 equivalent.  That's not a long lens for most people, but I've discovered the 2X digital zoom on the GH5, which downsamples a ~2.5K sensor area to a 1080p image, thus keeping all the downsampling goodness, and turns the lens into a 170mm / 3.8 equivalent, which probably is a "long lens".  Of course, I bought the 42.5 in late 2019 in anticipation of the many trips we had planned in 2020, so naturally it's basically only done test shots in the backyard, so it's both an old purchase that I've practically forgotten about and also a completely new lens I haven't really used yet!

[leslie]

Kye, i spotted one Russian lens that i own and a couple  of takumars as well i think. Waiting for the moon to come out and play and I have some other ideas that I want to try out with the mirror lens as well. I did enjoy the link that iron films posted as well

[noone]

My old battered Tamron 300 2.8 has put me off any other long lens....I guess IF i ever had the money again, I would buy something like a 400 2.8 AF lens (while I can still carry and hold it) and I still lust for a 200 f2.

 

I just do not use any of my other longer lenses now.

[leslie]

better conditions last night, two static images one from the p4k and the other the olympus e-m10 mark 2. The first should be from the p4k the second is the olympus. The olympus has a slight crop applied, oddly i would have thought the olypus with its 2x crop as opposed to the p4k 1.9 crop would have meant a slightly larger moon but that hasn't been the case for me. theres also a good chance that the issue could lie with me so i'll spend some more time on both. I have read that winter is a better time to photo the moon as the air is cooler and less turbulent, time will tell. Ideally i'm looking to get some footage of the moon with less apparent air disturbance, than the clip i posted earlier. 

[noone]

Have you noticed that there seems to be with few mount exceptions, very few (comparatively) lenses 60mm (m43), 80mm (APSC) or 120mm (FF) or longer faster than f4 made recently?     Only about 5 for M43 (apart from some cheaper MF ones).

If you make it an "equivalent" aperture as you should (if using "equivalent focal length"), it gets even worse for choice.

Canon APSC seems to have the largest native choice since they can use any EF mount lens and plenty of 85 mm primes and zooms qualify.

Still, you can always adapt and (for stills at least) get pretty much native use with Canon EF lenses on many systems including Sony E and M43.

 

I prefer faster longer lenses and like to be able to blur out a background while still having plenty of the subject in focus.

A few more shots from my ancient Tamron 300 2.8. (speakers at the march4justice march here in Wagga yesterday).

[leslie]

super moon / blood moon tonight. Busted out the  canon 500mm mirror lens. clouds were all over the place and blocked my view of totality, still did get one nice image that i liked.   Conditions permitting next time i plan on filming with the p4k as opposed to taking some stills. May even have a new / second mount which will open thing up.

The peaking on the om-d mark two is really quite helpful. Quite happy with the way its working out.  

[noone]

Too much cloud here last night so I just went for a quick look (could not see the moon) and gave up.

I have found i like superzoom cameras now.

I already had my late Dad's Fuji but picked up a Nikon P530 for very little...  Only HD video and no RAW photos and no manual focus but geez I like it.

I have come to realise that while they might not be all that great at photographing distant things compared to an ILC with appropriate lens, for closer in (and especially in their built in flash ranges, they can make wonderful portrait setups and probably be ok for people video in a non moving setting (if you have enough light).

I think i now really want a RX10iv or preferably, the NEXT Sony RX10 model.

[leslie]

i went into town to get some photos, set up on top of mt marley but the mozzies were trying to carry me away. So it was a very quick trip home and threw the tripod and camera up in the back yard. First pic moonrise with the canon 500mm from mt marley. Second pic the tokina rmc 35-105 

[leslie]

6 hours ago, noone said:

 

I have come to realise that while they might not be all that great at photographing distant things compared to an ILC with appropriate lens, for closer in (and especially in their built in flash ranges, they can make wonderful portrait setups and probably be ok for people video in a non moving setting (if you have enough light).

 

Im surprised you don't get a bit of redeye with the built in flashes. From memory i used to get a lot of redeye whenever i used my flash on the camera still could have been my technique 🙄

[noone]

1 hour ago, leslie said:

Im surprised you don't get a bit of redeye with the built in flashes. From memory i used to get a lot of redeye whenever i used my flash on the camera still could have been my technique 🙄

Not so far though not used the little Nikon for portraits yet (other than quickly deleted selfies just to check).

Turns out the cloud went away here and those who braved the cold after 9pm got a great view of the super moon and eclipse.     I just wish my little RX100iv had a slightly longer lens as it is also a great portrait camera and the eye AF is very good (still have to hold down a button on this model in continuous mode).