A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Featured Equipment Deals

25 Autumn Scenery Photos Read More

25 Autumn Scenery Photos

Fall is upon us yet again and to celebrate this colorful season, here are 25 scenes of autumn captured by photo.net members.

Latest Equipment Articles

Nikon D810 versus D750: Which to Choose? Read More

Nikon D810 versus D750: Which to Choose?

Both the Nikon D810 and D750 are excellent FX-format DSLRs. Shun Cheung compares the two models to help you choose which one is the right choice for you.

Latest Learning Articles

State of the ART: The Little Lens That Could Read More

State of the ART: The Little Lens That Could

Fine art photographer Pete Myers talks about his love for the Cosina Voigtländer CV ULTRON 40mm SLii, a lens he considers to be "The Little Lens That Could."


Opteka 650- 1300mm

Alvaro Morales , Aug 11, 2006; 08:24 a.m.

Hi people, I am new on the photography thing, and I got a question. I would like to get a new lens for my camera...It is a Canon EOS Rebel T2, and I saw in internet a lens of a brand I never heard of, it is the Opteka 650- 1300mm for canon cameras. I heard it is not a good lens, but I saw some pics taken with that, and I don't see too much lack of quality. But I am an amateur...maybe there is something I didn't see. Is there a way you an tell me how the quality of this lens really is? Also I am about to buy a Canon EF 70- 300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM, but since the Opteka is extremly cheap, I would like to have that one too; so I can have multiple choices of range... But if it has no quality, it would be better to wait, and get a better one. Please help me on this. If you can show me any sample pictures of the Opteka 650-1300mm, it would be great.

Thanks!!!

Responses

Bill Thorlin , Aug 11, 2006; 08:38 a.m.

Ask yourself why it is so cheap - you get what you pays for. Can you get a Rolls Royce for a Ford Mondeo price ? The images you have seen were probably taken in ideal, non-taxing conditions with considerable expert post-processing.

Go with quality, you will end up happier.

Alvaro Morales , Aug 11, 2006; 10:42 a.m.

OK Bill, thank you for the advice, it really helped, so, what I am going to do is to buy the Canon EF 70- 300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM, and later on I will save money to buy something stronger... Thanks again!

Bruce C , Aug 11, 2006; 07:47 p.m.

Can't say much about that particular lens, but I have bought $100 500mm mirrors and refractors that were probably akin to these. While they are not high quality items, they do serve a purpose for anyone thinking about going into tele shooting -- basically, they can tell you whether its worth investing 50X as much in top gear for your interests, and they can inculcate correct telescopic techniques, i.e., use of a tripod, monopod, or other form of lens support.

If you can adapt to the use of lens supports and other techniques, if the length of the refractor/zoom doesn't drive you nuts, and if you use it enough to justify purchasing a real one, then you're a candidate for a legitimate tele.

The 500mm mirror I had, possibly made with the same equipment as the current Opteka brand, had severe chromatic aberration problems not unlike what you experience when your eyes are dilated.

The 500mm refractor, which I still use now and then, has low contrast but otherwise I think it produces a salvageable image for the price that can be touched up in post-processing (Oh gosh! I shoot digitally -- film is different, maybe not worth the bother, frankly.)

Also, these guys are purely manual -- manual focus and manual aperture setting (if any!). The latter is also small -- f/8 is as good as it gets. I can focus at f/8 (I practiced), but smaller apertures raise the non-focus rate considerably. So that's something else to practice -- get the 70-300, set it to manual mode, screw it onto a tripod, set your camera to Av mode and stop down to f/8, hold (or engage) the manual stop down button, and see it you can focus -- all of this "costs" a lot less on a digital camera because you can shoot for "free" once you've bought all the gear.

I also have the 70-300 IS and its a super lens for my purposes. I would think you should try the Kenko 300 Pro (?not sure about the name) 1.4X teleconverter for about what you would pay for the Opteka as the most cost-effective way to extend your range. Again, you'll probably need to support the lens with the converter, but just consider it practice. Later on you can consider the 2X converter, but I don't think its a practical expense -- too big a quality hit. Beside, by then you'll probably have enough money for a real super tele.

Gopinath JVS , Mar 15, 2012; 10:33 a.m.

There are some excellent $100 lenses available ( long refractor type, not mirror) provided you have the patience to manually compose and focus and use a good tripod. Of course those who can afford a Sigma 500 or a Cannon will deride "cheap" lenses and compare them to Ford Mondeos. Some of these ace photographers have never even used these cheaper lenses but still condemn them out of hand.

Back to top

Notify me of Responses