Opticallimits

[url="http://www.cscrumors.com/2012/05/14/the-kenko-tokina-300mm-f6-3-mirror-lens-for-micro-four-thirds-to-be-released-on-may-25th/"]Kenko Tokina is releasing their new 300mm F6.3 mirror lens on May 25th[/url].



Who is planning to purchase one? Downsides I can find is to be manual focus and a slow and fixed aperture.

So all its properties are bad? If I was to go for a mirror lens, it would be the Samyang 500mm f/6.3 or 800mm f/8. But of course, I'm not using 4/3 or m4/3.

Well it has a small size if that is a plus. A 500mm or 800mm lens may provide high camera shake.

[quote name='sagu' timestamp='1336987181' post='18191']

Well it has a small size if that is a plus. A 500mm or 800mm lens may provide high camera shake.

[/quote]

Camera shake is exactly the same, just shows up more by the higher magnification <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



But for that we use support.



The big negative of mirror lenses is the bokeh. The construction makes for circle like crap in the out of focus areas. This is the same with all mirror lenses.

Bokeh psychedelia:

http://abbazz.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p293409921.jpg

http://jazzandflyfishing.com/wp-content/...1_of_1.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4077/5394...a78863.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_JuWrrjViyFQ/R9...G_7272.jpg



Who will worry about camera shake when the bokeh is SO dizzying:

http://www.dyxum.com/images/forum/kb/bok...1698-L.jpg

http://www.theriderfiles.com/wp-content/...-80-sm.jpg



I do not really understand why you would want a 300mm mirror lens. It is not like the quality 70-300mm lenses are big or unaffordable.... (for instance the Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS USM, Sony 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 SSM G, Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6 VC USD, Olympus 70-300mm f4-5.6 ED... all good quality lenses and quite compact).



Like Alexander points out, 500mm/600mm/800mm mirror lenses make more sense, as 500 to 800mm lenses are very bulky and very expensive. Then the IQ problems posed by the construction together with the lesser weight and costs can be a good compromise.

Some of those examples are really nice though. I love the effect on water. Also I've seen it in street photography during night, and it can look good.

[quote name='Alexander ' timestamp='1336996566' post='18196']

Some of those examples are really nice though. I love the effect on water. Also I've seen it in street photography during night, and it can look good.

[/quote]

On purpose I selected some bad and some nice examples... to give a good idea of the problems and possibilities.

Though it must be stressed that it is *very* small.



http://1.s.img-dpreview.com/files/news/1...jpg?v=1501



Thanks for your samples BC. Always good to get a reality check :-)

That is indeed very small <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':o' /> Makes much more sense then <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[quote name='sagu' timestamp='1336985261' post='18189']

Who is planning to purchase one? Downsides.......

[/quote]

.....yum, onion rings to go with my hot shotz.....i prefer mine well done and crispy please….and you know, size does matter….

That's... funky. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' /> Somehow it looked much less offensive in Photozone's very own test of a mirror lens: http://www.opticallimits.com/nikon--nikk...rt?start=1