TTartisan's New 500mm F6.3 Telephoto

[@danncorbit3623]

I have some old manual lenses and I love them. With a telephoto like this (500mm, no stabilization) it must obviously be used on a tripod. But this sort of lens is very nice for telephoto shots of scenery. If you want to use it for bird watching, you will need to find perched birds or birds on the water. Birds in the air are a no-go. Like any tool, if you know how to use it, it can bring benefit. I would spray paint over the huge lettering because it is utterly obnoxious. I don't need this lens today, but it might have been an option if it appeared five years ago. For people on an itty-bitty budget the only options for something in this category is used or this lens. Other ultra-cheap telephotos are "rainbow factories" that are really not useful for any purpose. So I see this lens as a good thing.

[@jaycee6996]

The oldest among us started doing 35mm film photography with all manual lenses. In my case that included an MTO 1000A (1100mm focal length), Tokina 500mm (mirror lenses), Soligor 350mm and Takumar 200mm 3.5. I also used Glanz or APS teleconverters. It took a long time and a lot of experience to get half reasonable shots with this gear. The point is that if you are brought up autofocus/IBIS and lens stabilisation you are going to find these lenses very difficult to use. It takes time to acquire the skill which most reviewers do not have. That is not a criticism just a fact of life. I am as a consequence of my personal experience incredibly impressed with this lens and hope to acquire one at some time.

[@Lucamitm]

If one learns to manual focus, is it possible to capture a bird with small movements on a branch ? I have use manual focus for macro work and for birds a mix with an option that focus first on auto and then you tune it manually, so I have lets say little experience.

[@p382742937423y4]

You are right. I am younger, but i did learn to shoot with analog camera's and it is remarkeble how much a camera can do for you. Truly amazing. Still i find that people with good gear and no feeling for aesthetics still never manage to make good pictures.

[@zachsteiner]

To save money and have some fun, I buy a lot of vintage lenses. It’s forced me to learn me how to get very good at manual focus.

[@Primeros1000]

I got the Tamron 150-500 for sony used for $600 an I love it. Its fun and never thought I was going to like taking pictures of birds but after using it I’m hooked.

[@PatrickWithCamera]

Same here, using tamron 150-500 with a6700, really good performance for its price, and probably most versatile tele lens I ever tested, great for birding, wildlife and macro.

[@epycleap]

For sleeping wildlife🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@tayspiderx]

No weather seal too, probably sleeping animal in enclosure

[@harryvlogs7833]

Nope you can use it for animals just use manual focus

[@MisterMustardIsDumb]

@@tayspiderxbrother it will be fine 😭

[@gdv2268]

Ur wife is sleeping too. Not with you.

[@Cracky003]

I know you were joking, but I've been looking at this to go take pictures of container ships that are docked with my stepdad. It's cheaper than buying a bridge camera like he uses, probably just as good IQ, and I have stationary subjects.

[@Whiskeyj456]

This is where the Tamron 70-300 shines imo. Sure 300 isn’t as long as 500 but you get stellar AF performance and weather sealing for $500 new. The lens is light and compact which is perfect for travel. But I’ve gotten some wonderful wildlife shots with this lens. And switching to crop mode you can squeeze out 450mm. I just don’t see a market for this ttartisan lens when you could save up another $100 and get the 70-300 used.

[@keithwcaselman]

Thank you for your no-nonsense videos, I always get something out of them. Thanks for your time and effort.

[@bondgabebond4907]

That thing reminds me of the cheap long lenses produced for 35mm film cameras about a half-a-century ago. Long and cheap. We even had cheap 500mm mirror lenses. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Great for private investigators and spies working on a small budget.

[@TheBEARofHIGHWAY1]

Literally what I was going to say. Looks like a piece of "junk" from the late 70's from Solignor.

[@arrebarre]

I personally still use a Minolta AF reflex 500 and it takes stunning photos with my A7R II, it may not be the cheapest 500mm mirror lens but it shows how good they could be if done right with AF. If people stopped being so pissy over the donut bokeh I would love to see a modern take on the concept.

[@zachsteiner]

@@TheBEARofHIGHWAY1Funny enough, Soligor actually has some nice lenses. But I feel you, I have one of those shitty 500mm Opteka lenses. Sometimes it can produce decent images but usually it’s crap. Tons of CA.

[@Digi20]

Looks like quite a usable lens for video if you plan to use a sturdy tripod anyway and focus manually on a cine rig. the picture quality is way better than those older really chepo 150€ junk 500mm f8-11 lenses, including the mirror variants.

[@abhaykumar619]

Is there any cheap prime lens in 150 to 250 mm focal length for E mount? Something cheap like TTartsans or 7artsans but with a telephoto reach?

[@ryanbeer5262]

You could adapt any # of vintage 135mm or 200mm lenses. Love my Nikkor 200 f4 ai.

[@matttelz6014]

Bummed no comparison shots between this and the 600mm F4 Sony Gmaster...lol jk

[@astro143_]

I really want a telephoto lens/telescope with a camera mount to photograph the moon on my a6600. This looks like a better option optically than those mirror lenses that are available, but even then, I could rent a Sony 600 mm for $100 for a week and take pictures then and be done with it. Great video, thanks for the information!

[@HagaishiSama]

Get a 50-210 you'll be fine

[@astro143_]

@@HagaishiSama I've got a 70-300 on an old Nikon dslr and it just doesn't get close enough. Gotta zoom all the way to the moon landing site!

[@Reviews4fun1]

I’ve used a 70-180 2.8 and got a real sweet photo of the moon a few weeks ago. You don’t need a super long telephoto for moon. Just skill and a crop.

[@PatrickWithCamera]

500mm is really good for moon shots, no need for stabe or autofocus, and at F8 this TTartisans is not bad, should get great moon shots. Wouldn't advice anything below 400mm, because @ 400mm you starting getting nice little details of craters which looks pleasing.

[@astro143_]

@@PatrickWithCamera that's what I was thinking. Plus on APSC that's 750mm of range. This lens is on my short list now

[@huasheng9695]

That moon shoot at 500mm is still amazing tho~

[@davect01]

That's my preferred wildlife, the sleeping kind. 😜

[@TheSilentJorge]

You know Arthur really didn't like the lens as he did not try to take pictures of his wife with it.

[@Openbaffle]

how do we mount it on the tripod, no Swiss arca, additional mounting plate required. if focus ring is hard to rotate, we sure need the tripod or stable base.

[@dallasgrant]

I have a Sigma 50-500 for my A6400, I paid about $1000AUD for it and the MC11 adapter was $200, rough comparison in USD is like $600-700, even with the slower AF(being a non native e mount), I would much prefer it over a manual lens for this kind of focal length, this lens may have it's uses but I think it would be a regretful purchase for many.

[@ak13official]

your reviews are the best 👏

[@Sony-Fanboy]

Nice for the price, but i'm still rocking with my Sony 70-350mm. Still my absolute favourite Sony APS-C tele zoomlens!

[@goodgremlinmedia2757]

Another beautiful lens not offered in L mount

[@d30gaijin]

I wonder how it might work with a speed booster...

[@דובבגוליגר]

How about review the Tokina 400 and 500 f8 Mirror lenses? And maybe make a short comparison between the TTartisan 500 f6.3 and them?

[@dbbang1]

Very good review. Thank you

[@odlinceanicet689]

Thanks for your review

[@aengusmacnaughton1375]

I'd like to see an MFT mount version, but none so far.... Good lens for a private eye!!! 😆

[@blaizze]

It would by nice to see some manufacturer to make similar lens to this TT Artisan (500mm, f6.3 prime), but with better contrast and sharpness and obviously with OSS and AF.

[@marximus4]

A used Sigma 150-600 Contemporary can be found for way less than $1000, and it goes to 600 at 6.3.

[@JeffreyJohnsonC]

Zoom is not a prime. They do make similar lenses with stabilization and af. That'll be $3000+ USD please...

[@josiahparker6915]

Arthur come back to TV Directing at church we miss you 😥

[@shirokuro73]

Great review as always! Honestly I’m looking for something fairly cheap to be able to get good moon shots, and this might be it! It obviously has limitations on flexibility, but for the main task I want it for, it might be the one.

[@Chorge1972]

Would be interesting how it compares for DeepSpace Astro against my Tamron 150-500… or against an old Beroflex 500!

[@TheCrustyCupcake]

I see this Lens mostly for fixed mount uses that otherwise didn't need stabilizing and auto focus. Some scientific observation purposes where the ability to have more cameras with this cheaper lens than a super expensive telephoto.

[@theBaron001]

It says large aperture, not fast focal ratio. 80mm is pretty big for a camera lens, especially one that costs $300

[@hbp_]

The hood is surprisingly short. I have seen much longer ones for much shorter focal lengths.

[@7784000]

I'm pretty happy with my sony 70-350mm for APS-C. It has super nice and fast AF, 525mm equivalent and F6.3 as well while offering good sharpness at F8 already. I don't think FF users are the ones that will buy this ultra cheap telephoto lens, otherwise they would not have invested in an expensive FF system anyway but rather an APS-C system or bridge camera instead.

[@7784000]

I recently had the chance to use a lumix dmc fz300 and for the price, I was really impressed. Maybe it would be a better alternative for this lens to just buy a bridge camera.

[@mastermaxderguru]

You know thats this 500mm Lens is FF, with an APSC eq. of 750mm. 750mm vs. 525mm is quite a gap, our do use a 1,5x teleconverter. @@7784000

[@davidipema7898]

can we fit the 2.0 converter into that lens ?

[@dasaen]

I think if it was very sharp, low CA and f4, it would be worth that price. Over 300 seems like a lot when 500 gets you a used 50-500mm (or something like this) with optical stabilization.

[@DavidIG500]

Hello everyone, I have a question. Would it be possible to use the clear image zoom with the TTartisan 500 mm on a Sony alpha 6000? Thanks

[@brentschmogbert]

Ok

[@Mgtowfreedom]

why is there a mount for pretty much every camera on the planet bar Fiji ?

[@MrMintyGluta]

Can you compare the Sony E 55-210mm f4.5-6.3 OSS with the Sony E 18-200m f3.5-6.3 LE please? I'm deciding on which one to buy for my Sony A6000

[@OregonFlunder47]

03:38 Focus breathing nearly non existent? Huh? Manual lens?

[@hoodio]

tbh the flare looks very 'artsy'

[@jcurtistx]

What telephoto zoom lens in the 400-600mm long end range do you recommend for the a6xxx series? I know there is the 70-350 but often felt it was too short (moon, birds, etc…). I know the longer they get the heavier they get which is a consideration.

[@YUGOT]

With the aps-c crop that lenses becomes a 130-500

[@joandreas1490]

tamron 150-500 or sigma 100-400 .500 to 600 on crop is not much difference to be worth the cost anyway. (on crop cheap lenses often struggles on highest range)

[@pf4773]

I think it's full frame... but it should be clarified, whether this is an apsc or a full frame lens. If full frame then the 70-350mm emount sony apsc lens is far more useful, and much lighter/smaller. Thanks so much for the reviews!!!

[@jayjackson1562]

Will this work for a6400 ??

[@joshuaaruiz]

Yooooo I’m buying this, this is awesome 😆

[@tanman99]

I’m thinking this might be a good candidate for shooting the eclipse next year…Don’t need autofocus and need to use it on a tripod anyways…the website shows shooting Astro photography with this but I’m kind of doubting the results they are showing.

[@Lucamitm]

Omg yes the eclipse, thanks for commenting!

[@paulc4194]

How does the lens compare to an old Minolta 500mm F8?

[@abhishekkendle9974]

Too many trade offs! If not brighter aperture, atleast weather sealing of some level is necessary for such a big lens!

[@tonykeltsflorida]

Looks like a decent Moon lens.

[@mrN3w7]

Or dead... dead wildlife will work for as well I guess... it is a different kind of sleeping anyway.

[@TechWithBruno]

Can we have Fuji equivalent pls TT 😪 Good video 👌👌

[@Dewabarasunderan]

“large aperture“ makes sense, when Canon is putting out f11 versions.

[@ballashoes]

Can you try some astrophotography

[@nightdonutstudio]

Contrast is dull.

[@ranziphotography7540]

for the price, focal length and the output this is not gonna sell. won't be surprised if it sells at 50% off in a year. Poor design, at least they should have given weather sealing + smaller body. TTartisan should make a 300mm f5.6 af glass, make it cheaper & smaller glass.

[@almightyri1757]

I don't think this needs to well well to be a success tbh

[@dinhdotdev]

At 500mm, most likely we will need a tripod anyway. It’s seem to be an affordable lens for moon shots and some landscapes

[@CLtech05]

talk 2 us about the sigma 10-18 f2.8

[@harryvlogs7833]

Wow not to heavy

[@kismat_rana]

Why they didn't give f4 if it is prime 😢😂 low lights counts I use minolta 500 af with my LA-EA5 a6600 !!

[@marcbeebe]

As much as I shoot telephoto, I'd pass. It is very much like a vintage lens so no real advantage over that and not as good as the 3X as expensive Sigma 150-600mm.

[@kevinmccarty157]

Thing is soft

[@saharatul]

This can be a cheap astrophotography lens if it can focus on infinity correctly

[@clevafeatha]

Is Tyler Hoover your relative?

[@brentschmogbert]

Yes this is his younger brother

[@gordonmiles9995]

It has a focus scale on the aperture but no ft/meter numbers on the focus ring. That's useless

[@networm64]

TTartisan needs to strat to move to make AF lenses

[@pf4773]

problem is lugging it around, especially internationally

[@winheiMR]

Ich besitze noch das Nikon Schnellschuß-Objektiv 500mm analog Kamera Nikon. Mit Adapter an einigen Bodys neuer Bauart getestet und als zu schlecht, zu schwer, zu langsam und ungenügend schnell wieder weit weg gelegt. Sollte es jemand haben wollen? melde dich !

[@jankucera8505]

a brand new tamron 150-500 cost me $964

[@Reviews4fun1]

I would rather adapt old lenses and get creative than buy this . Or just get any of the 3rd party telephoto zooms

[@mjl1958]

Depth-of-field ring is the wrong way around.

[@Anna-hs5os]

First

[@almightyri1757]

Contrast is too dull even if given away for free

[@datdudeinred]

This is designed for those guys who do gold digger videos recording from far. Not for wildlife 😂😂

[@avavaviv1]

Kind of stupid. Only sport and nature photographs need such a zoom and they need autofocus.

[@d.k.1394]

That's not a lens!!!