Reading mode: Light Dark

400 or 500 mm L Lens vs. Older Mirror Reflex Designs

Go to last post
O

ortho2000

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
485
Reaction score
1
Location
Metro DC, WA, US
I shoot a lot of day time outdoor sporting events, and my main lens so far has been my Canon 135L f/2 and 300l f/4. with a 20D . I need more range and have thought about a 400L f/5.6 .

A Canon TC1.4 is an option. I have also dug around in my ancient camera bag, and found an old old Vivitar Series 1 600mm f/8 solid cat lens. This is a highly unsual American made ( USA) mirror reflex which was manufactured by the Perkins Elmer corporation up in Connecticut. It is solid glass.

Perkins Elmer are the same folks who also contributed to the Hubble Space telescope :-) .

Anyway... Any old salts out there who can share their opinions on how the Solid Cat by PE will compare to today's L series lenses from Canon ?

--
I am always learning something here on the forums.
 
Cat or mirror lenses never did get much favor. Odd oof highlights, only 1 f/stop, not the best quality images. 400/5.6 is a great lens though most say it is too slow for sports. Sure you need to go that long? sigma EX 120-300/2.8 is highly regarded as a great sports lens.
 
Catadioptric lenses, known generally as mirror lenses, are a great disappointment. I invested in a 600mm cat a few years ago (in my film days) and couldn't unload the bloody thing quick enough and get rid. Low contrast, fixed aperture, tiny DoF, manual (and very difficult) focus. Bad news.

--
Alan, Newbury, UK
 
Like the subject line says, the Perkin Elmer built Vivitar Series 1 Solid Catadioptric lenses are VERY good. Probably some of the best mirror lenses ever built for 35mm format use, definately the best I have ever personally tried. Primarily this is because the lens can never change alignment, so it stays as good as it ever was, unlike conventional 2 or 3 element mirrors that shift with age. However, they (the solid cats) really can't compare to a good refractive lens. But, if you already have the Solid Cat, go ahead and grab an adapter for it, they cost less than $30, and it will give you a 600mm lens.

I have both the 600mm f8 and the 800mm f11 versions of the Solid Cats. By the way, some of the later solid cats were not built by Perkin Elmer, and those versions have a problem with delamination of the reflective surfaces.

I have put up a page comparing the PE Series One lenses to a few others, both other mirrors and some refractive lenses. The refractive lenses range from consumer grade to L quality. I did this several years ago, and have been meaning to update the page, but have not yet.

Here is the gallery, explaining what and how I did the comparisons:
http://www.pbase.com/token/lens_comp

The upshot of it is, mirrors can be a way of getting a focal length you might not otherwise be able to afford. And the Solid Cats are some of the best of the lot. But, they are a compromise, and so they have some shortcomings. So, the solid cat comes up short when you compare it to even a consumer refractive lens, but when comparing the solid cat to the contemporary mirror lens you can see that the solid cat is the winner. Other than a mirror, what is the next cheapest 600mm you can get? Comparing a $6000 lens to a $350 lens is not realy fair, but that is the real world gap between quality refractive and mirror lenses.

T!
--

 
I have a few lens including a 500mm f5.6 mirror lens that I got for astronomy. I tested this lens against other lens including the Bigma. The Mirror lens will not be as sharp and have less contrast. However they can make a mirror lens (like a SCT) that is very sharp (I am talking about a good quality telescope). they are all manual yet they can produce very sharp images.

Bob
 
Token said:
Other than a mirror, what is the
next cheapest 600mm you can get? Comparing a $6000 lens to a $350
lens is not realy fair, but that is the real world gap between
quality refractive and mirror lenses.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the 400/5.6L with a 1.4x TC?
--
Misha
 
I don't have a Solid Cat, but do have and use the Sigma 600/8 Mirror... In a nutshell, no, any Mirror will not equal an L lens... OTOH, I paid $750CDN for my 600 vs. $11000CDN!! for the 600/4 Canon (10 months ago).. for me the question was a no-brainer... the $11K was simply out of reach and here in Vancouver where I live, any wildlife is usually a good chunk of cold water away, so in order to capture it with any degree of close-up, I need at least 600mm.. often I use my 1.4xTC as well..

The Upside: Cost, Weight (2 pounds), Size (5.5" long), that amazing MF feel..

The Downside: f/8 or f/11 vs. f/4 or f/5.6, sharpness (just not as good as an L), No AF (not a detriment to ME, however others are welcome to differ!)

Notice I don't mention the "funky donut bokeh" - the answer is to learn how to use the lens - unless there are OOF bright specular highlights (sun on whitecaps, sun on car hood, etc) - the issue is simply non-existent..

Try using your Cat.. you might just like it... and to those naysayers - "it's just another tool in the bag"

Cheers,
Scotty
--
  • How deep does the Rabbit Hole go? *
Free the Images
Best Light**
 
I appreciate all the great replies, and the link to luminous-landscapes was very helpful. I shoot a lot of football games from an upper seating section and my Canon 300mm f/4 L series IS lens just does not have enough magiifcation.

I therefore have three options:

1. Haul out my ancient 600 mm solid glass cat and try it.
2.. Buy a Canon 1.4 TC and slap it on the 300mm to get 420 mm
3.. Buy a Canon 400 mm f 5.6 L series non-IS.

I value snappy contrasty pictures. I am therefore now leaning towards the 400 mm f/ 5.6. . The other two Canon 400mm optics, namely the faster L and the DO lens are a bit too pricey for me . I am not a professional photographer.
--
I am always learning something here on the forums.
 
Try the Solid Cat out...it will only cost you about $25 for the T to EOS adapter, and then you will have it to see for yourself. But, your best bet would be to get the 1.4 TC for your 300mm f4. This will give you a 420mm f5.6 that is very high quality. Upressing an image from this combo should beat any catadioptric on the market....short of a multi k $ telescope tube.

T!
--

 
misha said:
Perhaps the 400/5.6L with a 1.4x TC?
--
Misha
Click to expand...
Since the OP already has the 300mm f4 L IS I would say just get the 1.4 and 2.0 TC. Even if he does not have a 1 series camera, and thus may loose AF with the 2x, he would have had to manually focus the catadioptric lens anyway. So, he is out nothing, retains aperture control and IS, and has a 600mm f8 that will probably beat the pants off any catadioptric.

T!
--

 
ortho2000 said:
I shoot a lot of day time outdoor sporting events, and my main
lens so far has been my Canon 135L f/2 and 300l f/4. with a 20D
. I need more range and have thought about a 400L f/5.6 .

A Canon TC1.4 is an option. I have also dug around in my ancient
camera bag, and found an old old Vivitar Series 1 600mm f/8 solid
cat lens. This is a highly unsual American made ( USA) mirror
reflex which was manufactured by the Perkins Elmer corporation up
in Connecticut. It is solid glass.
Click to expand...
I am not sure you want that lens for sports. unless the background will be totaly blured, the bokeh will be distracting and ugly probably. mirror lenses are also quite soft and the bokeh with a donnut shape is not exactly pretty.
ortho2000 said:
Perkins Elmer are the same folks who also contributed to the
Hubble Space telescope :-) .

Anyway... Any old salts out there who can share their opinions
on how the Solid Cat by PE will compare to today's L series
lenses from Canon ?
Click to expand...
I never tried that mirror lens but no mirror lens can compare to a L lens. they are usualy soft and have horrible bokeh and lack of contrast.
ortho2000 said:
--
I am always learning something here on the forums.
Click to expand...
--



Please do not start new thread for private message to me but send them to me via email instead! thanks.
 
Token said:
Like the subject line says, the Perkin Elmer built Vivitar Series 1
Solid Catadioptric lenses are VERY good. Probably some of the best
mirror lenses ever built for 35mm format use, definately the best I
have ever personally tried. Primarily this is because the lens can
never change alignment, so it stays as good as it ever was, unlike
conventional 2 or 3 element mirrors that shift with age. However,
they (the solid cats) really can't compare to a good refractive
lens. But, if you already have the Solid Cat, go ahead and grab an
adapter for it, they cost less than $30, and it will give you a
600mm lens.

I have both the 600mm f8 and the 800mm f11 versions of the Solid
Cats. By the way, some of the later solid cats were not built by
Perkin Elmer, and those versions have a problem with delamination
of the reflective surfaces.

I have put up a page comparing the PE Series One lenses to a few
others, both other mirrors and some refractive lenses. The
refractive lenses range from consumer grade to L quality. I did
this several years ago, and have been meaning to update the page,
but have not yet.

Here is the gallery, explaining what and how I did the comparisons:
http://www.pbase.com/token/lens_comp

The upshot of it is, mirrors can be a way of getting a focal length
you might not otherwise be able to afford. And the Solid Cats are
some of the best of the lot. But, they are a compromise, and so
they have some shortcomings. So, the solid cat comes up short when
you compare it to even a consumer refractive lens, but when
comparing the solid cat to the contemporary mirror lens you can see
that the solid cat is the winner. Other than a mirror, what is the
next cheapest 600mm you can get? Comparing a $6000 lens to a $350
lens is not realy fair, but that is the real world gap between
quality refractive and mirror lenses.
Click to expand...
are you sure? you can get the new Canon 70-300 IS and put a 2x on it and still get better results. you can even get a cheapo 75-300mm Canon lens and put a 2x on it and get better results than that.

you will also have more control on the aperture and better bokeh.

in order to get a superb image quality yes the 600mm F4 IS is an awesome lens, but if you only want to get better image quality than any mirror lens, then you don't have to spend 7K...ony about 300$ will do it easily.
Member said:
T!
--

Click to expand...
--



Please do not start new thread for private message to me but send them to me via email instead! thanks.
 
Token said:
misha said:
Perhaps the 400/5.6L with a 1.4x TC?
--
Misha
Click to expand...
Since the OP already has the 300mm f4 L IS I would say just get the
1.4 and 2.0 TC. Even if he does not have a 1 series camera, and
thus may loose AF with the 2x, he would have had to manually focus
the catadioptric lens anyway. So, he is out nothing, retains
aperture control and IS, and has a 600mm f8 that will probably beat
the pants off any catadioptric.
Click to expand...
if he gets the Tamron 2x he will have AF still and he will have much better image quality than the mirror lens.

it will be 600mm f8 just the same but so much better. the Tamron standard does not report to the camera so AF will work still.
Member said:
T!
--

Click to expand...
--



Please do not start new thread for private message to me but send them to me via email instead! thanks.
 
Daniella said:
Token said:
snip
The upshot of it is, mirrors can be a way of getting a focal length
you might not otherwise be able to afford. And the Solid Cats are
some of the best of the lot. But, they are a compromise, and so
they have some shortcomings. So, the solid cat comes up short when
you compare it to even a consumer refractive lens, but when
comparing the solid cat to the contemporary mirror lens you can see
that the solid cat is the winner. Other than a mirror, what is the
next cheapest 600mm you can get? Comparing a $6000 lens to a $350
lens is not realy fair, but that is the real world gap between
quality refractive and mirror lenses.
Click to expand...
are you sure? you can get the new Canon 70-300 IS and put a 2x on
it and still get better results. you can even get a cheapo
75-300mm Canon lens and put a 2x on it and get better results than
that.

you will also have more control on the aperture and better bokeh.

in order to get a superb image quality yes the 600mm F4 IS is an
awesome lens, but if you only want to get better image quality than
any mirror lens, then you don't have to spend 7K...ony about 300$
will do it easily.
Click to expand...
I was talking about native 600mm lenses, not lenses with TC's on them. Also, I was talking about quality lenses at that focal length. Like them or not, the PE Solid Cats were high end lenses in their day, selling for just under $1000 (list price of about $1500 if I remember right) in the mid-early 80's and still today bringing prices on the used market that are more than the optically very good 100-300 f5.6 L. As you may have seen in one of my other post, I also agree that putting a TC on an EF mount 300mm would be the better way to go.

While I have not tried the new 70-300 IS I have tried (and own) the older 75-300 IS, essentially the same lens as the non-IS 75-300 USM. Adding a TC to this lens only made a bad lens soooo much worse. Although I did not shoot side by sides against the mirror lenses I am not all that sure the 75-300 IS plus TC was any better than the mirror. It was just flat out not good. Certainly not worth any effort to keep.

T!
--

 
Token, you are correct.. the older 75-300 (non IS) with either 1.4x or 2X TC does NOT match the quality of my Sigma 600/8 ... severe CA and less sharpness.. also, the AF becomes unuseable for anything changing distance quickly.. slow AF made slower by the TC..

Cheers,
Scotty
--
  • How deep does the Rabbit Hole go? *
Free the Images
Best Light**
 
Those old solid cats are really cool, though I agree that a modern refractive design will outperform it. Depends on your priorities. The old Vivitar will likely outperform current mirror lenses, because they're so cheap.

I read recently on this forum about an eBay auction where you can get a focus confirmation chip that you can attach to any MF lens and have your Canon confirm focus. Could be handy, if you decide to try it, because focusing these on the chintzy screens Canon supplies these days is difficult.

But seriously, it sounds like you don't use the cat any more. I can send you my address, if you'd like to give it a good home. ;-)
 
Sooo...

Perkins Elmer are the same folks who also contributed to the Hubble Space telescope......

I guess that means that your lens is unsharp and requires a visit from the Space Shuttle to install corrective optics???

:) Paul

P.S. I think that it's actually Perkin-Elmer. They also make scientific instruments and that's how I got to know the company.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Upgrade from eos RP or buy a new lens (EF 100-400 ii L OR RF 100-500
Replies
2
Views
548
RipTaylor
R
J
GAS strikes again: Searching for the perfect CAT
Replies
2
Views
3
Jan Chelminski
J
O
1300mm Mak on the Yi M1
Replies
16
Views
138
Olyinaz
O
A
5Dsr with Tamron 18-400
Replies
12
Views
561
Dragonrider
Dragonrider
Rifat555
Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 L IS USM Lens
Replies
3
Views
3K
Mike51880
M

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top