I finally got around to making a video about a mirror lens. Surprising to some it is actually a great optic. Light, well built and with good image quality it is very compelling at its price point. Link to the high resolution raw files:
Very good video and assessment Finn. To add a bit more info: - there are three versions of the tamron SP 500mm. Yours is the very first version 55B, introduced 1979. Then there was a later version 55B which has a separate lens hood. Then the 55B was superceded by the 55BB in 1983, this is easily distinguished because it does not have the tripod mount. The 55BB is supposed to be an optical improvement on 55B however based on my pics taken with multiple versions of both I can say that any optical difference is negligible. As you so rightly emphasise in your video, using these lenses is all about nailing critical focus, and good, diligent, extreme telephoto technique. - the contrast issues (and the difficulties of using these lenses multiply) rapidly become apparent as soon as the light is less than good. You have excellent bright light down there in Oz, perfect for mirror lens use, not so much here in UK...! - it's pertinent to make people aware that because the secondary mirror blocks some of the light, these lenses are slower than f8 by about another 2/3 stop - T-stop of about f10. - the rear adaptall lens cover is often missing. Use instead either: 1. a canon camera body cap. 2. An old canon FD rear lens cap (new ones can still be purchased cheaply online) slightly modded - half of the split flange needs to be cut off. - these lenses never IME suffer from silvering deterioration (unlike the sigma 600mm mirror which might be considered an alternative option). I have encountered sample variation - a couple of duff ones with sub par resolution, the tolerances on these are even tighter than with non-mirrors. Also incipient separation of an optical group in the rear optical asembly, indicated by rainbowing, however I have never been able to notice any effect on iq from that. In case of fungus they are one of the most straightfoward lenses to open up and clean. I totally agree with your recommendation.
I know that this is 3 years after the fact, but do you happen to know if retrofitting a tripod mount to a 55BB is possible? I'm a bit worried for my camera holding this thing on a tripod
@@MaxAndHisBike Well anything is possible but is retrofitting a TM practical? IMO no. It is possible to contrive an extension plate that you screw onto the camera and that extends forward under the lens with a support point. But frankly this lens is not that big and heavy. Look for the 55B's if you really want the TM. My recommended piece of kit when using this and other mirrors is a bean bag, and I commonly have a short forward extending plate diy'ed from perspex on the camera because that keeps the focus ring clear of the bean bag.
I've used one for airshows by pre focussing on a foreground feature and creating a focus trap for the aircraft, against a blue sky background obviously you cannot tell it is a mirror and it is sharp enough for a subject at near infinity
As it happens, I was weighing up whether to get one of these, or a later version of the tokina 400mm, and this video has helped me make my decision. That might be a unique comparison/case to make in a video, but it was exactly what I needed to hear!
Note that as originally sold, this lens came with a protective case which also holds a kit of provided 30.5mm filters to fit the rear holder threads. Four filters covering both color and B%W usage. The lens hood is a necessary use to avoid degrading flare in a lens which suffers low contrast at the best of times. I've never before seen this lens with a sliding lens hood. Mine and all I've seen before use a solid hood which threads into the 82mm front. A sliding hood would make using 82mm filters a bit more convenient. This was probably a running modification prior to updating the lens to the 55BB successor model.
I find often, but of course not always, that the bokeh is very painterly on mirror lenses. They remind me of aquarelle brush strokes. For non-mushy bokeh it is rather charming.
If you use a fast enough shutter speed, wouldn't you be able to continuously shoot frames while turning the focus ring to increase your keeper rate? You'd bound to have a few frames in focus I'd assume.
From 1991 till 2003 I had this Lens and really liked it. It did get Damaged and it had what looked like a chip in the Main Mirror. Insurance paid for Tamron to repair it. During the 80s I had the Tokina 500 f8 Mirror, in both Canon and Nikon Mounts. It wasn't as nice a Lens as the Tamron, and it was smaller and had a T-Stop of about f11. In 2006, I got the 3rd Gen Nikkor 500 reflex, while I liked it, I missed the Tamron.
To be honest, the bokeh is quite nice to me. I get what you're saying about the subject being the focal point but the bokeh makes it look like a painting. Either way, paintings and photography are both art forms and the price tag is still quite a good tradeoff for me when looking in to something like this.
Have enjoyed this lens since '85 using Nikon bodies. Made me a better photographer before auto focus came to be. For the money this lens gets you in the telephoto game with stunning results. Best lens for the buck bar non!
These Cassegrain designs are still very popular in telescope design (and are still widely manufactured) and provide some of the sharpest images around.
Thank you for the great lens review. Tamron made 2 versions of the Adaptall SP 500mm f/8 mirror lens, the 55B and 55BB. Yours is the earlier 55B, which has the attached tripod collar. The later 55BB had a slightly different optical setup that was meant to improve its close focus performance. But the later 55BB did away with the tripod collar and 30mm filters. I don't think I'd shoot this lens without being on a Monopod. BTW, I use an X-H1 with IBIS, so I'll get a few stops of stabilization, but I also shoot lots of film cameras, which is why the Adaptall mount is so attractive for me. And I shoot a good amount of black and white film, so the various 30mm filters of the 55B lens are also attractive to me.
Sharpness is so problematic with longer telephoto lenses, as the issues which appear usually concern how still the lens and camera are held rather than the optical performance of the lens. I have an extremely sharp and fast 400mm, also usable with a 1.4 extender, both way sharper than my Tamron 500 mirror lens like shown here. But it's size and weight practically prohibit any use where I cannot tote a large and heavy tripod as well. While the Tamron would benefit from such a rock solid support, I can get by using it with a gunstock camera support or (better) a monopod. Both of these supports make it marginally usable just walking around in nature. The difference is an adequately sharp, if not perfect, image versus no shot at all. For those seeking a macro focusing telephoto lens to maintain distance from the subject, consider a 300mm 5.6 lens made by Tamron in its SP line. While a shorter focaql length, it gives excellent sharpness and contrast compared to the mirror 500mm SP here. It is little known and was never a big seller, so finding one may be difficult. On the plus side, when found, they are usually inexpensive, as sellers are put off by the small maximum aperture and know nothing of the extra design and optical efforts Tamron employed to make the lens.
i can't tell if im just really bad at focusing or if my mirror lens is actually not sharp at all... i tried to take a picture of my ring from across the room and tried to move the focus ring a lil tiny bit at a time and they are all not sharp so... what am I doing wrong ;-;
Hey. I just ordered this lens from KEH ( I believed they still had one more left) , also together I added a Tamron 2x teleconverter. Cheap! Now regarding the adapter: I ordered from eBay it's a Tamron to NEX. Tamron-NEX $16
Difficult to use would be an understatement - it's possible but yeah really hard, if you use this lens a lot you'll get used to it and you might be able to land focused shots on moving stuff but for the most part it's best to use on somewhat static subject, if you have it setup on a tripod you might have an easier time but yeah... Autofocus is for sissies anyway! :P
Yes, of course. You put the Nikon "F" adapter and add Lushnikov "Dandellion" chip for Nikon. The focus will be of course manual, but otherwise you will have all the benefits. With new Nikon Z50 / Nikon Zfc (or full-frame Nikon Z) + any of the autofocus adapters you will even get autofocus.
it is a 500 mm lens only, so it is ok for the moon, but definitely not ok for any other planet where you see just a tiny bulge if you use it with some standard DSLR. Might be ok if you adapt a webcam with a sensor with generally smaller pixels than DSLR
🤔You should be able to stop the lens down restricting the aperture at the 37mm filter ring. You simply cut out a piece of black paper with a hole whatever size you want to stepdown to and place it between the rear element and a filter. I guess you are then making an already dark lens even darker 🙄
Great video. I have the 55bb version. Works great with IBIS and focus magnification on my Sony A7ii. I think these lenses get a bad rep because of how light weight they are. Slightest vibration will cause the image to blur even on a tripod; a DSLR mirror movement will cause motion blur in your shots. Even some shutters will. I use electronic front curtain shutter, and IBIS certainly helps with the vibration issue. Also since the lens opening has the donut thing going on, I suspect that the bokeh donuts are bigger than if they were just balls with the same area. This causes the depth of field to be much thinner, but I haven't tested this against a conventional lens at 500mm f/8 yet. Nailing focus and beating vibrations this lens can perform great, and I often throw it in my bag just in case.
@@chinitopinoy1726 I have tried a cheap Tamron Adaptall to Sony E adapter and it was very wobbly. I do recommend K&F Concept adapters though. Don't cheap out.
Hi, you are using photo shop to change the actual photo you have taken. It is quite interesting to see raw photos directly from camera, to appreciate the actual performance of the camera, lens and of course your skills. Based upon the photo-shopped pictures, people might be disheartened to find that the real pictures are not that good. Am I right?
Great review impressed with the results from lens trawled internet for one and found mint one for £60 not arrived yet have old Pentax Dslr photo only though . Hoping to use mainly on Micro 4/3 for photo/ video do you think ? should this should be ok with large crop factor
@@wsmfilmdocandeventsweston-4230 Used a PK to Micro 4/3 that I already had for my old Pentax lens , the Tamron 500mm lens has a tamron adaptall PK mount it seems to work ok get full focus . Not sure if there is tamron adaptall to M 4/3 but would have careful with focus if sensor to lens gets to short , use mine some times with PK old 2x convertor
@@wsmfilmdocandeventsweston-4230 Pleased with mine even with tiny depth of field and doughnut bokeh its bugger to focus but you can get great results . Loads better than them cheap new mirror len's they seem to mess up colour and contrast image ends up looking like a cheap webcam
the lense is 7-8cm only, with a focal of 500mm, you can shoot only bright and big targets. Great for shooting Orion nebula (I did that with a motorized mount) or Andromeda galaxy, but probably not much more.
Thanks for debunking the myths about the mirror lenses, until you tell someone, in most of the photographs people wouldn't be able to identify that it was shot with a mirror lens, Having said that I must say you are a brilliant wild life photographer.
More than sharp considering the iso used. The detail at 100% crop was impressive for a mirror design. Perhaps before you go around being a bully to people, you should know what you're talking about.
Wha‽ Considering the device you’re watching this on, the distribution channel and the ratio these were shown at, there is no chance you could glean hysterical sharpness obsessed data from this. I find it ridiculous how everyone thinks they are an authority on sharpness.
