Top critical review
43 people found this helpful
It's a lesson
on October 14, 2013
Closest analogy: It's like holding a big magnifying glass in front of a 12" TV, trying to make it look like 42".
Astronomy: I got plenty of moon photos at 650mm and 1200mm. Two tripods and "pillow" under the lens, because even with the camera timer, the lens/camera kept shaking for several seconds. I managed to keep it completely still and used the remote.
Then I compared it with a moon picture I took with my 200mm Canon lens a week ago.
Result: if I crop the moon from the 200mm Canon lens photograph, I get the SAME resolution with the photos I got with 1200mm setting on this Opteka. A little better contrast/colors with the Canon lens. I posted side-side comparison here (currently image 14/18 in this site).
Nature: Forget it if the subject is moving. If it's still, you'll get the same result with a 250-400mm lens, but with slightly less resolution, compromised colors and probably "fog", depending on the time.
Who may like this lens: Amateurs that do not have anything higher than 150mm already, and they want something cheap for limited uses, all manual. It works just like a big magnifying glass - it's not an actual telephoto lens. Works great as "spying binoculars" through the camera. It doesn't have an "infinity" focus, so when you take the moon, it focuses "somewhere in between"... it's as if the moon is not far away, but at a specific close distance. Not the entire surface will be in focus.
Who will be disappointed: Those who think that they discovered something that Canon and Nikon have not discovered.
Carrying it around is another sad story, especially when someone with 1/3 of the size and volume will get much better pictures than you, quickly and accurately.