"Vinnie" <vtb666@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:4314e9a5.0308270402.11e55f9d@posting.google.com...

> In an earlier post, I wrote:

> > You can get decent snapshots using mirror lenses, provided you dont

> > have OOF highlights (or provided you really like donut shapes).

> >

> > You may be able to get decent snapshots using cheap, 3rd part, super

> > telephoto lenses as well, provided you stop down to f/11, but it sure

> > will not be of any sporting action or wildlife (too slow).

> Not stated above is that the images will look ok (ie, P&S caliber) at

> 3x4.5 or 4x6 sizes - but will start to show their weaknesses when

> enlarged further.

>

> Still, having a mediocre lens is sure better than having no lens. A

> mirror lens, given its limitations, is a good lens to use for learning

> the harder parts of wildlife photography (understanding animal

> behavior, stalking, patience, etc.). And if the photos are for your

> own personal use, you may find the memories associated with it

> interesting enough to not care about the last word in detail.

Just to point out three good inexpensive alternatives: the older

Nikkor 500mm f8 is quite excellent, and goes for about $250

used (the equivalent Minolta and Canon 500mm mirrors may

be good, also...); the "el-cheapo" 400mm f6.3 preset-diaphragm

lens sold under various labels is surprisingly good, and likely under

$100; the various Sigma "APO" 400mm f5.6 versions are not

bad, and if purchased used, one may be quite cheap...

--

David Ruether

d_ruether@hotmail.com

http://www.David-Ruether-Photography.com