Comments on: A Bit of 3250mm Fun

By: Ken

Ken — Fri, 10 Aug 2012 02:11:15 +0000

I’ve managed to create a similar setup with a V1 + Questar – also about 3200mm equivalent focal length. Manual focus and no VR but works well on a heavy tripod. Extension tubes and eyepiece projection could make it even longer but that would be just crazy lol

By: Tord S Eriksson

Tord S Eriksson — Sat, 16 Jun 2012 20:07:30 +0000

I own the V1, and a K-5, and NEX-5N, while the wife has a OM-D E-M5 instead of the V1, otherwise we have the same set-up.

As long as the light is good, the V1 is superb, with the fastest focus in town, but as light gets dimmer it is not nearly as crisp as the OM-D5, so cutting down the OM-D’s digital images to V1 size gives a lot of interesting facts: The OM-D is so pre-sharpened that PP doesn’t do much good, unless the exposure is off (a rare event), while the other cameras take to PP in the same way!

A few examples, made with the K-5, OM-D and the V1:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tord55/7177393223/in/set-72157630043299435/

By: touristguy87

touristguy87 — Tue, 05 Jun 2012 04:39:42 +0000

…a comparison against the NEX-7 and the A850 is also informative, though unfortunately they don’t have the relevant data for the D3200…anyway this is one reason that people pay extra for Nikon gear

By: touristguy87

touristguy87 — Tue, 05 Jun 2012 04:34:03 +0000

ps, forget about the whole “virtual 75mm fullframe” thing and just treat it as it is: a 10MP 1″ diagonal cmos sensor…and downsampling by definition doesn’t average-out noise, it just discards the extra pixels. So the SNR improves by the downsampling ratio (20log10 of it). And comparing the V1/J1 to the D5100 doesn’t mean that the smaller pixels cost up to 3x the DR. It means that the D5100 is a better camera. Nothing more. Try it with the Sony A200, a 10MP CCD subframe. That’s why they do these tests instead of just generalizing from pitch.

By: touristguy87

touristguy87 — Tue, 05 Jun 2012 04:17:55 +0000

This is all very well and good but really not too useful as in my experience it’s usually better to just move closer and shoot without the TC. Of course it does come in handy when you don’t really have another choice. Maybe it’ll save some Saudi prince from ordering another 2600mm Canon lens.

You should try it at night and see if you can get any interesting shots of the near planets

By: Antonio

Antonio — Fri, 11 May 2012 18:21:14 +0000

a-maze-ing lol

By: Haruo Chikamori

Haruo Chikamori — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:18:35 +0000

~jaw dropping on floor and shattering~. OMG!

Hey, if you want to go birding on a budget…this is the best way to do it. Slap on a 70-300mm with the V1 lens adapter and you get a 810mm lens. And here I thought that I should get myself a 600mm f/4 lens for my D300s. ~evil grin~

By: Samuel L

Samuel L — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 16:58:44 +0000

Bit of a false comparison, as a Celestron C8 (which is what’s being used there) doesn’t throw a 44mm image circle which is what would be required to fully illuminate a 135-format sensor, making the “crop factor” multiplication at best a half-truth. As an amateur astronomer, doing stuff like this seems so obvious and everyday…

By: Bryan

Bryan — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 00:16:53 +0000

that is a beast! that said i regally connect my camera to my Celestron CPC800 8″ diameter telescope with a focal length of a little over 2m plus the 1.6 crop on my canon makes for a pretty long lens but not very portable.

By: Samuel H

Samuel H — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 19:17:28 +0000

good news: we finally found someone who is crazier than you guys are
http://nikonrumors.com/2012/01/21/nikon-v1-ft1-adapter-celestron-reflex-2000mm-f10-5400mm.aspx/