500mm Mirror Lens shade

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by BILWIL, Feb 25, 2004.

  1. BILWIL

    BILWIL Guest

    Good Morning.

    I just received in a trade, a Tamron 500mm f8 mirror lens. It has quite
    a deep lens shade. Now I am aware of all the "problems" with these
    lenses, and that subject has been discussed many times on the list.

    What I don't remember reading is the effect of a lens hood on mirror
    lenses. I used a Nikkor 500 for a while, and it has a very short
    (Almost non-existant) shade, while the Tamron has a very deep one, which
    made me wonder, Are mirror lenses any more or less prone to flare than
    normal refractive lenses?

    Bill Wilson
     
    BILWIL, Feb 25, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. BILWIL

    Alan Browne Guest


    Mirror lenses are pretty simple in design with few optical elements, so
    my guess would be less 'effect' due to flare, generally. Tamron may
    simply have been going the extra mile on their lens to compensate for
    coatings and optical formulas that are less flare resistant than the
    Nikon counterpart.

    The 500 has a very narrow FOV so you can go pretty deep w/o risk of
    vigentting.

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, Feb 25, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. BILWIL

    bmoag Guest

    I was very excited when I got my (used) Minolta 500mm mirror lens. Flare
    occurs if you let it but is not a particular problem for the lens type. The
    total lack of depth of field with the fixed aperture is very, very, very
    difficult to overcome without "bracketing" your shots for focus, and it is
    very difficult to judge accurate focus because even in sunlight the image is
    very dark. Split image is almost impossible to use. And you may or may not
    like the donut effect on out of focus areas: not always a donut but
    definitely different in appearance than non-mirror lenses yield.

    Good luck
     
    bmoag, Feb 26, 2004
    #3
  4. BILWIL

    BILWIL Guest

    aetoo$yahoo.com wrote:

    "The total lack of depth of field with the fixed aperture is very, very,
    very difficult to overcome without "bracketing" your shots for focus,
    and it is very difficult to judge accurate focus because even in
    sunlight the image is very dark. Split image is almost impossible to
    use."

    Apparently I missed something here. "Lack of depth of field with a
    fixed aperture"? Does that imply the depth of field would be better
    with a variable aperture lens? f8 is f8 on any lens, or so I always
    thought. I use a K2 (and E2) screen on my Nikon FE and don't have the
    dreaded dark split image syndrome others complain about. At least in
    moderate to bright light .... Which the 500mm f8 is best used in
    anyway. And I d know about the "doughnut" effect also. tho I don't like
    it, I've learned to work around it most of the time. Would that I could
    afford/warrant the purchase of a refractive lens of that focal length,
    but the mirror serves it's purpose for me.

    Many thanks for the input guys.
    Bill Wilson
     
    BILWIL, Feb 27, 2004
    #4
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.