Looking for some super telephoto help

[sog1927]

Not to get to far off topic, but I think the 1st party Hasselblad V to Mamiya 645 adapter has existed for a long time? The 500mm APO Rollei lens is I believe is the same as the Hasselblad version, I could be wrong though comparing the diagrams:

Carl Zeiss Tele-Apotessar T* 500mm F/8 CF

Medium telephoto prime lens. Announced: 1982. Production status: Discontinued. Maximum format: Medium format 6x6. Mount: Hasselblad V. Slow speed. Internal focusing (IF). Built-in leaf shutter. Manual focus only. Automatic diaphragm. Heavy. Compatible with teleconverters.

lens-db.com

Carl Zeiss Tele-Apotessar HFT 500mm F/8 PQS

Medium telephoto prime lens. Announced: February 1999. Production status: Discontinued. Maximum format: Medium format 6x6. Mount: Rolleiflex SLX. Slow speed. Internal focusing (IF). Built-in leaf shutter. Manual focus only. Automatic diaphragm. Heavy. Built-in telescopic lens hood.

lens-db.com

The Hasselblad version is only ~900USD used : https://www.keh.com/shop/hasselblad...ns-for-hasselblad-500-series-v-system-93.html

From rolleiflex.us: "Zeiss did make a very rare 500mm Tele-APO-tessar version with improved optics, but rumor is that there are only about 100 copies or less made." :/

Not even collectors, just anyone who wanted a good long lens for the 6000/HY6 series. I'm not sure why anyone would do this, the Rollei lens has to have been more expensive than the V version at any point....Even if they had it already, they could have made wayyyy more money selling it and getting the V version.

I've got the 500 Apotessar. I'd be careful about buying one that cheap unless I had a chance to examine it first. The fluorite element is prone to separation because its coefficient of thermal expansion is different from the glass elements in the group.

Back in the 90's (IIRC) Zeiss made exactly one 1700mm f/4 Apo-Sonnar FE lens, as a special order for an extremely wealthy Hasselblad owner. I suppose you could always ask how much they'd charge you to make another ;-).

Here it is (and yes, that's a 203 hanging off it): https://www.filmsnotdead.com/the-worlds-largest-telephoto-lens/

At a mere 564 lbs, portability might be an issue, though.

 

[MGrayson]

Beautiful shot! Maybe I am not accurately describing the goal when I say lunar, I am hoping to get the compression to make the moon a more significant part of certain landscapes. I am certainly open to suggestions!
Thanks!

I believe the traditional method is Photoshop.

There was an extremely dramatic photo circulating around the time of the last solar eclipse, supposedly from space, showing the moon casting a shadow and the milky way visible above it. The moon had to be a long lens shot and milky way a very wide angle one. To say nothing of their relative brightness. These things annoy the hell out of me.

Second annecdote - sorry - I was in a hair salon with my portrait photographer brother-in-law. I was looking at the giant glamour shots on the wall and I asked him what lighting was used. He answered "None. It's all faked" and proceeded to point out the contradictions.

 

[jng]

Beautiful shot! Maybe I am not accurately describing the goal when I say lunar, I am hoping to get the compression to make the moon a more significant part of certain landscapes. I am certainly open to suggestions!
Thanks!

Greg,

This is helpful. Here's my quick back-of-the-envelope estimate (I'll leave it to @MGrayson to correct my sloppy calculations): the moon subtends ~0.5 degrees. A 500mm lens works out to around 6.5 degrees of view across the long dimension of the IQ4 150 sensor, so figure that the moon would occupy ~1/12 the width of the image (plus or minus).

Put in practical terms that you can evaluate in the field: your Fuji 250 + 1.4x extender gives roughly the same angle of view as the 350 + 1.4x extender on the IQ4 150. So, you might scout some locations with the Fuji to see which end of the 400~600mm spectrum would best suit your needs.

Here's an image I made with the 350 SA + APO 1.4XE on the Hasselblad X1D (so same physical dimensions of your Fuji 100 Mp sensor), cropped square keeping the full height of the image (I think).

Cold Moon Rising by John Ngai, on Flickr​

John

 

[Shashin]

Beautiful shot! Maybe I am not accurately describing the goal when I say lunar, I am hoping to get the compression to make the moon a more significant part of certain landscapes. I am certainly open to suggestions!
Thanks!

Sorry, Yes, you are right, a longer lens will give a bigger presence for the moon.

 

[cuida1991]

Anyone has experience with the rare Mamiya 500/4.5 apo? How is the resolving power of that lens, and how does it compare to Hasselblad 250sa/350sa?

 

[buildbot]

I've got the 500 Apotessar. I'd be careful about buying one that cheap unless I had a chance to examine it first. The fluorite element is prone to separation because its coefficient of thermal expansion is different from the glass elements in the group.

Back in the 90's (IIRC) Zeiss made exactly one 1700mm f/4 Apo-Sonnar FE lens, as a special order for an extremely wealthy Hasselblad owner. I suppose you could always ask how much they'd charge you to make another ;-).

Here it is (and yes, that's a 203 hanging off it): https://www.filmsnotdead.com/the-worlds-largest-telephoto-lens/

At a mere 564 lbs, portability might be an issue, though.

Oh yeah to be clear not recommending anything, I have no experience with either.

Wow!! 1700mm!!! 564lbs!!!! Thanks for sharing, that’s super cool.

Out of curiosity, what are the downsides of a telescope for this kind of work? It seems like once you start going above 500mm weight and size become extreme. Or a catadioptric lens?

 

[sog1927]

Oh yeah to be clear not recommending anything, I have no experience with either.

Wow!! 1700mm!!! 564lbs!!!! Thanks for sharing, that’s super cool.

Out of curiosity, what are the downsides of a telescope for this kind of work? It seems like once you start going above 500mm weight and size become extreme. Or a catadioptric lens?

I like my 500 (which I used quite a bit with my 503CW). It's one of many reasons I wished Hasselblad had made a fully-functional VX adapter (i.e one wich could cock and trip the central shutter) for the X series cameras.

Re: mirror lenses (catadoptric lenses). Obviously they're compact and don't suffer from chromatic aberration. However, they don't have diaphragms so you can only shoot at one aperture and you don't have control over depth of field. A lot of people find the bokeh weird (out of focus highlights look like donuts).

 

[MGrayson]

My particular favorite telephoto (without going to Mt. Palomar or the Keck twins) 5200mm f/14. You can see the camera off on the far right. It gives a sense of scale. It also has a spotting scope.


I once played with a 24" (diameter!) telescope and its finder scope had a finder scope. It was computer driven, so it didn't really NEED them, but it was cool. All telescopes have a Sun filter. Almost every scope has a moon filter (it's too bright). This one had a Jupiter filter.

 

[Greg Haag]

My particular favorite telephoto (without going to Mt. Palomar or the Keck twins) 5200mm f/14. You can see the camera off on the far right. It gives a sense of scale.
View attachment 200633

Now we're talking!

 

[Greg Haag]

Greg,

This is helpful. Here's my quick back-of-the-envelope estimate (I'll leave it to @MGrayson to correct my sloppy calculations): the moon subtends ~0.5 degrees. A 500mm lens works out to around 6.5 degrees of view across the long dimension of the IQ4 150 sensor, so figure that the moon would occupy ~1/12 the width of the image (plus or minus).

Put in practical terms that you can evaluate in the field: your Fuji 250 + 1.4x extender gives roughly the same angle of view as the 350 + 1.4x extender on the IQ4 150. So, you might scout some locations with the Fuji to see which end of the 400~600mm spectrum would best suit your needs.

Here's an image I made with the 350 SA + APO 1.4XE on the Hasselblad X1D (so same physical dimensions of your Fuji 100 Mp sensor), cropped square keeping the full height of the image (I think).

Cold Moon Rising by John Ngai, on Flickr​

John

Beautiful shot John! Yes this an example of what I would like to be able to capture.

 

[tsjanik]

Hi Greg,
I have the Pentax 600mm and the 400mm FA, and have used them for a number of years. The 600 is a beautifully made lens and is admirable on that basis alone. It is heavy and very sensitive to vibrations and, frankly, requires a lot more effort than most lenses. The 400 is light, sharp, handholdable, and has autofocus (at least on Pentax bodies). I use them both depending on the application and how energetic I am. Using the 600 on a GFX eliminates a major vibration source with the electronic front shutter; there is enough mass that wind has not been an issue.
When I first acquired the 600, I did some shots using flash; it is very sharp. Any fuzziness is either vibration or focus error.
In my experience, the 1.4x works well with the 600; I did not keep the 2x.
Cropped examples using the 600 (canvasback duck with the 1.4x and illustrates the shallow DOF and OOF areas). Sorry, I don't have a moon shot per se, but have one of the 2017 eclipse.
Either a 645D or Z.
I am sure you would enjoy the lens.

TomView attachment 200629
View attachment 200621

 

[tsjanik]

Greg, Just so you know what you are in for

 

[John_McMaster]

Anyone has experience with the rare Mamiya 500/4.5 apo? How is the resolving power of that lens, and how does it compare to Hasselblad 250sa/350sa?

I have only seen it on a single web page, never seen one for sale. I have the 300/2.8 APO for my Leica S system

john

 

[sog1927]

500mm f/8 "cats" were very popular for 35mm SLRs when I was getting into photography seriously in my early teens (I'm 67). There was a Soviet company that introduced a third-party mirror lens with adapters to fit pretty much all the major brands. Here's one: https://kamerastore.com/products/mto-500mm-f8-3m-5a.

It was followed by mirror lenses (typically also 500m f/8) from most of the major Japanese 3rd-party brands (Tamron, Komura, etc, etc) and most of the 35mm SLR brands (Canon, Nikon, Pentax, etc). You could even get one from Spiratone (the home of all oddball photographic gadgetry). I don't know if any of these would cover medium format but there have to be some out there in the used market. No idea if they'd be up to the rigors of a modern sensor, but they're inherently apochromatic, so that's a start.

A lot of sports and wildlife photographers used to use the Novoflex follow-focus telephotos (remember, autofocus didn't exist back then): https://kamerastore.com/en-us/products/novoflex-400mm-f5-6-t-noflexar-1. That big handgrip *is* the focus control - with a little practice, people who used these regularly got pretty good at tracking even fast-moving objects. IIRC, the lens heads were interchangeable up to 800mm (like the Leitz Telyt). I *think* they'll cover MF, but no idea if they'd give acceptable results on a modern sensor.

 

[Greg Haag]

Hi Greg,
I have the Pentax 600mm and the 400mm FA, and have used them for a number of years. The 600 is a beautifully made lens and is admirable on that basis alone. It is heavy and very sensitive to vibrations and, frankly, requires a lot more effort than most lenses. The 400 is light, sharp, handholdable, and has autofocus (at least on Pentax bodies). I use them both depending on the application and how energetic I am. Using the 600 on a GFX eliminates a major vibration source with the electronic front shutter; there is enough mass that wind has not been an issue.
When I first acquired the 600, I did some shots using flash; it is very sharp. Any fuzziness is either vibration or focus error.
In my experience, the 1.4x works well with the 600; I did not keep the 2x.
Cropped examples using the 600 (canvasback duck with the 1.4x and illustrates the shallow DOF and OOF areas). Sorry, I don't have a moon shot per se, but have one of the 2017 eclipse.
Either a 645D or Z.
I am sure you would enjoy the lens.

TomView attachment 200629
View attachment 200621View attachment 200681View attachment 200682

Beautiful shots Tom! Thank so much that was very helpful information! It that the RRS Long Lens Support system?

 

[buildbot]

Re: mirror lenses (catadoptric lenses). Obviously they're compact and don't suffer from chromatic aberration. However, they don't have diaphragms so you can only shoot at one aperture and you don't have control over depth of field. A lot of people find the bokeh weird (out of focus highlights look like donuts).

Yeah I know, but for moon photos and such at infinity it seems like a pretty good solution?

500mm f/8 "cats" were very popular for 35mm SLRs when I was getting into photography seriously in my early teens (I'm 67). There was a Soviet company that introduced a third-party mirror lens with adapters to fit pretty much all the major brands. Here's one: https://kamerastore.com/products/mto-500mm-f8-3m-5a.

It was followed by mirror lenses (typically also 500m f/8) from most of the major Japanese 3rd-party brands (Tamron, Komura, etc, etc) and most of the 35mm SLR brands (Canon, Nikon, Pentax, etc). You could even get one from Spiratone (the home of all oddball photographic gadgetry). I don't know if any of these would cover medium format but there have to be some out there in the used market. No idea if they'd be up to the rigors of a modern sensor, but they're inherently apochromatic, so that's a start.

A lot of sports and wildlife photographers used to use the Novoflex follow-focus telephotos (remember, autofocus didn't exist back then): https://kamerastore.com/en-us/products/novoflex-400mm-f5-6-t-noflexar-1. That big handgrip *is* the focus control - with a little practice, people who used these regularly got pretty good at tracking even fast-moving objects. IIRC, the lens heads were interchangeable up to 800mm (like the Leitz Telyt). I *think* they'll cover MF, but no idea if they'd give acceptable results on a modern sensor.

There are few mirror lenses for medium format! Mamiya made one, which I have: https://lens-db.com/mamiya-sekor-reflex-c-500mm-f8-1982/

I posted a few shots here with it and a few different systems, I have some even with my Achro - the lens almost keeps up with it. One thing I discovered/realized was that an LCC is very effective at dealing with the "odd" illumination pattern from a mirror lens, smoothing out the exposure very nicely.

There is also the a Pentax one for 6x7 - https://lens-db.com/asahi-reflex-takumar-6x7-1000mm-f8-1971/

I really want this one actually...

 

[algrove]

Beautiful shots Tom! Thank so much that was very helpful information! It that the RRS Long Lens Support system?

Yes it is Greg.

 

[algrove]

Just happen to remember there is the Mamiya APO 300 which auto focuses on the Phase XF body. Not sure if you can use the Phase 2x along with it. Steve H. might know. I still have mine as well as the 105-210 which also autofocuses on the XF. No longer used since traded my XF.

 

[sog1927]

I like my 500 (which I used quite a bit with my 503CW). It's one of many reasons I wished Hasselblad had made a fully-functional VX adapter (i.e one wich could cock and trip the central shutter) for the X series cameras.

Re: mirror lenses (catadoptric lenses). Obviously they're compact and don't suffer from chromatic aberration. However, they don't have diaphragms so you can only shoot at one aperture and you don't have control over depth of field. A lot of people find the bokeh weird (out of focus highlights look like donuts).

Now that I think about it, I believe Zeiss made a 1000mm f/11 mirror lens of the Rollei SL66. Never saw one in the flesh, though. I don't even know if they ever sold any.

 

[algrove]

Greg
If you are using a lens made for 6x6 or 6x7 on your 100S as you no doubt know you are using just the center area of the lens due to the 100S's 33x44 sensor size which on most lenses is the sharpest area.

I use my Mamiya 645 300/5.6 (small form factor with pull out hood) on my M11 without difficulty due to the above using a simple adapter. It competes with the Leica APO 135 M lens on an M11.