 It says binocular - and it is |
| Review Date: January 16, 2010 |
| Reviewer: Tried this, CA |
I was long hesitating to buy it. Yes, I knew it was fully manually operated. But having using lenses 25+ years back, it could be fun to do it again. I knew it needed a lot of light. I knew it was slow. I knew it would be a tripod-only. But for my purpose (mostly sky photography) I thought it should be OK. Well, it turned out it was not OK. First I looked at a lunar pics and thought ("aha"). Then I zoomed it to 100% and it was deal killer. Tried playing with it for several nights and gave up. The description says "it's like looking through binocular". I realized that is was absolutely correct description. That one sentence tells more about lens than everything else. You cannot achieve good stable view looking through binocular. Just try. If I had kind of tripod that is transported in trunk and on which you hang additional 20 pounds between its legs maybe it could be better. But with my super light tripod it was a disaster. I could use my camera phone with the same effect of taking such dim and shaken pictures as I had with that lens. Build quality seems OK. That's why 3 stars for that. For purposes other than mine it might be OK. That's why 2 stars for the lens. Just for my purposes - I would rate it as 1 star.
Now couple words about service. I wanted to return item and as per Amazon's instruction contacted seller first (seller is from Brooklyn, NY; that fact added couple extra days to my deliberation before buying). No reply (somehow I was not surprised). Contacted Amazon and they activated their A-Z guarantee program. If I was to rate Amazon's service, it would be 5+ stars.
Finally, information about where product was made. That info is important as there is big difference between "designed in Japan" and "made in Japan". Yet I was not able to find that info until I unpacked lens from shipping package. To people who, like myself want that info - it is designed in Japan, but made in Korea (assuming in South Korea of course). To finish off, previous reviewer mentioned about what kind of paperweight it could be. My experience - it is 90-dollars paperweight. Cheap for lens. Expensive for paperweight. |
It is what it is!
|
| Review Date: November 23, 2009 |
| Reviewer: kk, |
| This is a cheap lens. Having said that, i should say i have 2 canon telephones lenses, one that is 300$, and one that is 1500$. I got this to hike and kayak and take it with, without the worry of damaging 1500$ of lens, and it far exceeded my wishes. It is similar to looking through a spotting scope. it's skinny and long, but still about half the weight of the more expensive canon lens with image stabilization and full automation. I call the canon lens my bazooka-its huge worth every inch and dimes, but its huge! this is a pea shooter i can take it without care and shoot and id birds. Way better then the 75-300mm. Nothing award winning, but i shoot free hand and with a steady wind condition I don't even use a tripod and get clear pictures. you manually focus and set your own fstop, and it is what it is! I highly recommend it! |
Where are all the bad reviews?
|
| Review Date: June 9, 2009 |
| Reviewer: Devon Johnston, Round Rock, TX USA |
I read the two reviews on this product, both good, one of which referred to many bad reviews. My question is where are the bad reviews? Were there so many of them someone decided to remove them all and start again? Cause my experience with the lens so far as been nothing but bad. I've had no luck focusing it. Not in bright sunlight. Not on any object. Lens seems to be defective,,, it is certainly disappointing. I am going to try one more time to get a decent picture with my tripod, after that it is going back to the store and I'll put the money towards a better one.
|
This Lens was a life saver
|
| Review Date: March 6, 2009 |
| Reviewer: A. Hope, Cincinnati, OH |
| I bought this lens going into the facts of having read so many negative reviews. I was in a rush to shoot some sports photos. I know how sometimes reviewers like to over-exaggerate the claims that they are making, and once again they have over-exaggerated the negativity on this beautiful lens. For 80 some odd dollars I was not expecting much, but oh my was I in for a shock, this lens is incredible. Yes the image quality on this lens in comparison to a hig-tech $2000.00 canon lens can not obviously win, but sometimes it came very close to that range of image quality. This lens is capable of producing sharp detailed images, you just have to know how to work it correctly. If you are debating whether or not you should by this lens, debate no more, try it out, you will get some blurry images but that is because you are shooting at extreme focal lengths and manual focus is your worst enemy on this lens. Especially if you are used to taking photos in AF. I would recommend this lens to anyone, professional or consumer buyer. |
Half full or half empty?
|
| Review Date: January 21, 2007 |
| Reviewer: R. Horton, Chicago, IL |
If you're viewing this item, you're probably (as I was) a.) drooling over the thought of breaking into really long focal lengths for less than you paid to get a memory card but b.) wondering what sort of paperweight you'll be stuck with for less than you paid to get a memory card.
Yes, one can cite several shotcomings: slow, bulky, optically nothing stellar. The tripod mount wiggles enough to disturb the shot. (Though it looks more precarious and complicates aiming, I've ended up mounting the tripod to the camera with the lens hanging out in front.) All in all, having played with this lens for a week or so now, I'll say that the glass (no pun intended) is indeed half full. Build quality is satisfyingly solid. For those photographers willing to work within the limitations of the lens, this'll be a treat. Anyone expecting to shoot fast moving wildlife or athletes should stop reading here.
Focusing is completely manual and, at this length, becomes a serious challenge. If you wear prescription eyeglasses like me, be certain that you have your eyepiece diopter set correctly. Whenever possible, work at a smaller aperture to give yourself more room for error...you're going to need all you can get.
This brings us to the aperture, which is also manual. One ring marked with f/stop numbers acts as a stop block to select the minimum aperture, while a second ring marked O <-> C actually closes the leaves. Pick the desired aperture on the first ring; but leave the second ring wide open to focus. (It'll get too dim to focus if you don't.) Then close the second ring and make your exposure.
Beyond the pure sex appeal of wielding a footlong tube, you'll find this lens useful primarily for stills and outdoor daylight portraiture, possibly also for some shots of the moon. In my own work photographing pipe organs, it's great for picking out some dramatic details. No, it's not the right lens for every application...no lens is. All in all, I'm having fun and am glad I decided to take the chance. |
|
No video reviews found for this product.
Recent Comments