Lens on E-bay... advice please

[DigiJay]

http://cgi.ebay.ca/420-1600mm-Lens-...09707910QQihZ022QQcategoryZ3343QQcmdZViewItem

This seems like a rediculously low price. I understand it's a manual focus, which is fine.
Would this be a good lens on a budget for shooting birds? Or am I wating my money?
I have a D200.

 

[bemmermazda]

Dont waste your money.

 

[photogincollege]

I agree, i saw that lens on ebay and laughed.

 

[Paparoksguitar]

..Yeah...I wouldn't.

 

[johnmh]

These lenses are of limited use. Better than nothing and you can get some shots you'd never get otherwise. If you're not really going to miss the $$, it's ok, but it IS hard to use - in my experience.

Figure on a tripod and remote because this lens is going to be very sensitive to movement. You'll need long exposures because they don't let in a huge amount of light. You'll be operating in manual mode as well, so do some testing first to know what you'll need to do.

I found it hard to manually focus since most DSLR's aren't really set up for this - at least I found it hard to focus without the nice split screen help you have on older cameras - partially due to MY fading eyesight..... lol If you can see better, you can focus better...

Having said that, I used something very similar Opteka 500 with a 2xTC to shoot wildlife and my sons rockclimbing. Great quality? not really but I got shots I never could have gotten otherwise. But I spent a ton of time locating subjects, making sure NOT to breathe on the tripod......

Giving you an idea of what I was zooming on EXIF says this was at 56mm - I took this with my son's camera to provide context.

Can't give you specifics on this shot because nothing gets written into the EXIF file, but you get some idea.... I'm guessing this was at 1000mm... I was shooting at max most of the time.

It was really was hard to keep the subjects in view.... you'd lose them with the SLIGHTEST nudge to the tripod....

Below is at 300mm - with the 70-300VR lens

Below is with the cheapo long lens - I really found this hard to focus manually - or to keep the whole set-up perfectly still. This was on a not-great lightweight tripod, using the ML-L3 remote to trigger the camera. All this roadside at the Oxbow near Grand Teton's east entrance - near the loop road - with a zillion people trying to get their moose shot. I'm thinking that this is 1000mm total with the 2x TC that 47th street sells the Opteka with. again, no EXIF data........ after this experience, I gave up on shooting wildlife with this lens.... didn't seem like it was worth the tripod/remote set-up time.... besides there were lots of shots that were fine at 300mm or less

As a comparison.....My youngest got the shot below with a Canon P&S aimed THROUGH a binocular braced on my monopod.........

 

[Sw1tchFX]

if you're on a budget, grab a 70-300VR.

 

[DigiJay]

if you're on a budget, grab a 70-300VR.

what do they go for?

 

[Antithesis]

what do they go for?

New, they are about $500 but you can get em for cheaper than that. I've seen auctions for them on ebay end at $375 before.

 

[Happy Hour]

if you're on a budget, grab a 70-300VR.

I agree! if you still need more you can buy a 2x teleconverter. I have a 300mm with a 2x and I can't think of ever needing to be closer to a subject than 600mm. that is for me. I seen those lenses on eBay. Take a big magnifier (the ones you use to read with) put it over one of your lenses and you will get the same crap pics that you will with that lens. Remember you get what you pay for. 90% of the stuff you see on eBay is either crap or rigged so the bidding goes up till they get there price they want. I have a friend who does this on eBay he learned from many others on there, he puts a item up for a dollar then has 20 other accounts he uses to keep upping the bid. Or he puts a $20.00 handling fee which you can't see until you have already committed to buying the item.

 

[DigiJay]

nice.. thanks for the info Happy Hour, Antithesis, Sw1thcfx and especially johnmh.. this is why I love this forum.. i get info instead of insult for questions like this.

 

[photogincollege]

Sorry if what i said came across as an insult, i didnt mean it to be, i was laughing at the lens when i said it, not at you, i actually looked into it a bit, but figured id be better off leaving it be.

 

[johnmh]

BTW - after my 'experiment' with the cheapo Opteka, I decided to stay with good glass. It didn't cost me anything but some time, let me get some nice shots - the ones rockclimbing were worth the expense of the lens to me.

But - being in a position to afford better lenses, I'm thinking its worth it to me to stay with better lenses.

It's an old pov that seems to hold - quality is worth the price.

I'm astounded with what I've gotten with the 70-200VR - even with TC's - should've splurged for that lens years earlier. The 200-400 - bought used - is a bit big and heavy but amazing.

If $$$ is an issue you can stay with the f4 primes like the 300 and a TC....

The 70-300VR is a great affordable carry lens if you want a longer reach but keep in mind, you're going to want good light for action shots.

If you want a longer reach, you might want to wait until the updated 80-400 AF-S comes out (widely expected for 2008)..... you could go for that - or pick up an older version at a reduced price (I expect the supply of older ones will be going up as people migrate to the faster AF-S)

 

[DigiJay]

Sorry if what i said came across as an insult, i didnt mean it to be, i was laughing at the lens when i said it, not at you, i actually looked into it a bit, but figured id be better off leaving it be.

You weren't insulting! what I was saying is that I appreciate genuine info.. i'm not "afraid" to be an amateur here!

 

[DigiJay]

BTW - after my 'experiment' with the cheapo Opteka, I decided to stay with good glass. It didn't cost me anything but some time, let me get some nice shots - the ones rockclimbing were worth the expense of the lens to me.

But - being in a position to afford better lenses, I'm thinking its worth it to me to stay with better lenses.

It's an old pov that seems to hold - quality is worth the price.

I'm astounded with what I've gotten with the 70-200VR - even with TC's - should've splurged for that lens years earlier. The 200-400 - bought used - is a bit big and heavy but amazing.

If $$$ is an issue you can stay with the f4 primes like the 300 and a TC....

The 70-300VR is a great affordable carry lens if you want a longer reach but keep in mind, you're going to want good light for action shots.

If you want a longer reach, you might want to wait until the updated 80-400 AF-S comes out (widely expected for 2008)..... you could go for that - or pick up an older version at a reduced price (I expect the supply of older ones will be going up as people migrate to the faster AF-S)

I totally agree that quality is worth the price... but sometimes I need to decide if I want low quality on my budget, or wait a few months and get the higher quality.. I'm on a tight budget right now as I'm getting ready to buy my first house.

Right now I have an 18-200 VR... would that work well with a 2xTC? Maybe that should be my temporary route until I can get a good quality telephoto.

 

[Mike_E]

Give the 2x a miss. Too many Xs and the quality drops off quickly. Try a 1.4, that will give you a 420mm equiv..