Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Mamiya sekor 200/3.5 sharpest 200mm is it?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2019 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

D1N0 wrote:
But what is the best affordable 200mm lens?


Most probably the Minolta MD 200mm/F4, particularly in the latest MD II or MD III versions.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2019 1:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
D1N0 wrote:
But what is the best affordable 200mm lens?


Most probably the Minolta MD 200mm/F4, particularly in the latest MD II or MD III versions.


Like 1 but put it in the category "affordable best 200mm lens". I have the somewhat heavier MD I, I paid 45 Euro excl. 7 Euro postage.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

padam wrote:
Minolta MD 200/4 (last version) is a very sharp lens, also very very light so great to handle.
OM 200/4 is also very good (not quite as sharp, but warmer colors and softer blur)
There are dozens of good ones out there (like Konica 200/3.5), we are splitting hairs here.


The Minolta MC/MD 4/200mm in its first version (larger and heavier than the last version) is visibly better than most contemporary 4/200mm lenses i know, including the second (last) Minolta MD 4/200mm. Not only has it very little CAs, but also an incredible detail resolution, even in the Full Frame corners at f4.

Stephan


PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I bet you can make three Japan 4/200mm lenses out of Jupiter 21M glass. See design: http://allphotolenses.com/lenses/item/c_160.html
It is true Sonnar and obvious choice in category under 50 EUR.


PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2019 10:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've shot with several vintage 200mm lenses, and I was most pleased with the results (and handling and build quiality) of the Takumar 200/3.5.


PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2019 10:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

caspert79 wrote:
I've shot with several vintage 200mm lenses, and I was most pleased with the results (and handling and build quiality) of the Takumar 200/3.5.


+1 on that.
Canon FDn 4/200 is also a great lens and much much lighter, but the Takumar is truly a beaut.
Tom


PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2019 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the tak 200mm f3.5, and the meyer optik gorlitz orestogor 200mm f4, both are good lenses. I have also just acquired and cleaned a pentax smc 200mm f4 (1st gen K mount), this is also clearly an excellent lens, sharp from f4, very little fringing. But limited focus range relative to other 200's that focus much closer than 2m.
It's interesting that the tak 200mm f3.5 is 4 element while the tak 200mm f4 is 5 element, the latter's optical schema looks the same as this K 200mm f4, however the spec isn't quite the same this lens has closer focus (2m vs 2.5m) than the tak.
Test pics pentax k3 (24MPx), consistent settings (default) export from LR3.

#1


#2


#3


#4


#5


PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 2:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So, after allí, which affordable lens is best? I would rank the one that's got a hood, if it's incorporated with the body,much better


PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 2:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kiddo wrote:
So, after allí, which affordable lens is best? I would rank the one that's got a hood, if it's incorporated with the body,much better


Maybe the question should be .... Which good lens is affordable?
The Canon FDn is still very cheap but not as cheap as it was a year ago.
I got mine for $15 which was about the going rate at the time - sellers couldn't give them away.
Of course very nice images have started to appear from mirrorless cameras and this lens so the price has risen somewhat, but that has happened with most lenses.
You have plenty of suggestions in this thread - search for sales of these and see what you can find
Tom


PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 4:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've always been partial to the Nikkor 200mm. It can be got pretty cheaply if you spend some time at it. I've got one sitting on my desk as I type this waiting for me to dismantle and clean up. A couple of shots with my Ai version.




PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 6:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

gaeger wrote:
I've always been partial to the Nikkor 200mm. It can be got pretty cheaply if you spend some time at it. I've got one sitting on my desk as I type this waiting for me to dismantle and clean up. A couple of shots with my Ai version.




Yeah, Nikkors are usually pretty solid performers.


PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kiddo wrote:
So, after allí, which affordable lens is best? I would rank the one that's got a hood, if it's incorporated with the body,much better


Lenses such as the Canon FD 4/200mm, the Konica Hexanon AR 4/200mm, the Minolta MC 3.5 and 4.5/200mm, the Minolta MD 4/200mm (second computation), the Nikkor Ai/AiS 4/200mm, and the Pentax M 4/200mm perform nearly identically.

Other lenses such as the Hexanon AR 3.5/200mm and the Canon new FD 4/200mm IF have slightly different image characteristics (e. g. more yellow/blueish CAs in the case of the Hexanon 3.5/200mm, instead of the common reddish/green CAs), but otherwise are comparable in detail resolution.

Visibly better (less CAs, better corner resolution at f4 and f5.6) is the first computation of the Minolta 4/200mm in both its MC and MD versions.

Stephan


PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2019 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
I've shot with several vintage 200mm lenses, and I was most pleased with the results (and handling and build quiality) of the Takumar 200/3.5.


+1 on that.
Canon FDn 4/200 is also a great lens and much much lighter, but the Takumar is truly a beaut.
Tom


I've got a few 200s, but the main ones I use are the Orestegor 200/4 and the Takumar 200/3.5. I love the Orestegor, and it's the sharper of the two I think, but that Takumar 200/3.5 is something special. For some reason shooting with it is a joy, and I'm always looking forward to the next time I'll be using it.

It's probably my favorite Takumar.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2019 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've found a 200mm Group test (in Dutch). Focus magazine March 1973:








Interestingly the Konica Hexanon AR 200 3.5 also seems to be a Sonnar. It is the heaviest in the test. All major camera brand options are very good. Nikon and Olympus (OM-1 variant) seems very impressive. The Nikon is the most expensive lens in the test. Another interesting fact is that the CFD of the Tamron (which was used as a reference lens in the test seems to be 1.5 meters. Much shorter than all the rest of them. (I've got a newer adaptamatic 200 3.5 that focusses up to two meters).


PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2019 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you so much, this very valuable material . I've only own the Pentacon 200mm f4 in M42 , which i consider Sharp enough for portraits, for landscape, probably others listed previously,would do better. I wonder if you would have the Pentacon renderings to compare with others...


PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2019 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kiddo wrote:
Thank you so much, this very valuable material . I've only own the Pentacon 200mm f4 in M42 , which i consider Sharp enough for portraits, for landscape, probably others listed previously,would do better. I wonder if you would have the Pentacon renderings to compare with others...


I have one but don't like it very much. Too soft and rendering seems unnatural. But it's coatings are in poor condition, very flaked of. I will probably need another copy :p


PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2019 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@D1NO: thanks man, this is gold!


PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2019 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have one but don't like it very much. Too soft and rendering seems unnatural. But it's coatings are in poor condition, very flaked of. I will probably need another copy :p[/quote]

Well,mine came with plenty of haze and rust on couple of blades,which cleaned pretty well (not like new,as it left some black colour in the blade,which doesn't botter me); i've noticed ,with haze was less sharp ,being my only 200mm ,I wouldn't know how to compare it , so ,using it in portraits ,and seeing details, it's enough for me to say it's sharp enough for my needs . It's focus it isn't it's best,so ,to be a pleasure to use,would need some relube. These GDR and Russian lens , have pretty much same issue of relube helical ,well my Minolta MD it's the same.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2019 9:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

After I've seen the good lens it is the Olympus OM200mm ,with less weight and among the best of the range in sharpness,I wonder how would you compare de olympus 300 from the same times . Thanks


PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's interesting that they show a 20cm F4 Nikkor-Q, the original formulation of the lens. The formula was changed early on, the Nikkor-QC 200/4 is better. I prefer the newer 5-element 200/4 Ai. I have all three. I also have the AF-Micro-Nikkor 200/4.


PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2019 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fiftyonepointsix wrote:
It's interesting that they show a 20cm F4 Nikkor-Q, the original formulation of the lens. The formula was changed early on, the Nikkor-QC 200/4 is better. I prefer the newer 5-element 200/4 Ai. I have all three. I also have the AF-Micro-Nikkor 200/4.


Which one you used most, having all.of these nikkors?


PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2019 8:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I use the compact 200/4 Nikkor most often. It's small and light, especially for a 200. It is as sharp as I ever need. If I need close-in work, the Micro-Nikkor 200/4 comes out. I have a lot of manual focus Nikon lenses, started buying them over 40 years ago.

That Auto-Vivitar 200/3.5 brings back memories- I had one in High School, took it when I saw Elvis Presley. I bought the lens and a Vivitar 283 for the concert. I took my High-School Girl Friend AND her Mom to it. Her Mom was a big fan of Elvis.


PostPosted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 1:04 am    Post subject: Re: Mamiya sekor 200/3.5 sharpest 200mm is it? Reply with quote

dr.volkan wrote:
Today i use my old mamiya sekor 200/3.5
With my samsung nx3000


That's some very impressive IQ. Like it!