Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

500mm lens for nikon

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
September 7, 2005 10:49:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I haven't seen any affordable lenses for the D70 in the high mm range, my store
only goes to 400mm

Any suggestions?

I'm thinking of maybe buying a telescope instead... A 2000mm is comparable in
price to a good lens.

More about : 500mm lens nikon

Anonymous
September 8, 2005 4:01:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I don't know what you consider affordable, but Nikon's 500mm f/8 is
under 900.00. The Vivitar 500mm f/8 is a T-mount lens. The lens and a
T-mount should run you under 125.00.

Henry Posner
B&H Photo-Video, Inc.
Anonymous
September 8, 2005 4:02:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 8 Sep 2005 12:01:59 -0700, "henryp" <henryp@bhphotovideo.com>
wrote:

>I don't know what you consider affordable, but Nikon's 500mm f/8 is
>under 900.00. The Vivitar 500mm f/8 is a T-mount lens. The lens and a
>T-mount should run you under 125.00.
>
>Henry Posner
>B&H Photo-Video, Inc.

Nikon 500 mm f8 mirror lenses appear all the time on EBay. You can
usually get a nice, clean unit for about $250-$400. Lots of people
who sell this lens have bought it and them used in infrequently, so
you can usually find lenses in really good condition.

Only thing to look for is that there are two versions of this lens,
the newer one is regarded as optically superior. The way you tell the
two versions apart is that the newer version has a narrow red band
about midways on the lens barrel.

--Padre Kodak--
Related resources
Anonymous
September 9, 2005 1:20:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <1gruh1d2ru09breqb34r6vtutsieg7l9b1@4ax.com>,
BobFlintsTone@spam.com says...
>
> I haven't seen any affordable lenses for the D70 in the high mm range, my store
> only goes to 400mm
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> I'm thinking of maybe buying a telescope instead... A 2000mm is comparable in
> price to a good lens.
>
>
Try Sigma's 50-500 mm zoom. From what I hear, it is a great lens.
Anonymous
September 9, 2005 2:32:56 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Bob" <BobFlintsTone@spam.com> wrote in message
news:1gruh1d2ru09breqb34r6vtutsieg7l9b1@4ax.com...
>
> I haven't seen any affordable lenses for the D70 in the high mm range, my
> store
> only goes to 400mm
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> I'm thinking of maybe buying a telescope instead... A 2000mm is comparable
> in
> price to a good lens.

I'm not selling it, but I have a Nikon 800mm mirror f8 lens that was a real
workhorse for me when I was shooting a lot of sports. Fits my D70
perfectly, but I have to set it to manual and guestimate the exposure or use
a meter. Remember, the 1.5x ratio, so you're actually getting a 750mm. And
that 400 will be a 600 on your D70.
September 9, 2005 4:30:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 8 Sep 2005 12:01:59 -0700, "henryp" <henryp@bhphotovideo.com> wrote:

>I don't know what you consider affordable, but Nikon's 500mm f/8 is
>under 900.00.

My store doesn't carry it, maybe I should Email them... I never even heard of
it!

> The Vivitar 500mm f/8 is a T-mount lens. The lens and a
>T-mount should run you under 125.00.

And they don't carry Vivitar...

>Henry Posner
>B&H Photo-Video, Inc.
September 9, 2005 4:31:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 21:20:05 GMT, Joe Rutsky <jr12866@nycap.NOSPAMrr.com> wrote:

>In article <1gruh1d2ru09breqb34r6vtutsieg7l9b1@4ax.com>,
>BobFlintsTone@spam.com says...
>>
>> I haven't seen any affordable lenses for the D70 in the high mm range, my store
>> only goes to 400mm
>>
>> Any suggestions?
>>
>> I'm thinking of maybe buying a telescope instead... A 2000mm is comparable in
>> price to a good lens.
>>
>>
>Try Sigma's 50-500 mm zoom. From what I hear, it is a great lens.

I never heard of that one, just the 170-500... it goes for $1000 here.
Anonymous
September 9, 2005 12:16:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Bob" <BobFlintsTone@spam.com> wrote in message
news:su32i15p3g9i7hqttfbiincs49seuo2mua@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 21:20:05 GMT, Joe Rutsky <jr12866@nycap.NOSPAMrr.com>
> wrote:
>
>>In article <1gruh1d2ru09breqb34r6vtutsieg7l9b1@4ax.com>,
>>BobFlintsTone@spam.com says...
>>>
>>> I haven't seen any affordable lenses for the D70 in the high mm range,
>>> my store
>>> only goes to 400mm
>>>
>>> Any suggestions?
>>>
>>> I'm thinking of maybe buying a telescope instead... A 2000mm is
>>> comparable in
>>> price to a good lens.
>>>
>>>
>>Try Sigma's 50-500 mm zoom. From what I hear, it is a great lens.
>
> I never heard of that one, just the 170-500... it goes for $1000 here.

Don't know where "here" is but there's a shop I buy from on Long Island,
Cameta Camera, that also is an eBay dealer. They're selling the 50-500mm
Sigma for $ 599.99 right now.
Anonymous
September 9, 2005 2:16:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I have a 600 mm f/8 Sigma catadioptric and a Tamron SP 300 mm f/2.8 AF
LD, so I can compare these two from direct experience. I bought both
second hand in Japan, the Sigma for about 130 US$, the Tamron about
800 $, so the comparison is not that fair in view of the difference of
price.

Sigma 600
++: lightweight, rather easy to carry, not extremely noticeable
(although it does attract stares)
--: impossible to use without tripod, dark viewfinder, very difficult
to focus accurately, mediocre optical resolution, no autofocus, no
exposure metering with D70/70s/50, cannot lay steady onto a support
(because of the rotating focusing ring and front portion)
To the above, add all the usual characteristics of reflector optics,
like doughnut shaped out-of-focus blobs.

Tamron 300 without teleconverter
++: extremely sharp at all diaphragm openings, autofocus precise and
reasonably fast, can be used freehands for short periods, easy to lay
steady onto a support (no external moving parts in the way).
--: heavy as a boulder, requires a separate carrying bag or a large
backpack, no chance to avoid being noticed even from a distance.

Tamron 300 with 2x teleconverter
++: still much sharper and more luminous than the Sigma 600,
autofocus slower but still usable, can be used freehands for 1-2 shots
if you have no choice, easy to lay steady
--: as above, no additional drawbacks (but you should choose a
teleconverter made of metal rather than plastic, because of the large
weight)

In conclusion, I use the Sigma 600 only if I cannot carry the Tamron
because of its weight and size. However, pictures taken with the
Tamron + teleconverter are invariably much sharper. I would get rid of
the Sigma if I could get out a more significant amount of money from
it.
September 10, 2005 1:10:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 22:32:56 -0600, "Sheldon" <sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net> wrote:

>
>"Bob" <BobFlintsTone@spam.com> wrote in message
>news:1gruh1d2ru09breqb34r6vtutsieg7l9b1@4ax.com...
>>
>> I haven't seen any affordable lenses for the D70 in the high mm range, my
>> store
>> only goes to 400mm
>>
>> Any suggestions?
>>
>> I'm thinking of maybe buying a telescope instead... A 2000mm is comparable
>> in
>> price to a good lens.
>
>I'm not selling it, but I have a Nikon 800mm mirror f8 lens that was a real
>workhorse for me when I was shooting a lot of sports. Fits my D70
>perfectly, but I have to set it to manual and guestimate the exposure or use
>a meter. Remember, the 1.5x ratio, so you're actually getting a 750mm. And
>that 400 will be a 600 on your D70.
>

One of the things I have to keep in mind, is that I may buy a full frame 12m
Nikon in the future... as soon as they come out in an inexpensive model, like
the new Canon...

Therefore I don't really care so much about the crop - my 300 is 450 now, and if
I buy a 500 it will be 750 now, but will be back to 500 in the future!

That's why I won't buy any 'digital' lenses (other then the kit lens) since the
narrow throw won't be of use in the future. They will only work with the D70 and
similar.

I'm surprised that the manufacturers never figured that - crop factor is a
passing fad!


A matter of interest - a 500mm Sigma lens costs $200 more then a Meade F15
1900mm spotting scope! I may go with the scope and a T mount... and a unipod!
September 10, 2005 1:11:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 9 Sep 2005 08:16:22 -0400, "Peter A. Stavrakoglou"
<ntotrr(remove)@optonline.net> wrote:

>"Bob" <BobFlintsTone@spam.com> wrote in message
>news:su32i15p3g9i7hqttfbiincs49seuo2mua@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 21:20:05 GMT, Joe Rutsky <jr12866@nycap.NOSPAMrr.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <1gruh1d2ru09breqb34r6vtutsieg7l9b1@4ax.com>,
>>>BobFlintsTone@spam.com says...
>>>>
>>>> I haven't seen any affordable lenses for the D70 in the high mm range,
>>>> my store
>>>> only goes to 400mm
>>>>
>>>> Any suggestions?
>>>>
>>>> I'm thinking of maybe buying a telescope instead... A 2000mm is
>>>> comparable in
>>>> price to a good lens.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Try Sigma's 50-500 mm zoom. From what I hear, it is a great lens.
>>
>> I never heard of that one, just the 170-500... it goes for $1000 here.
>
>Don't know where "here" is but there's a shop I buy from on Long Island,
>Cameta Camera, that also is an eBay dealer. They're selling the 50-500mm
>Sigma for $ 599.99 right now.
>

I'll have to check it out - thanks!
Anonymous
September 11, 2005 9:51:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 21:10:09 -0400, in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Bob
<BobFlintsTone@spam.com> wrote:


>Therefore I don't really care so much about the crop - my 300 is

What 300? Have you considered adding a teleconverter ?
----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
September 12, 2005 1:38:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 17:51:06 -0400, Ed Ruf <egruf_usenet@cox.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 21:10:09 -0400, in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Bob
><BobFlintsTone@spam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Therefore I don't really care so much about the crop - my 300 is
>
>What 300? Have you considered adding a teleconverter ?

I have the Nikon 70-300 4.5 G lens I think it is...

I don't know much about teleconverters... would the lens still work properly?

What range and quality could I expect?

What are the limitations?
Anonymous
September 12, 2005 9:44:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 21:38:37 -0400, in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Bob
<BobFlintsTone@spam.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 17:51:06 -0400, Ed Ruf <egruf_usenet@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 21:10:09 -0400, in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Bob
>><BobFlintsTone@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Therefore I don't really care so much about the crop - my 300 is
>>
>>What 300? Have you considered adding a teleconverter ?
>
>I have the Nikon 70-300 4.5 G lens I think it is...

If it is the G, then I don't believe so. If the ED sort of, mainly you will
lose the ability to AF.

----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Anonymous
September 12, 2005 11:10:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 21:38:37 -0400, Bob <BobFlintsTone@spam.com>
wrote:

>I have the Nikon 70-300 4.5 G lens I think it is...
>
>I don't know much about teleconverters... would the lens still work properly?
>
>What range and quality could I expect?
>
>What are the limitations?
>

The Nikkor 70-300 4-5.6 G is cheap and lightweight and may have its
uses (I keep mine as a lightweight second zoom), but not with a
teleconverter. The lens itself performs rather poorly already in the
250-300 mm range without a teleconverter, and with a 2x teleconverter
is too bad to use in practice. I do not recommend it.

My own alternatives are a Sigma APO Macro 180 3.5, which doubles as a
medium tele and performs well with a teleconverter, and a Tamron SP
300 2.8 AF LD, which is very sharp with and without teleconverter but
must be carried in a second bag and is too heavy for more than 2-3
handheld shots. In other words, you should use a teleconverter only
with a lens that is already very good to start with.

Teleconverters increase a lens' effective aperture by 1 diaphragm stop
(for a 1.4x teleconverter) or 2 stops (for a 2x) and increase the
focal length of the objective accordingly. They also magnify all
optical defects of the lens by the same amount, and cheaper ones add
their own defects as well. Autofocus becomes slower, and is difficult
or impossible to use if the effective aperture of the lens with
teleconverter exceeds 5.6. All modern teleconverters support light
metering if the lens does.

Current Nikon lenses use either type of autofocus coupling (mechanical
and electronic) and the teleconverter must support the one implemented
by the lens you plan to use. Some teleconverters have both
transmissions (e.g., Kenko, Sigma), others only one (e.g., Nikon's
own). A few teleconverters are made for specific models of lenses and
cannot be used on others. Another difference among teleconverters is
their mechanical strength - some are made of metal, others of plastic.
A metal bayonet mount is a must, and a metal body highly desirable for
use with a heavy lens.
September 13, 2005 12:23:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 19:10:36 +0900, Deedee Tee <abuse@localhost> wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 21:38:37 -0400, Bob <BobFlintsTone@spam.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I have the Nikon 70-300 4.5 G lens I think it is...
>>
>>I don't know much about teleconverters... would the lens still work properly?
>>
>>What range and quality could I expect?
>>
>>What are the limitations?
>>
>
>The Nikkor 70-300 4-5.6 G is cheap and lightweight and may have its
>uses (I keep mine as a lightweight second zoom), but not with a
>teleconverter. The lens itself performs rather poorly already in the
>250-300 mm range without a teleconverter, and with a 2x teleconverter
>is too bad to use in practice. I do not recommend it.

Neither does Nikon! I down loaded their lens data and none of their converters
work with it!

>My own alternatives are a Sigma APO Macro 180 3.5, which doubles as a
>medium tele and performs well with a teleconverter, and a Tamron SP
>300 2.8 AF LD, which is very sharp with and without teleconverter but
>must be carried in a second bag and is too heavy for more than 2-3
>handheld shots. In other words, you should use a teleconverter only
>with a lens that is already very good to start with.
>
>Teleconverters increase a lens' effective aperture by 1 diaphragm stop
>(for a 1.4x teleconverter) or 2 stops (for a 2x) and increase the
>focal length of the objective accordingly. They also magnify all
>optical defects of the lens by the same amount, and cheaper ones add
>their own defects as well. Autofocus becomes slower, and is difficult
>or impossible to use if the effective aperture of the lens with
>teleconverter exceeds 5.6. All modern teleconverters support light
>metering if the lens does.
>
>Current Nikon lenses use either type of autofocus coupling (mechanical
>and electronic) and the teleconverter must support the one implemented
>by the lens you plan to use. Some teleconverters have both
>transmissions (e.g., Kenko, Sigma), others only one (e.g., Nikon's
>own). A few teleconverters are made for specific models of lenses and
>cannot be used on others. Another difference among teleconverters is
>their mechanical strength - some are made of metal, others of plastic.
>A metal bayonet mount is a must, and a metal body highly desirable for
>use with a heavy lens.

They sound like a lot of trouble... It's like the close up filters I have -
lots of trouble! I'd rather have a macro lens then have to do so much screwing
around...

The Sigma 50-500 sounds interesting but I think it's overpriced for what it
is... I'm going to get some kind of lens or spotting scope... the Meade series
of spotters looks quite nice, at half the price of a long lens...

Thanks for all the info!
Anonymous
September 14, 2005 10:49:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Sheldon" <sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net> wrote in message
news:md6dnUfKioY8jrzeRVn-pA@comcast.com...
>
> "Bob" <BobFlintsTone@spam.com> wrote in message
> news:1gruh1d2ru09breqb34r6vtutsieg7l9b1@4ax.com...
>>
>> I haven't seen any affordable lenses for the D70 in the high mm range, my
>> store
>> only goes to 400mm
>>
>> Any suggestions?
>>
>> I'm thinking of maybe buying a telescope instead... A 2000mm is
>> comparable in
>> price to a good lens.
>
> I'm not selling it, but I have a Nikon 800mm mirror f8 lens...

That was supposed to be a 500mm mirror. Sorry.
September 16, 2005 1:01:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005 18:49:46 -0600, "Sheldon" <sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net>
wrote:

>
>"Sheldon" <sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net> wrote in message
>news:md6dnUfKioY8jrzeRVn-pA@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Bob" <BobFlintsTone@spam.com> wrote in message
>> news:1gruh1d2ru09breqb34r6vtutsieg7l9b1@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> I haven't seen any affordable lenses for the D70 in the high mm range, my
>>> store
>>> only goes to 400mm
>>>
>>> Any suggestions?
>>>
>>> I'm thinking of maybe buying a telescope instead... A 2000mm is
>>> comparable in
>>> price to a good lens.
>>
>> I'm not selling it, but I have a Nikon 800mm mirror f8 lens...
>
>That was supposed to be a 500mm mirror. Sorry.
>

I was just looking at a 1350mm f/13 , mirror lens... have to test it with my
camera in the store to see if it's compatible... if so I'll get it tomorrow...

I need a new tripod as well!
!