The massive vintage soviet lens you don't need - MC Rubinar 1000mm F10 review and test

Testing the MC Rubinar 1000mm F10 soviet vintage lens
get your adapter: amzn.to/3zhDtJt (affiliate link)
► You can support the channel directly via Paypal:
paypal.me/marcoaries
or by becoming a member:
/ @marcoaries
● Instagram: / marco.aries

[@seoulrydr]

when you need the reach, you need the reach. a very interesting lens to review indeed.

[@MarcoAries]

Imagine using it on an micro 4/3 with a 2x teleconverter, it would be a 4000 equivalent or something like that 😂

[@Renegade1127]

@@MarcoAries My Rubinar 500/5.6 Makpo is used on an E-M1 ii. so 1000/5.6 Also, I have a Pixco m42 - m4/3 speedbooster, so 710/4. Sadly, it won't mount on my 7d2 because the flash housing is too long.

[@MarcoAries]

Yeah, I don't like bodies with the flash protruding like that 😅 I remember trying the MTO 500 on my old Sony a5100 with a 2x teleconverter so... 500x2x1.5 😂

[@somegeezer]

Have the 500/5.6 from this series. Quite a fan. f/5.6 is actually quite usable, and it's one of the sharpest of the mirror lens style you can get your hands on at reasonable prices. I paid 150ish for mine. It's been a great birding lens for me. The doughnut bokeh seems minimal at the distances I'm shooting them at. When it does turn up, it's definitely an acquired taste. I'd recommend an ordinary tubular lens with aperture control for anyone wanting to avoid it. I don't think I'd have a use for the 1000mm. If I do need that reach, I have a decent 2x converter, that will give me 1000/11, and probably about equal sharpness. But with the camera I'm using, apertures that dark get into shutter speeds I just would not be able to handle the 1000mm shake with.

[@MarcoAries]

Yeah, I concur, the 1000 is a bit much in every sense, the 500 is much more useable and I did prefer the image quality, although I the MTO so it's not a 1:1 comparison.

[@ohjajohh]

Great video, I think it would be a nice lens to play around with for a day, but not something to use very often.

[@MarcoAries]

Yes, exactly!

[@Renegade1127]

I have the Rubinar 500mm f5.6 MC Macro. Can only be used on my mirrorless bodies - Eos M5 & E-M1 ii. Flash housing on my 7d2 is too long. I also have a Pixco .71x M42-MFT speedbooster. So with that on the E-M1 ii I have 720mm f4.0 as well. Soooooo, 810mm f5.6 on the M5, 1000mm f5.6 on the E-M1 ii and 720mm f4.0 on E-M1 ii with speedbooster 😁

[@MarcoAries]

Yes, I'm used to mirrorless or analog cameras, so I forgot about the protruding flash. I would be kind of curious to try the 1000 on a micro four thirds sensor with a 2x converter, that should add up to 4000mm equivalent 😁

[@Renegade1127]

@@MarcoAries In full daylight, maybe. 2x TC would make it f20.0 😲

[@MarcoAries]

Yeah, midday in summer 🌞 😆

[@MarcoBisogni]

Some friends of mine, older than me, told that they were used to shoot wildlife action photos using lens like this. Thinking about that nowadays sounds crazy. Anyways, they missed a lot of shots 😅.

[@MarcoAries]

They must be very patient people 😅 I tried mounting it on my film cameras and I was like "nope!" 😂

[@MarcoBisogni]

@ 😂 I agree with you.

[@molybdnum]

Well, it seems like a decent lens for statues anyway 😄 I guess it was meant for surveillance, where you need to see "yep, that's a person" at a few km and low contrast/poor sharpness are acceptable tradeoffs.

[@MarcoAries]

Yeah. I don't know about the Rubinar specifically, but when I was researching MTO for the review of the 500, their website said they made stuff for military use

[@jan-martinulvag1962]

Get a Fuji HS10. Its cheap and good and has very good stabilisation and is up to 720mm

[@MarcoAries]

...that would be a downgrade

[@jan-martinulvag1962]

@@MarcoAries You dont know the camera. I do.

[@Renegade1127]

HS50exr is far better.

[@kalinmir]

I got one a while ago and it turns out I cant even mount it due to pentaprism overhang :(

[@MarcoAries]

Yeah, it seems to be a common problem with the design of DSLRs

[@kalinmir]

@MarcoAries i tried using a TC and macro tubes but neither is very practical...maybe if one craves the 110 film look but is plagued with 36mp sensor 😅

[@somegeezer]

Mirrorless will help, but also Canon's full frame SLRs just about squeeze them on. A few mm clearance on the prism cover. It's actually the built in flash on their APSC cams overhanging.

[@MarcoAries]

@@kalinmir 😁

[@MarcoAries]

@@somegeezer indeed

[@tonykeltsflorida]

I have a setup for 600mm moon pictures. I don't need anything bigger that would be more difficult to use. Interesting lens but too big.

[@MarcoAries]

Yep, I agree!

[@connermcfortu4835]

sorry, but in my opinion the front filter is 116mm not 115. maybe I misunderstood

[@MarcoAries]

It is 116, yes