No wonder I liked that "SOL" shot so much. Like you, I don't mind the Bokeh this lens produces. Thanks so much for producing such a great writeup.

Nice work Carl, and you got some really nice shots with it too!

This one is way down my list, but for some it's big pull will be the reach..so it may appeal more to them. It is unique to A mount though, that is not a bad thing.

Glad you enjoyed it, and thanks for the compliments on the shots.

Still working this lens and getting to know it. I have a 2x converter coming today that I think is going to work with it (crosses fingers), manual focus is fine and yeah it will make it stop down to f13 in T value, but thats ok to me.

Someone nice told me we have a view of the moon, venus, and saturn all at once... I'll see if I can get some shots of that tonight. If anything the full moon this month. Sony gave me extra time with this lens on this time around which I am grateful for. I anticipate Ill be able to get even more detail out of the moon shots, and I want to use the 4x ND/2x converter on a sunset as well. Hopefully be able to get enough more information to add another page to the review.

Carl

Seems like a good piece of glass that is unique to our mount. I would put a few others on my list ahead of this one; but if I needed that kind of reach with any consistency, I wouldn't hesitate to pick it up.

Nice sample images and a well balanced and thorough review as usual...

Now get out of the kitchen and go play ;)

Hapster

especially when you are in Yellowstone and some of photogs use the incredible size lens to catch animals. There is subtle comments of "oh thats a Sony", ha ha. I have actually used the lens as a scope. And allow people to see close up...with stuff in Yellowstone. I like this lens and so for what I have used it for works. I will be curious on the 2X comments you have. I also can carry this lens in the Lowepro Sling Bag, attached to the outside. tb

Carl,

FYI, my 1.4X Kenko Teleplus 300 will not fit on the 500mm. Back of lens extends too deep.

Andy

A Pro-Optic and a Tamron 2x that should work, the element is plenty recessed into the body of the TC on both. Ill find out today since they are on my porch now :). If not, back to the drawing board :)

Carl

Nice review Carl, this is a very interesting lens...

After reading your review, I debated whether I need this lens. I have the A900 and the Sony 70-300g. However, Christmas is coming, so I decided to do my part for the world economy bailout and ordered it from B&H Photo. Nice present for myself. I look forward to your A900 update with this lens.
Thanks, I think!

Chef Carl,

I think this is a really great review. I’m really grateful to see someone do an in depth review on this lens. I have had the Minolta version for over 16 years and I picked up a copy of the Sony earlier this year and have found no difference in image quality. I find it a very useful tool in telephoto photography. In my experience with this lens its even better with digital than film. All mirror lenses suffer from some loss of contrast but in post process, increasing contrast in tonal curve completely fixes this. I always look for any vignetting and correct it before contrast adjustments. With very little practice, post processed, this lens produces very sharp photos with natural colors and almost no, or simply no chromatic aberrations. In sharpness, this lens gives the Minolta 400 f/4.5 HS APO G lens a run for its money at a fraction of the cost.

I think this has been one of the two most misunderstood lenses that have come out of Minolta/Sony. This could be because in certain lighting situations the donut shapes in the bokeh tend to distract from the main subject. More often than not that’s just not an issue, as you have shown in your samples. Maybe it’s one of those lenses you either love or dislike. Some really nice shots Chef, if I may add.

Anyone looking for serious focal length should seriously consider this lens.
AJ

Carl, thank you for the review and the beautiful pictures.

I don't think my head is going to fit out the door tomorrow morning :) ..... seriously thank you. I am glad you enjoy the review. This has been an especially fun one so far and less like "work" in comparison to some.

I was lucky in my find on the 2x converter, it works. Now I just need the moon to fill in a bit more and I can show some shots.

Works out to f16 for light transmission now, I did my calculation wrong apparently. The lens will auto focus but it will not lock unfortunately but thats quite alright.

So far with the sliver we have, the detail is fantastic.. quite improved and I can't wait to post a full moon sample using this combination. Perhaps Ill just add a page to the review on my findings (just need someone to twist my arm please!).

Carl

Which TC did you find? I’m quite interested in the TC you used for your new moon shots and the IQ. I don’t have any Minolta TC’s that fit the 500.
AJ

I honestly didn't expect much from this lens(or mirror lenses in general), but the sample images look quite good.

I have the 500mm f/8 mirror. Like you I found the focus to be very critical with a shallow depth of field. It was a challenge to use/focus on my A100 at f/8. f/16 has got to be a real challenge! I suspect the bright, big view finder on the A900 to be a big help when using this lens, making the TC worth while.

Dave

Right now I am working on an addition to this review I think you will like (testing and writing currently). I will report all my findings test and samples, the brand of the TC, and where to get it etc. Pretty exciting so far, and it will make .. well.. an interesting addition to this review (I hope!).

Carl

Great review. I have the minolta version of this lens and have been using it as my main birdi photogrphy lens for the past 4 months as I didnt have the budget for a big 500mm. You can view the results it produces on my site www.birdsnapping.com. Its a superb piece of kit especially if the light is good. When the light falls it struggles a bit with autofocus, at these times I use it in manual focus, I`m thinking of getting a viewfinder magnifier for manual focusing. Looking forward to your experiments with getting it to work with a teleconverter...I might go that way if it works. Theres nothing like enough reach in bird photography!

Excellent review. I use my SONY 500/f8 for about a year first of all taking birds and wild animals. It serves my quite well as a victorious successor of the Sigma 170-500.

Great review for a great lens! I've been using the Minolta Maxxum version for about a month now and am really pleased with it. It is definitely more practical to handle than manual focus 500 f8 mirror lenses, even on my AF-speed/accuracy challenged A100. It is also sharper and more contrasty than any of the MF mirror lenses I've tried so far, except maybe for the Tamron Adaptall2 version. It seems to be a genuine f8, which is quite rare for mirror lenses, as most have an f rating that ignores loss of light caused by the center plug.

That being said, based on my specimen I would not rate this lens as being quite as sharp as top-of-the-line dioptric teles in the 300-500mm range. In ideal conditions when used properly, the latter can pass a pixelpeeping test from a 10 Mpx aps-c sensor or better, whereas my Maxxum 500 f8 only looks sharp until approx 67% scale (corresponding to what a 6-7 Mpx sensor would deliver). So I suspect there isn't much point putting this on an A900, at least resolution-wise.

Nevertheless, it's a great lens that really gives the alpha system a unique flavor, and I hope if Sony might someday be convinced to release a 700mm or 800mm version.

Maybe you could take a couple shots to show a scene comparing the use of converter to the same photo with out. That could give an idea that we could maybe see better. This converter has a use for me, just really enjoyed your efforts and comments of making worth thinking about. It appears in your review of the converter that the AF would work on my 18-250, and my 70-300 Sony lens on the A 350. Just not on the AF with the 500. Good work.
Tb

Unfortunately the lens just went back to the nice people at Sony. When I get my own copy I will probably do this however.

On your comments on the TC, it probably wont auto focus on the 18-250 or 70-300, reason being is that there are 2 stops less light coming through as a result of the TC, and the AF sensors won't be able to pick up the light coming through. You can still manual focus those lenses no problem however.

To me, the limit on any lenses that would be able to use the TC and AF would be lenses that have a max f4 or under aperture. Lenses with a 2.8 max aperture would work great.

....as my Christmas present which mean I won't be allowed to play with it until Christmas day!

I used to own a Tamron 350mm mirror lens which was F5.6 and was surprised to find this lens while longer is very similar in weight.

The Tamron had a very useful rotating tripod collar fixed on the lens and would focus much closer than this but then I went for the 500 because it is a 500 and for its reach. With mirror lenses if you know what you are getting they are great lenses to have. I also simply could not afford anything else that went to 500mm.

I think this lens is actually more useful on digital than it was on film. On film you were stuck with whatever ISO film you had and so if the fixed aperture meant it was too dark to shoot then that was it. On digital then we can change the ISO. In fact I think I will be putting my camera onto auto-iso quite a bit to let the ISO be the variable instead of the aperture if you see what I mean.

With improvements to the high ISO performance of the A700 then I think this makes the lens more practical than some people may at first consider when they see the fixed aperture.

I like the point you make about it being more versatile on digital. That just makes good sense.

Even though digital is really overall more convenient than film in many respects, I think there are times we forget just what makes it so convenient at times.

Carl

Greetings Carl,
Thank you very much for your fine review on the 500mm f8 lens. I did order one (a used Minolta at a good price from Adorama). I gave it a try this very cold morning just through the window into my back yard and I was impressed with the clarity and sharpness - even through the window. This lens is going to be very useful to me and I was impressed by how well I could photograph with this 500mm as a hand held lens... At the same time I bought the lens I ordered a Tamron SP 2x TeleConverter 300F-Xi but it did not work so I'm returning the TC and ordering the Pro-Optic which you mentioned. Thanks so much for letting us know what TC works with this lens. I look forward to enjoying the AlphaMountWorld web site.
Thank you.

Pollycracker44
A350, SAL 18-250, Minolta 100mm f2.8, Minolta f1.4 50mm and others.

The moon is 28,000km closer to the earth this month and the germinid meteor shower is happening too. Any chance you will be participating in this? Would love to see that lens capture heaven's light show.

Thanks for the reminder about the "large" moon - it is beautiful tonight so I took my A350 and 500mm lens outside in the cold air - and gave a try to taking some moon shots. The camera/lens is now inside in a plastic bag to avoid condensation. I'll check the photos tomorrow and if anything turns out well I'll post the pics. Cheers, Pollycracker44

Hey Carl,

I'm very familiar with this type of system, it's a Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope and it is the most used system in astronomy now as it produces excellent shots with barely any CA and it's extremely compact as you know. (i have an 8" LX200GPS, focal length of 2000mm!)

I have a Meade ETX 90mm scope, focal length 1250mm that i use for astronomy for quick looks and i've attached it to my Sony and my friends Canon (boo evil empire...hehe [Canon and Nikon=Evil Empire]) anyway i took some shots of a Great Barred Owl that lives in our backyard with the ETX and my friends Canon XT. I didn't have my A300 at the time nor the benefit of SSS and these shots were all hand holding with some bracing of the deck. Some are quite good and some are blurry but i'll take whatever as this freaking bird is so hard to spot in the wild!!! :)

http://picasaweb.google.com/mike.pisto/41608OwlPictures#5189958579432565186

But i just wanted to say I'm very familiar with this system, just on a larger scale. I know the quality that they can be produced by this system. I just wanted to say your review was really good and i enjoyed it.

thanks
mike

in any information you would be willing to link here in terms of the telescope and adapter(s) you are using. I am particularly interested in the 8" telescope @ 2000mm.

My next move it to get into Astrophotography (using the 500mm reflex for this review spurred on additional curiosity into the subject).

I'd appreciate any info you'd be willing to give.

I saw the shots of the Barn owl, how far were you from it?

Carl

Hey Carl,

about 100-125ft? It was at the edge of the "woods" line in our backyard. Just spotted him and i was in the experimenting phase with my ETX90 and my 66mm Refractor (FL 460mm) so i had everything hooked up. I saw it, grabbed the camera and headed out.

Astrophotography requires LOTS of practice because to get anything good, you have to have a really good mount to track the sky. I haven't used my scope(s) for astrophotography in a while because i get in the process and then i get busy and don't go back out for a while and i forget everything i learned. It's a very rewarding hobby if you get into it and there are TONS of good books out there that explain the processes you have to take to get good stuff, also of course is Google.

My scope is a Meade LX200GPS, 8". It's an F10 scope which is the most used, all around performer. The focal lengths are similar to the camera lenses. I have an F6.3 focal reducer and a F3.3 focal reducer. Basically it reduces the focal length (screws on the rear cell near the eyepieces) and it will bring the focal length down to about 1200mm from 2000mm or down to like 750mm or for the F3.3. Don't hold me to those numbers! So in effect you can get wider and also you get brighter images, with shorter exposures. It's very similar to photography with some differences that are easily picked up. Also you have Barlows, i have a 2x barlow (or teleconverter for the photography minded). They make all types and sizes. from 1.5x to 5x. But unlike camera TC's, if you have an OK eyepiece, it will actually help to make the eyepiece better because of the narrowing of the field, essentially using the center more than the edges.

Moon is the easiest as it's the brightest thing around. Sun is fun too but you need a nice filter so you don't blow up your eyes and camera!
Deep Sky objects are next because they are easier to shoot because you can shoot whatever your camera gives you and capture the object.
Planets are last because you have to crank up the zoom with barlows or eyepiece projection to get something worth seeing in the picture. Its the only way to bring out details and not just have a little dot.

If you want to just take pictures of deep sky objects, like Orion Nebula and stuff like that, your best bet is to get an Astrograph. They are NOT CHEAP! but they produce a near perfectly flat field so no distortions. Oh speaking of that, Distortions are a lot easier to see in astrophotography than regular because stars like to be round but they get stretched and they are very easy to see. But still you can obtain very excellent results with a non dedicated astrograph. I have a William Optics ZenithStar 66mm, 460mm Triplet Apo refractor (discontinued) and that would be an awesome starting point for you to do. They also make a field flattener/focal reducer. You can get awesome pictures with these little scopes if you are really interested in stars and deepsky objects. Couple it with the field flattener and you'll really have good shots but you don't need it.

The William Optics (www.williamoptics.com) are good scopes, AWESOMELY Well made. They have a Zenithstar 66 Doublet Semi Apo for like $300 and they have models that range up to over $4000. My ZS66 Triplet cost around $450. They are awesome scopes becasue they are small and travel friendly. I traveled to Peru with mine for 2 weeks, 1 week in the amazon to shoot the Macaws.
Put that little scope on this http://www.ioptron.com/ It's a tripod with gps to get the current time and date, you'll be zooming along the sky on a nice solid mount with a great little scope that can travel with you where ever you go. If you get in to it, then you can move up to the big boys. I highly recommend this. For about $1000-$1200 (depending on the scope you'd get) and the tripod/mount is $700 you can be having fun taking night time shots of the sky.

Let me know if you have any questions. I'm always willing to help!!! SOrry it's long but i wanted to get a lot of good info.

Thanks
Mike

Very useful information. Keeping this info bookmarked. When I get up to speed and get a shot or two ill post the results.

Looks pretty good being that far away from the Owl, too bad you didn't have a fully clean shot yet, I can't say I've nailed an owl shot yet in my life so, you got me there! :)

Carl