It’s even more fun when photographing little King Fishers soaring through the air then dive bombing down into the water all while taking and adjusting with manual focus
@@Poisonous_Owlgood luck trying to get a fast moving bird in even a somewhat closish distance. The FOV becomes narrowly thin and you won’t be able to see whether you hit the bird until you open the picture on a big screen. Good AF improves the hit rate massively and massively moves the statistics of getting a good picture in your favor.
If you look at the optical formula they published you can see that it's actually an entry level astrophotography telescope with the field flattener lens element group built in, plus an iris, a helicoid focuser and a tiny little built in teleconverter. The build style is much more like those little telescopes than a military lens. Check out williams optics if you want to see more lenses like this with better optics. They have focal lengths available well past a metre
The method described here will have negative effects on image quality. It’s basically desaturating high contrast edges to zero. But hey, this is how they’re able to sell a lens like this for so cheap.
@@tormaid42 i know this method kills sharpness but i dont know editing well so i dont have another option. My lens has higher quality so i dont have problems like this but i still get chromatic aberration when i zoom in enuogh
Good sharpness, the purple fringing not unexpected at that price. However spend a little more and get an old used lightweight canon FD 500mm f4.5 with fluorite..
that should be a lot heavier tho. resolution between the two would be very interesting given film equates to low double digit mps and this is a hyper budget tele. id be curious to see how either one perform on a modern 20+mp sensor or even crop sensor
I bought an 800mm on Amazon for $90 and it's actually great. Full manual ofc and it fringes a lot, but fixable and very useable - especially for a hobbyist with no money
@@SenseiFritz labelled as "BENOISON 420-800mm Telephoto Lens" do not expect to shoot cover photos for nature mags with it but as hobby or Instagram, it's pretty good and the price is amazing. Does need quite a bit of de-fringing if that is something that bothers you, so if you're a no edit purist it might not be for you :P
@@Xethl Thanks! Hahahaha.... i don't expect Wonders for that price. But seldom i need more tele than my 200mm for animals (slow or almost not moving), the moon and so on. Fringing isn't a big problem for me..... or for Photoshop. ;-)
@@SenseiFritz I'm not sure how much experience you have so just in case I should warn if you're used to digital, digital cameras essentially simulate the photos on their display they don't show you what's ACTUALLY happening. Because this lens is very cheap it has no chip meaning your camera will likely just through a tantrum when simulating because it doesn't know what aperture it is, just turn off the simulation and get some test shots to see what level your shutter and ISO should be :) if you already know what you're doing, apologies for the useless info!
Long telephoto lenses are no rocket science, especially without AF and IS and if you compromise on color correction and aperture. For all I need, my very old tele zoom 70-200 f/4 (constant) is more than enough, combined with 46 MPixel to crop in.
Im all for manual focus lenses. Everyone should have a nice 35 or 50mm manual focus lens to practice with and enjoy. I even have a quite nice 300mm f4.5. manual focus lens for my nikon film cameras. However, unless you're looking to shoot sloths with a tripod, good luck using a 500mm f6.3 for wildlife. Super telephoto lenses really benefit from stabilisation and autofocus more so than other lenses.
I bought this lens 2 Weeks ago and its great for that price. I like the stiff Focus ring, because it feels good when I have to Focus a small focus area. The black corners and the chromatic aberations aren` t the big of a Problem. Cool short, too, I like your videos.
I think I’m going to buy it, manual focusing is a really good exercise to be present while taking the shot, and it is great to seat with a lens like that on a porch and or in a camping site and taking photos while been relaxed
ND aperture means no control over depth of field. and I doubt that any of these sample photos were taken with that lens unless cropped significantly. It's bound to have moderate to severe vignetting, which is not evident in any of the samples. And a f/6.3 lens is awfully dim necessitating longer exposure times or high ISO which will be noisy as hell.
Cheap is when something saves you Time and Effort. So therefore this Lens really isn't cheap. I worry far less about the manual focusing part as opposed to having to correct lens faults in Software. Would love to see Viltrox counter with a Super Telephoto in the 300 to 400mm range at 5.6 with better Glass but still only manual. Most wouldn't mind spending a little bit extra for that.
Wide open at 6.3? That's the key right there. I would like to see more examples in a less frenetic vid. But it looks like a worthwhile look. The Leica Noctilux has similar fringing, so...
I bought this and found that focusing was extremely difficult. The images the were in focus were good. But nailing the focus down was so hard I returned the lens.
I actually have bought this lens, and when i was on a Trip in Italy with it it served me well, especially photographing smaller wildlife thats relatively close (about 5m) is a ton of fun. Especially Lizards, butterflies and the likes. You can get basically macro shots without being so close that you scare them away.
can you try adapting this to a micro 4/3 with a speed booster? I dont know how exactly it works out but I think it would be a 710mm f4 point something...
Hey man, maybe you know, I won the Hasselblad masters 2023 somehow, and Now I get the x2d 100c and 2 lenses. But Hasselblad doesnt have a 300mm or more tele. Is there another option for the xcd mount? 😅 Thanks alot!
I'd probably pick up a vintage lens at the same focal length for less. It might have a bit less contrast because of the older coatings, but should otherwise be similar.
Found it for sale $369 think I'm going to pick it up. Doing astrophotography seen a couple samples of people that used it already. Thanks didn't know it existed.
This sounds like a great deal for this low price. Do you or someone else know how good it works on an aps-c camera? And does the lens work on dslr camera's? It would be nice to know that
Well for such a long focal length and low cost, can't say i'm surprised by the chromatic aberration, vignetting, and lack of autofocus. The low cost has to come from somewhere
Nah, the Sarblue Mak60 telescope using a t-adapter gives you 750mm in a tiny lightweight package. I mount mine upside down so I can dial the focus with my other hand while shooting. Currently it goes for $129 on Amazon. 😎
No good at all! I bought a brand new Nikon 70-300mm for $200 !!! It's extremely cheap. I used it for professional purposes, it's sharp and flawless! It has Autofocus & Vibration Reduction, which means you can use it without a tripod !!! The photos taken with it look much better than with my 50mm pancake, yeah, it's true!
Whilst I agree it's cheap it's not much use if there's loads of CA. I'm convinced there no ED glass in it . And it would be better if it had ED glass even it meant being twice as expensive Wouldn't buy as it stands
Nope. Even if it’s cheap, it’s still a waste of money because before long, you’ll quickly tire of using it because manual focusing at 500mm is irritating. The lens will just gather dust. No thanks. Use the $329 elsewhere.
