telephoto lenses?

Messages
56
Name
jamie unwin
Edit My Images
No
#1
Hi
I have been looking at the range of telephoto lenses for my sony a350 and there are alot around, but at huge prices. i am looking at beyond 300mm as i already have a 300mm lens. I have come across this lens on ebay the link is below

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/15-30x-Telesc...39:1|66:2|65:12|240:1318&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

if you could have a look at it and tell me your thoughts i would be very factful! or even recomend any other lenses. Thanxs:)
 
Messages
258
Name
Greg
Edit My Images
Yes
#4
I think he means it's a load of rubbish.
 
OP
OP
J
Messages
56
Name
jamie unwin
Edit My Images
No
#6
have you looked at it? your thoughts? i didn't think that there was anything wrong with it myself!
 
Messages
470
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
#8
The price should tell you everything!

i.e. Its a piece of s*%t

You pay your money, you take your chances. It spend my money on toilet paper though. (not to put it too bluntly).
 
OP
OP
J
Messages
56
Name
jamie unwin
Edit My Images
No
#10
but your only reason for this is the price! you can not judg everything by its price, do you no of any bad points except for the price?!!!!
 
Messages
5,463
Name
Andy Jones
Edit My Images
Yes
#13
It will have terrible, really terrible image quality but if you're happy with that and just want something cheap with a lot of reach and don't mind the hassle to set up and use it then go ahead.
 
Messages
470
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
#16
I have a toilet roll with a piece of cling film over the end going for £20.00. Trust me, it'd be better quality. And I'll guarantee it for 30 seconds.

I don't men to be crass by the above suggestion but........... A lens for £30 will give you what most people would expect - distorted images of very poor quality that you will never be pleased with.

Its up to you but with all due respect, sae your money.
 
Messages
5,463
Name
Andy Jones
Edit My Images
Yes
#17
what do u mean by bad image quality? the colours, sharpeness?
Everything. In any way you care to measure image quality the lens will score badly. The sample images show just show soft and fluffy the results are.
 
Messages
3,174
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
#19
You must have an inkling otherwise you wouldn't have asked, bearing in mind it costs £39.99.

The ad doesn't mention what the maximum aperture is, but I'll bet it's at least f/8, which'll mean a dark viewfinder to manually focus into, yes the lens is manual focus only..

If they are good, surely we'd all have them, wouldn't we:wacky:
 
Messages
83
Edit My Images
Yes
#20
There are example images at the link. Additionally you can search for more. It's £40 ($65) which is 3 weekends of pizzas with the boys... I like junk like this. I'd grab it myself. Looks like fun. Just don't expect too much from it. The CA in the examples is pretty bad so you'll have to use CameraRAW to kill the majority of it and probably hand edit some too.

The thing I though was weird was that the shipping was £29 - how strange... If you can get it to your house for the £40 then I think it might be fun!


I have a buttload of add-ons and lenses like this. Some ROCK! even at $25 others suck even at $200...



.
 
Messages
90
Name
Ryan Patterson
Edit My Images
Yes
#27
I actually have one of these and i must say its the most underated piece of kit in the world! Ok, at £39.99 some of you may say its a bit too expensive but i believe that you get what you pay for and i prefer quality myself! Its a common rule that quality glass is much more important than a good body so i reccomend this lens.... it really is worth the big spend!


ps for those of you who havent realised this is a joke........ just like this thread :razz:
 
Messages
6,628
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
No
#28
Jamie

Save yourself £40 It's junk :puke:
 
Messages
843
Edit My Images
Yes
#29
The Sigma 170-500mm is considered a bad lens, from most of the reviews I've read. It lacks contrast, sharpness, AF speed, it suffers from chromatic abberations, vignetting etc etc.

Sigma is the largest third party lens producer. Even though it has some issues with quality control, it produces some stunning lenses and a lot of proffessionals use their lenses (like the 120-300mm f/2.8).

The Sigma 170-500mm is a £500 lens.

Why on earth would you want to spend even £40 on a... NIKULA 1200mm - 2500mm???????
 
Messages
407
Name
John
Edit My Images
No
#30
From the sample images you can work out the effective aperture.

Assuming the images where taken in similar light conditions (they do seem very similarly exposed) then:-

the wide angle reference shot is: Canon 10D, ISO 200, F8, 1/250s

the 30x zoom shot is: Canon 10D, ISO 400, 1/90s

Therefore,
add one stop for the ISO difference = F11 (ISO200 to ISO400)
add one full stop for the shutter speed = F16 (1/250s to 1/125s)
add a further half a stop for shutter speed = approx. F18 (1/125s to 1/90s)

The aperture at the 30x setting is between F18 and F22.

It is safe to assume the lens is fixed aperture and manual focus as it uses a standard EOS adapter with no electrical contacts.

To see how hard this would be to manually focus take a standard lens and shut it down to F16. Hold the DOF preview button whilst you look through the view finder. Then stop it down to F22 and try again. Now try and manually focus on something :)

Having converted a 600mm F8 telescope to DSLR use I have some practical experience of the difficulty of using a manual focus long lens. Trust me on this one, if you are not on a very sturdy tripod the slightest movement/shake whilst trying to adjust the focus will make it very difficult.

Seriously, you will probably get better results by cropping into a 300mm accurately focused and tripod sharp image and up sizing.

Hope this helps.
 
Top