Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
Any decent APO scope will beat a lens rather easily.
2 reasons. Scope optics are simply a triplet, lenses often have 9 or more elements. Every air to glass surface needs to be figured perfectly to prevent aberrations.
There was an interesting post on the AP Yahoo Group about 3 months ago. A pro photographer there compared city scape photos of a Canon 500mm lens ($14000 or more) to an AP130 (about US$6750).
The AP was noticeably better. So much so he was planning to use his AP scope for that type of imaging. You could make out a guy smoking on a balcony from something like 3 miles away with the AP130.
The best lens images I have seen are from Marco here using a Pentax 300mm 67 EDIF F4 lens. The next best are from Wolfgang Promper using a Zeiss 300mm.
The Pentax 67 300mm EDIF F4 is a rare lens but they come up very occassionally for about US$1500-2000.
I use my TEC110FL for long telephoto type images at 613mm focal length.
It is way beyond any other lens I have although admittedly the longest I have is 300mm Pentax 67 non ED.
The humble ED doublet Orion ED 80 makes a great telephoto as well. It is nice and light so it is relatively portable.
The main advantage of these expensive Canon lenses would be autofocus and image stabilisation. But if you are using a tripod (which you virtually have to) the stabilisation is no advantage. Autofocus is not much either as my scope has fine focuser knob and it snaps to focus better than any other optic I have including an AP scope.
Greg.
|
Thank you Greg, this really helps.
Very good points and thanks for the feedback and experience too!
