wrr wrote:
madcapmagishion wrote:
Opteka 500/1000mm with 2X multiplier = POS to avoid
So you have one I take it. Care to post some pictures, I'd like to see them.
I don't have one, but I used a friends Opteka 500/1000 to try it out and it sucked the big one.(but then I'm an amatuer photographer) I took maybe 50 shots with it and each one was terrible (too dark, too fuzzy) so I deleted them all, and gave it back to him post haste. He (the friend) ended up selling it on craigs list for $50.
wrr wrote:
I still think if it cost $800 this thread would read radically different!
If anyone spent $800 on this lens they wouldn't comment on it as they would be dead due to self inflicted wounds for buying it at that price. :mrgreen:
madcapmagishion wrote:
If anyone spent $800 on this lens they wouldn't comment on it as they would be dead due to self inflicted wounds for buying it at that price. :mrgreen:
I like how you think....
were your shots that you took with it comparable to the ones posted above here?
wrr wrote:
madcapmagishion wrote:
If anyone spent $800 on this lens they wouldn't comment on it as they would be dead due to self inflicted wounds for buying it at that price. :mrgreen:
I like how you think....
were your shots that you took with it comparable to the ones posted above here?
No mine were not that good. (good being a relative term)
The vingetting is a little less than in what I shot. The scene is a little brighter than mine, maybe PP accounts for that, but I don't do any PP to my photos.
Plus I didn't see any clouds in those pics and when I shot, it was cloudy/overcast so less light available.
But over all mine were more fuzzy. (shot hand held)
Since then I have tried the Sigma BigMa (50-500mm) and was suitably impressed with it. I'm just wondering how it would do with a 2X tele-converter on it.
$140 for that lens no way you would get better shots from a kodak browney regards john
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.