Mirror Lenses

I tried many old mirror lenses, and was disappointed by most, including an expensive Contax Zeiss 500/8 apparently in perfect condition (I wonder...).
The only one I could get really good photos - and many rejects due to difficulty to focus - was the Tamron 350/5.6 SP.
Did some of you compare mirror lenses of yesterday (say, pre-1990) with more modern ones (say, post-2010)? If yes, what did you find in terms of I.Q.?

A high quality film mirror lens (Nikon, Minolta, etc) from the 60's, 70's, 80's should produce an image of equal quality to current mirror lenses. However there are very few, if any, major manufacturers currently producing mirror lenses.

Tamron has some and I recently had their 400mm. I also have a Minolta 500mm from around 1980. I'd say image IQ from each was about the same and it can be excellent. The problem I've had with all mirror lenses is that focusing is difficult and unforgiving.
I like the concept of mirror lenses and I'm a very experienced photographer. I want to love mirror lenses and yes, then can produce sharp images but I find them difficult to focus with.

I've found mirror lenses don't quite live up to quality refractive lenses, but given the weight & financial savings I find them generally acceptable.
Here are a collection of shots using different lenses from my collection:
A cheap 500mm/8 on APSC DSLR
BSB Brands Hatch 4 by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

the same lens/camera combo when the action moved rapidly out of my pre-focused zone:
125 rider midtumble by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

Using a different lighter 500mm lens on FF autofocused via a Techart pro (recording IR only)
Nikon Shooter by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

A 600mm/11 mirror that was given to me (a test shot with a homemade hood)
sea worker crane by hooded 600mm by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

The same lens on a Full spectrum MFT body (2x crop & including IR, which reflective lenses can struggle with)
FS test - Reflex + focal reducer by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

And here's a shot shooting MFT through a 650mm/5.6 newtonian telescope (not quite the same I know)
prime focus small by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

Handling of long telephotos is definitely an acquired skill, especially where manual focusing is needed. With the exception of the last all of these were handheld

"Handling of long telephotos is definitely an acquired skill, especially where manual focusing is needed."

Agree and don't be in a hurry. Again, I love the concept but the focusing is tough especially if in a hurry. That said, there are some vintage AF mirror lenses (I know Minolta had some in the 90's) which may solve the focusing issue. I don't know if any AF mirror lenses are currently produced however.
The donut bokeh can be lovely especially when there's reflections on the water. Another issue is that mirror lenses are (were) all telephoto (300, 400, 500, 800, etc) and if you're shooting apsc, you've now increased your effective FL by at least 50%. Minolta did produce a super cool 250mm f5.6 mirror about the size of a 50mm f1.2 normal lens (even that 250 becomes though almost a 400 on my Fuji.

I think I'm gonna start taking out my 500mm Minolta mirror more often :)

AFAIK Minolta were the only ones who ever made an autofocus mirror lens, but there are some autofocus adapters that can give limited AF to manual lenses - the Techart Pro used for one of my examples above is one (though mirror lenses are usually above the maximum recommended weight). Another type that might work occasionally are AF teleconverters I believe both Nikon & Pentax made models that would give AF to manual lenses - but the slow apertures of most mirror lenses might be an issue.

Not normally considered a mirror lens, but 'birds eye' style adapters that mount in-front of standard lenses do use mirrors and give extreme wide angle views. I picked up a used Kaidan 360 to play about with this option. It gives a 360 degree (by 140 degree) FOV in a weird circular view:
NEPW - P1080495 small by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

As they mount before the lens camera format makes little difference. I've seen similar devices for mobile phones where the new price doesn't risk a heart attack (I think my adapter sold for hundreds when new)

Minolta's successor (Sony) produced a 500mm AF mirror lens which though discontinued was a newer version of Minolta's 500mm www.dyxum.com/reviews/lenses/Sony-AF-Reflex-500mm-F8_review310.html

Both the Minolta and Sony 500mm af mirror's are well regarded.

I'd never heard the Sony version was different than the Minolta one (other than cosmetically, changing the name on the lens doesn't count)

The criticism mentioned above ad unsharpness and lack of contrast may be expanded beyond focussing and shake issues.

Moving air currrents (=wind& thermal currents)with slightly differing refraction between the lens and the subject becomes more visible and destructive of imaging at long distances. Also, the annulus at the front of a Maksutov-Cassegrain impacts contrast negatively (in a way that I have never seen well explained) and lots of light travelling in opposite directions in the same volume must result in stray photons.

So in sum, a steady mount / accurate stabilization plus precise focus on the very narrow plane(?) that is desired sharp may not suffice. Also, one should note that with the light forming the picture travelling in-back-out, the mirror alignments are extremely critical, so any manufacturing imprecision, impact, or later well meaning atempts to dust off the internals may easily have destroyed the intended precision.

p.

I've both the Sony and Minolta versions of this lens , optically they are both the same .
When Sony bought the camera side of the business from Minolta, most of the first range of lenses were effectively rebadged Minolta's . Made under license.

Minolta also did an autofocus 400mm f/8 Reflex lens for their APS film cameras , the Vectis S-1 and S-100 , as well as the V mount dSLR , the Minolta DiMage RD-3000 .
These also have very good image quality.

I'm using one of these also on my Sony E mount cameras with the recently released via the recently released Minolta Vectis to Sony E Monster Adapter.

I've also the Tamron Adaptall 2 350mm and 500mm mirror lenses .
Both very good .
The 350mm is a nice focal length to work with when you want to travel light .

I've rather regretted buying the Vectis lenses I've brought (being fairly rare & all electronic they aren't easy to adapt). The monster adapter is far too expensive to try out a couple of £10 lenses. Maybe I should look into the RD3000, not that I need another camera!

I'd like to try a 350mm mirror on FF but have not come across one yet, I do have a Samyang 300mm mirror made for MFT. It works reasonably well but isn't anything outstanding. I ought to dig out a few images from it as well as the MTO 1000 which isn't represented above.

I like your photo “125 rider midtumble” 👍🏻

Just for fun 😎

Nikon 1 S1 (2013) / Sigma 600mm mirror f/8

Nikon 1 S1 (2013) / Sigma 600mm mirror f/8 by Marc Aubry, sur Flickr

morning blur by Marc Aubry, sur Flickr

The Sigma 600mm mirror f/8 turns into 1620mm with the little Nikon 1 S1 :)

Ode to love by Marc Aubry, sur Flickr

Here Sigma 600mm mirror with the Nikon D2X

Mirrored lenses can be fun to use on occasion.

Thanks @Maoby
My focus was definitely off, but it captures the moment all the same IMO. I also found the dark crescents interesting, not normally how bokeh shows :)
Yes taking things to extremes can be fun, I've not tried a mirror lens on the Pentax Q yet, but I'll get round to it sometime.

I have the Samyang 500mm F6.3 Mirror lens (purchased new in 2014) and contrast is pretty aweful but I think that's a characteristic of this type of lens. It can be improved somewhat in post but not fully.
Here are some test shots and some example images after processing. NB I haven't used the lens in quite a while.
Test shots...you can see they're not particularly sharp or contrasty:

Some images after processing which are still not particularly sharp or contrasty.
lunar eclipse Oct 2014 by astrogirl969, on Flickr
Moon and Samyang 500 f/6.3 by astrogirl969, on Flickr