TTArtisans launches the RF 500mm f/6.3

[AlanF]

I looked on their website, and I saw the 300 g weight and no MTF curves. Do you have a link?

It has somewhere the weight is 1603-1617g, presumably small differences for different mounts. I can’t see anything about a hood or where it fits.

 

[neuroanatomist]

It has somewhere the weight is 1603-1617g, presumably small differences for different mounts. I can’t see anything about a hood or where it fits.

The lens has filter threads, the hood appears to be a screw-in type.



Where are you seeing the weight? I agree that 307 g seems really light, but that's what the spec table indicates.

 

[EricN]

I had trouble with the weight too and finally found it on a Polish page

TTartisan 500 mm f/6.3

Oferta obiektywów marki TTartisan powiększyła się o przeznaczoną do współpracy z pełnoklatkowymi bezlusterkowcami konstrukcję o parametrach 500 mm f/6.3. ...

www.optyczne.pl

 

[cayenne]

For $329 you cannot expect too much! If this lens would have had electrical contacts for focus guides / peaking and cost a bit more I likely would make a purchase. I have tried full manual lenses on a R5 without focus guides and struggled to obtain sharp images.

Are you saying the Canon RF cameras do NOT have focus guides/assist that work with a fully manual lens...say a vintage one with no "electrical contacts"?

 

[AlanF]

The lens has filter threads, the hood appears to be a screw-in type.

View attachment 211777 View attachment 211776

Where are you seeing the weight? I agree that 307 g seems really light, but that's what the spec table indicates.

View attachment 211778

No way its only 300g. Here's the link.

500mm F6.3 Telephoto lens

Full Frame MC Multi-Layer Coatings 3.3m Close-up Shot Comes with Tripod Mount Ring Focus Gear Ring Comes with a Metal Lens Hood

ttartisan.myshopify.com

 

[EricN]

No way its only 300g. Here's the link.

500mm F6.3 Telephoto lens

Full Frame MC Multi-Layer Coatings 3.3m Close-up Shot Comes with Tripod Mount Ring Focus Gear Ring Comes with a Metal Lens Hood

ttartisan.myshopify.com

View attachment 211779

It appears they have different webpages for our countries.

 

[AlanF]

It appears they have different webpages for our countries.

You have to click at the bottom right of the page and scroll through to find it.

 

[neuroanatomist]

It appears they have different webpages for our countries.

Indeed, that's the link I used for the screenshot of the table above where I highlighted the weight. Does not appear to be a unit conversion issue, either.

 

[neuroanatomist]

PetaPixel is reporting the 307 g weight.

The TTArtisan 500mm f/6.3 telephoto lens includes eight elements organized across five groups, including a pair of extra-low dispersion and two high-index glass elements. The full-frame telephoto prime lens weighs just over 300 grams (a hair under 11 ounces) despite its long focal length.

 

[AlanF]

PetaPixel is reporting the 307 g weight.

305g is the weight of the Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 to put it in perspective. A 500mm f/6.3 would have the same front element size as a 35mm f/0.44.

 

[neuroanatomist]

305g is the weight of the Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 to put it in perspective. A 500mm f/6.3 would have the same front element size as a 35mm f/0.44.

I agree the 307 g weight is not reasonable.

 

[Ozarker]

It has somewhere the weight is 1603-1617g, presumably small differences for different mounts. I can’t see anything about a hood or where it fits.

That sounds more like it. There's no way this is an 11oz lens. I regularly buy ounces, so I should know.

 

[mpmark]

What on earth would you use this telephoto for without AF? Moon shots?

 

[EricN]

What on earth would you use this telephoto for without AF? Moon shots?

faking UFO shots?

 

[AJ]

What on earth would you use this telephoto for without AF? Moon shots?

And there is also a lack of IS. Trying to manually focus in image that's bouncing around in the viewfinder is an exercise in frustration. Nevermind the results once you take the shot.
On the whole, this lens sounds like recipe for disappointment.

 

[EricN]

And there is also a lack of IS. Trying to manually focus in image that's bouncing around in the viewfinder is an exercise in frustration. Nevermind the results once you take the shot.
On the whole, this lens sounds like recipe for disappointment.

To be serious, there was a time when there was no IS or autofocus. They used tripods more often then. For the price, I think it's not bad.

 

[AJ]

To be serious, there was a time when there was no IS or autofocus. They used tripods more often then.

That's true, yes. There was also a time when film was 10 iso and subjects had to sit still. Those times are in the past, though.

 

[mpmark]

And there is also a lack of IS. Trying to manually focus in image that's bouncing around in the viewfinder is an exercise in frustration. Nevermind the results once you take the shot.
On the whole, this lens sounds like recipe for disappointment.

Completely agree, this is really pointless in my opinion.

 

[EricN]

That's true, yes. There was also a time when film was 10 iso and subjects had to sit still. Those times are in the past, though.

Now, the limitation which will make this a good option for some people is money. It's ok with me if you aren't interested in in this lens, but I'm certain some people particularly young people will be. Possibly, some smaller percentage of people with enough money to buy something with autofocus and IS might try it as a challenge, too.

 

[Jethro]

Now, the limitation which will make this a good option for some people is money. It's ok with me if you aren't interested in in this lens, but I'm certain some people particularly young people will be. Possibly, some smaller percentage of people with enough money to buy something with autofocus and IS might try it as a challenge, too.

If you are planning on using it on a tripod, I could imagine uses, but as has been mentioned before, the RF 600mm f/11 (stabilised and AF) is not hugely more expensive and, despite the naysayers, is a really good lens.