If mirror lenses are not all that great...

then why do people buy them? I can understand why companies make mirror lenses...for the same reason companies make everything else...$$$. But why would people continue to buy mirror lenses if they are no where as good as other lenses?

Like all lenses, they have a purpose. Another name for them is a "donut lens" for the donut shaped bokeh. However, most have but one aperture ( usually f/8 ) so either a tripod or lots of light is needed.

Matthew

MLKstudios wrote: Like all lenses, they have a purpose. Another name for them is a "donut lens" for the donut shaped bokeh. However, most have but one aperture ( usually f/8 ) so either a tripod or lots of light is needed.

Matthew

What is their purpose? I never owned a mirror lens, I only heard the bad stories about them.
Overall their purpose is to be part of the camera to capture the image, but why would someone buy a mirror lens, when they can buy a normal everyday lens to produce better quality?

Try pricing an OEM lens in the same focal length & you will discover why people buy them.....Using one means you at least get an image that otherwise you may not have gotten. You can get decent images with them sometimes, but it's not easy....I've got two of them .I'll post a sample image later when I get home from work...

Screamin Scott wrote: Try pricing an OEM lens in the same focal length & you will discover why people buy them.....Using one means you at least get an image that otherwise you may not have gotten. You can get decent images with them sometimes, but it's not easy....I've got two of them .I'll post a sample image later when I get home from work...

Thanks Scott for your answer. Can't wait to see the image.

Reflective (mirror) lenses are far shorter and lighter then their refractive counterparts. If you're trying to maintain a low profile while watching a suspect, they have their merits. Also if some angry person grabs the lens trying to gain control of your camera, just hit the release button and sacrifice the lens. You'd loose a couple hundred $$$ versus several thousand $$$$.

Like everything else, they're a tool to use.

As Scott has mentioned. There is a BIG price difference:

www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/5008.htm

www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product/...-f%252F4G-ED-VR.html

See?

Hogan wrote: then why do people buy them? I can understand why companies make mirror lenses...for the same reason companies make everything else...$$$. But why would people continue to buy mirror lenses if they are no where as good as other lenses?

I believe P.T. Barnum had this question covered.......

Graflex 4x5 wrote: Reflective (mirror) lenses are far shorter and lighter then their refractive counterparts. If you're trying to maintain a low profile while watching a suspect, they have their merits. Also if some angry person grabs the lens trying to gain control of your camera, just hit the release button and sacrifice the lens. You'd loose a couple hundred $$$ versus several thousand $$$$.

Like everything else, they're a tool to use.

Haha, spying on someone...for a cheap price. Until you get caught.

Screamin Scott wrote: Try pricing an OEM lens in the same focal length & you will discover why people buy them.....Using one means you at least get an image that otherwise you may not have gotten. You can get decent images with them sometimes, but it's not easy....I've got two of them .I'll post a sample image later when I get home from work...

There are also "regular non-mirror" lenses in this same category.
This is a shot with a 1000mm (500mm with 2x convertor (about $100) using a Pentax ME Super film camera. Not great quality but with the other lens I had, I might as well have been shooting ants.

Hogan wrote:

Graflex 4x5 wrote: Reflective (mirror) lenses are far shorter and lighter then their refractive counterparts. If you're trying to maintain a low profile while watching a suspect, they have their merits. Also if some angry person grabs the lens trying to gain control of your camera, just hit the release button and sacrifice the lens. You'd loose a couple hundred $$$ versus several thousand $$$$.

Like everything else, they're a tool to use.

Haha, spying on someone...for a cheap price. Until you get caught.

It's called SURVEILLANCE and is perfectly legal if done from public property. Police, private investigators and insurance companies do it all the time.

Right now I have a 70-300. I have looked into mirror lenses before and thought about it. One day if I decide to get a bigger telephoto, I will probably buy a mirror lens. They are cheap for the focal length and I can't afford the real deal.

Graflex 4x5 wrote:

Hogan wrote:

Graflex 4x5 wrote: Reflective (mirror) lenses are far shorter and lighter then their refractive counterparts. If you're trying to maintain a low profile while watching a suspect, they have their merits. Also if some angry person grabs the lens trying to gain control of your camera, just hit the release button and sacrifice the lens. You'd loose a couple hundred $$$ versus several thousand $$$$.

Like everything else, they're a tool to use.

Haha, spying on someone...for a cheap price. Until you get caught.

It's called SURVEILLANCE and is perfectly legal if done from public property. Police, private investigators and insurance companies do it all the time.

Yes, but what police do and what you and I/everyday people do, are two different things. We all know, if the person whom we are spying on catches us and call the cops, we would probably be arrested.

Hogan wrote:

Graflex 4x5 wrote:

Hogan wrote:

Graflex 4x5 wrote: Reflective (mirror) lenses are far shorter and lighter then their refractive counterparts. If you're trying to maintain a low profile while watching a suspect, they have their merits. Also if some angry person grabs the lens trying to gain control of your camera, just hit the release button and sacrifice the lens. You'd loose a couple hundred $$$ versus several thousand $$$$.

Like everything else, they're a tool to use.

Haha, spying on someone...for a cheap price. Until you get caught.

It's called SURVEILLANCE and is perfectly legal if done from public property. Police, private investigators and insurance companies do it all the time.

Yes, but what police do and what you and I/everyday people do, are two different things. We all know, if the person whom we are spying on catches us and call the cops, we would probably be arrested.

Not if you are taking the photos from pubic property and not shooting into someones window or in, say, a public restroom.

Baydream wrote:

Hogan wrote:

Graflex 4x5 wrote:

Hogan wrote:

Graflex 4x5 wrote: Reflective (mirror) lenses are far shorter and lighter then their refractive counterparts. If you're trying to maintain a low profile while watching a suspect, they have their merits. Also if some angry person grabs the lens trying to gain control of your camera, just hit the release button and sacrifice the lens. You'd loose a couple hundred $$$ versus several thousand $$$$.

Like everything else, they're a tool to use.

Haha, spying on someone...for a cheap price. Until you get caught.

It's called SURVEILLANCE and is perfectly legal if done from public property. Police, private investigators and insurance companies do it all the time.

Yes, but what police do and what you and I/everyday people do, are two different things. We all know, if the person whom we are spying on catches us and call the cops, we would probably be arrested.

Not if you are taking the photos from pubic property and not shooting into someones window or in, say, a public restroom.

In PA. if you can see it from public property (roadway) doesn't matter if you shoot into a window. The idea is, If you don't want people seeing what you're doing, put up a fence and close the curtains. I knew a person who had a PI taking pics through her windows .... The DA told her to close the curtains. In a public rest room you are assured an implied amount of privacy ... doors on the stalls and screens on either side of the urnials.