Lens comparison: Ok Folks, I've always wondered about some of the more inexpensive telephoto lenses on the market. I had the opertunity to try one out. Here is the results: I mounted a...

Tom Brownell Loc: Chassell, Michigan

Ok Folks, I've always wondered about some of the more inexpensive telephoto lenses on the market. I had the opertunity to try one out. Here is the results: I mounted a Bower 500mm fixed lens with a 2x extender on my Nikon D5100. I mounted on a tripod and used a remote shutter release so as to eliminate any chance of camera movement. I took a few shots of the full moon night before last. The 1st photo is with that set up.
Then I removed that lens and mounted my Nikkor 55-300mm af vr lens back on my D5100. I shot the 2nd photo with that lens hand held. Then I cropped it up to the size of the 1st shot with the fixed 1000mm. The quality and sharpness stayed until I blew it up several times the size of the 1st shot. I'll let you judge for yourselves.
I think I just Proved that you usually get what you pay for in a lens! The fixed lens with extender was $150. The Nikkor was $260 both from e-bay.

500mm lens with 2x extender (Bower tripod remote shutter release)

Nikor 55-300mm af vr lens (hand held)

Allen Hirsch Loc: Oakland, CA

The contrast is better on the 2nd one, but I'm not at all sure if it's the lens, or because the exposure is better on the 2nd one than the first one.

ecobin Loc: Paoli, PA

I couldn't agree more. Also, I'm sure you know that any extender will degrade the image somewhat. So if the Bower isn't sharp then the extender is magnifying the imperfections in the lens as well as causing some degradation by itself.

Tom Brownell Loc: Chassell, Michigan

I agree with you both. The fact that you have to manually focus the fixed lens and shoot it from a tripod is deterrent enough for me! I shot several different settings to get the best exposure and contrast that I could get and that was the best out of all of them. The second was one hand held shot on auto focus, (camera on auto setting) I guess I should try it without the extender and crop it up and see if it's the lens or the extender. thanks for the
critique.

amehta Loc: Boston

We can see the comparison better if we can see the full image, rather than a 600x480 version. If you please check "store original" when you attach the image, we can download them. Thanks.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Tom Brownell wrote:

I agree with you both. The fact that you have to manually focus the fixed lens and shoot it from a tripod is deterrent enough for me! I shot several different settings to get the best exposure and contrast that I could get and that was the best out of all of them. The second was one hand held shot on auto focus, (camera on auto setting) I guess I should try it without the extender and crop it up and see if it's the lens or the extender. thanks for the
critique.

Your "deterrent" is placing a handicap on the quality of your work.
For this shot, both lenses should be manually focused from a solid tripod. With VR turned off.
Both your shots are overexposed.
You will gain more by brushing up your technique than by doing lens comparisons.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

lighthouse wrote:

Your "deterrent" is placing a handicap on the quality of your work.
For this shot, both lenses should be manually focused from a solid tripod. With VR turned off.
Both your shots are overexposed.
You will gain more by brushing up your technique than by doing lens comparisons.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: I might add, mirror lock-up.

Tom Brownell Loc: Chassell, Michigan

Ok, PWR but with my old eyesight i've found that the camera computer probably see focus better than my eyes, but I'll take that in to account and give it try.
ametha, I'm new here so i'm not sure how or where to do that.

Tom Brownell Loc: Chassell, Michigan

The first attempt didn't go, I'll try again

fixed lens

(Download)

auto focus lens

(Download)

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

Exif info of image #2, better of the two:
Camera Model: Nikon D5100
Image Date: 2014-05-13
Focal Length: 300.0mm
Aperture: f/5.6
Exposure Time: 0.0004 s (1/2500)
ISO equiv: 250
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Spot
Exposure: shutter priority (semi-auto)
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No

Exif of image #1. Soft & over-exposed. Incomplete data:
Camera Model: NIKON D5100
Image Date: 2014-05-13
Aperture: f/0.0
Exposure Time: 0.017 s (1/60)
ISO equiv: 250
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Center Weight
Exposure: Manual
Exposure Mode: Manual
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No

Tom Brownell Loc: Chassell, Michigan

ok, nikonian, is it over exposed?

Allen Hirsch Loc: Oakland, CA

Tom Brownell wrote:

ok, nikonian, is it over exposed?

2nd one isn't, first one is, IMO.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

FAQ: How to Photograph the Moon
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-26498-1.html

Tom Brownell Loc: Chassell, Michigan

A member called lighthouse says both shots are overexposed. I can certainly see where the first on is but I don't see that in the 2n one!

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Tom Brownell wrote:

Ok, PWR but with my old eyesight i've found that the camera computer probably see focus better than my eyes, but I'll take that in to account and give it try.
ametha, I'm new here so i'm not sure how or where to do that.

My eyesight is not what it used to be either. Lots of old blind photographers on UHH.
So I often use the following for relatively static objects like the moon and trees etc, then once focus is achieved I turn it to manual so it does not shift.
For more accurate autofocusing with your camera you can use live view zoom autofocus and focus on the edge of the moon where you have high contrast between the moon and the sky.
Point 7.
http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/how-to-autofocus-in-live-view-and-movie-mode-with-.html