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

Minolta AF lenses recommendation needed
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2015 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So, here are the first two examples of the 85mm/F1.4 lens on the Sony A850 FF camera:

F=1.6


F=5.6


Pictures re-sized for display here. ISO was at 800 rather high as I didn't find batteries for my flash.
I know that there are better objects, but I had nothing else on hand for the moment and for the test it doesn't matter anyway.
Shooting distance was slightly above minimum of 0,85m.
I was under the impression that I made the first photo with F1.4 but EXIF tells me that it was F1.6. However, I don't think that this would make any visible difference. If you would like, I could eventually repeat the test. Please let me know.
If you want to see an original, please advise via PM where to send it. However, that is a really large file which may be above certain Mailbox limits.


PostPosted: Tue May 12, 2015 2:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Extreme condition 85mm/F1.4 fully open under direct bright sunlight (nearly impossible without grey filter) therefore slightly overexposed.
View outside the open window. The rose in the middle is some few meters away.

Now definitely F1.4:



Crop 100% from the middle of the rose:



In the 1:1 full size view some purple fringing becomes visible. However, normally under such extreme circumstances nobody would use F1.4 for such a picture and the overall picture size in this view is almost billboard like.

Specification of the lens: http://www.mhohner.de/sony-minolta/onelens/af85f14

Let me know whether you want to see some more. I could do also some similar tests with the 80-200/2.8 APO or any other lens I have out of my reported collection.


PostPosted: Wed May 13, 2015 7:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

a few more from the 2.8/200 HS APO G... this time taken with the Sony A900:


@2.8



@3.2



@4.5



@5.6



PostPosted: Thu May 14, 2015 5:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eddie
Indeed a very sharp lens with a nice out of focus rendition. The portrait shows it very well. I can see now why you like it so much.
Now I want it, too!
A new lens on my short "wanted" list.

Thomas
Thanks for the samples with the 85 f/1.4 lens. It looks like a very good lens to me, capable of large enlargements.
The purple fringing from the last sample photo, in those difficult light conditions, is not much to worry about, IMO.

Jan

Thank you very much for the posted photo samples. The 200 f/2.8 seams up to its reputation. Very nice separation between portraits and backgrounds and lovely OOF rendition, somehow expected at this FL from a reputed G lens. But the last photo, at f/5.6, shows a level of sharpness (in the flikr larger size) that exceeded all my expectations!


PostPosted: Thu May 14, 2015 6:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dan_ wrote:

Thanks for the samples with the 85 f/1.4 lens. It looks like a very good lens to me, capable of large enlargements.
The purple fringing from the last sample photo, in those difficult light conditions, is not much to worry about, IMO.


It will disappear when stopped down anyway. For me it's a fantastic lens on FF. Most probably also because I have also the MF version (MC Rokkor-PF 85/1.7) since ages and liked it also very much on film. 85mm on FF is one of my favorite focus lengths. Thats one of the reasons why I like my MF (MC Rokkor-PG 58mm/1.2) that much on APS-C as it leads to 87mm equ. FOV which is almost the same. Wink


PostPosted: Fri May 15, 2015 6:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dan_ wrote:
But the last photo, at f/5.6, shows a level of sharpness (in the flikr larger size) that exceeded all my expectations!


the AF 2/100 is even a tad sharper (at f/2.8!) and also has a very pleasant (creamy) bokeh... those both are my favorite Minolta AF lenses.

You asked for the 80-200 G zoom which I also had (and sold together with my A900 when I decided to focus on the A7), it's a fantastic zoom.. maybe not on the same level as the 200 APO G (the later 70-200 SSM zoom comes a bit closer), but still outstanding. With 1.3kg it's just to heavy/bulky for such a small camera and this was the only reason to let it go.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2015 11:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

eddieitman wrote:
Dan, since i gave you my advice, i acquired two extraordinary lenses, the 135F2.8 and the 100mm F2
The 100mm F2 is absolutely amazing, that lens is now always on the camera for portraits.
It will be a cold day in hell before i lose that lens.


The MFD of the 100mm f2 is much too long for me. The Sony 55-200mm lens (though probably not as good optically over much of its range) is far superior for close-ups, eg flowers, but then there are better macro lenses available like the Tamron 90mm f2.5 or f2.8.

The Minolta 75-300mm lens is also an excellent lens IMHO (build, handling, as well as optics) but if the OP already has the 100-300 APO there's not much point.

I reckon that the Minolta 28-100mm lens, though not rated as highly as the 28-105, is actually a very good lens for its class and can be picked up very cheaply. Mine is very sharp over the range, and has a usefully short MFD for close-ups. It's incredibly small and light too.

Agree that that the Sony 35mm f1.8 is an excellent choice on APS-C, equivalent to the 50mm we all used in SLR days. Probably not the ideal lens for macro work due to its short MFD but better than most of the older 50mm lenses (2.8 macro excepted) and I've taken some lovely flower pics with mine.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2015 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For Minolta lenses, the Dyxum database and forum on http://www.dyxum.com/index.asp are worth a look.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 18, 2015 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If the MFD of the AF 2/100 is much too long for your taste.. get the Minolta AF Macro 2.8/100 instead.. it's cheaper anyway Wink

About the AF 3.5-5.6/28-100.. it was one of those cheap plastic kitlenses (thats the reason why it's so light). Not as bad as the 28-80.. but also not a great lens (check Dyxum if you don't believe). If you think it's sharp.. get a 3.5-4.5/35-105 from the 1. generation and you know what I'm talking about. This one won't cost much more, but is so much better in every aspect.

The 4.5-5.6/75-300 is a really nice lens, but again only the first generation. The later versions are different and far from this quality.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dan I recently also went to the Sony. I am asking the same questions as you! However, I have found a good super wide zoom AF that I can recommend. Tamron 19-35 AF 3.5-4.5. Its small , light inexpensive for a super wide, I got mine for 129USD plus shipping. I also think IQ is quite good. Please ignore the spots apparently I had some debris on my sensor, as after I saw the spots on these photos I did a sensor clean and a test shot with the same lens came out clear. so... not the lenses fault! JPG from the camera resized only


PostPosted: Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tedat wrote:
dan_ wrote:

- the "secret handshake" 28-135 zoom for 112 EURO shipped, from Italy;
- the 100-300 APO D zoom locally for a little more than 100 EURO.


there you got some really good deals


dan_ wrote:

Is the Zeiss zoom so much better than the Minolta ones I got?


nope.. the Vario Sonnar 2.8/24-70mm ZA SSM would be better, but this will cost "a bit" more Wink


Yes I paid over 900 USD for a exterior beat up version (glass was impeccable) It is quick and sharp and weighs 4 times as much as my camera. It is as heavy as the 70-400 G Sony! Also it is not small. But hey it takes lovely photos and autofocus is lightning fast and quiet.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 04, 2015 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jamaeolus wrote:
I have found a good super wide zoom AF that I can recommend. Tamron 19-35 AF 3.5-4.5.


That's the Tokina 19-35 rebadged, a very good lens. The 19-35 is the same optics as the earlier 20-35 but rehoused in a cheaper plastic compared to the 20-35s all metal barrel.

I have the 20-35 and use it a lot, it outperforms most legacy wides. My first copy was beaten up and eventually died on me so I ound a mint replacement for 50ukp, the original beat up one had been 25ukp.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2015 11:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anybody watching this might be interested in this:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Minolta-35-m-camera-/252049414829?hash=item3aaf50daad

the 70- to 210 and the 28-85 plus a lowepro bag, no bids currently at 15 USD about 3 hrs to go! I already have both of those.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2015 9:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know that this is not a new thread, but thought I could share my experience anyways: I have the LA-EA4 adapter with Minolta 17-35mm/2.8-4, 50mm/1.4 and 80-200/2.8 (black) for use on my A7r. In low light situations I prefer manual focus, but AF works great otherwise. The 50 is nice and compact, and provides great bang for the buck (I lucked out and snagged mine for a mere £25 bundled with an old Minolta body). The 80-200 feels a tad too heavy for the A7r body, but image quality is great! I really loved my 70-200/4L when using Canon gear, and missed it a lot when moving to Sony - not anymore! Very Happy I got mine together with the 17-35 for around £450, which I think was a really good deal. The 17-35 shows some vignetting on the widest end, but cleans up nicely in post.

Here are some snaps with the 80-200 from my trip to Sri Lanka this summer. Unfortunately, I only have these resized samples (which Facebook so kindly has degraded to pieces) on this HDD. I might dig out the originals later, as these really don't do the lens any justice...



PostPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2015 10:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Congrats Like 1

Well, the Minolta AF 50/1.4 is one of the best lenses ever. Heavily underrated by most people. I love this lens for best results.

Your black F2.8 tele zoom isn't bad either, though the later generations are a little bit better compared in pixel peeping mode. I have the 2nd generation one in white which is quite similar and also very heavy. That's the reason I don't use it very often. Wink

I don't have the 17-35 zoom but it's known to be very good. I rather prefer to have the smaller and faster primes in this range instead.

All in all that deal wasn't bad at all. I paid much more only for the tele zoom. Wink

Curios to see some more pictures from your trip. I always enjoyed Sri Lanka very much when I was there. Beautiful country. Unfortunately still politically unstable and somehow strange.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2015 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'll see what I can find on my other HDD Wink Sri Lanka is indeed a very "strange" place... Nice weather and great food, though!

I really love the 80-200 for its ability to isolate subjects. Great for portraits, as is the 50. I mostly use Canon FD lenses, but it's nice to have some AF alternatives for traveling - my wife isn't patient enough for manual focus shots, haha!


PostPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2015 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not a MF fanatic. Therefore I like to have a full set of Minolta AF lenses for my Sony A850 FF DSLR as well. Though I like MF shooting very much. For travelling I rather prefer the faster AF option to avoid that I miss the right moment. Wink

Indeed, the food is very nice there. Quite comparable to the south Indian kitchen. In the last years I was rather travelling to Kerala/India instead.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 04, 2015 1:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've decided to build a Minolta AF set....

I've gathered 2.8/20, 2.8/24 and 1.4/50...
Tonight i bought the Sony LA-EA4 for my ɑ7

More to come

Thanks to all for sharing their experiences with Minolta AF lenses !


PostPosted: Wed Nov 04, 2015 3:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mir wrote:
I've decided to build a Minolta AF set....

I've gathered 2.8/20, 2.8/24 and 1.4/50...
Tonight i bought the Sony LA-EA4 for my ɑ7


Congrats! Wise decision. Wink


PostPosted: Wed Nov 04, 2015 9:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mir wrote:
I've decided to build a Minolta AF set....

I've gathered 2.8/20, 2.8/24 and 1.4/50...
Tonight i bought the Sony LA-EA4 for my ɑ7

More to come

Thanks to all for sharing their experiences with Minolta AF lenses !


The 135/2.8 is a gem too


PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 1:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I also like my MAF 300/4 very much, even as MF-lens:
http://forum.mflenses.com/minolta-af-300mm-f-4-apo-g-hs-t71048.html#1456327


PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rick1779 wrote:

The 135/2.8 is a gem too


It's on my list, too.


PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2015 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How about the 85/1.4 GDL? Wink


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2015 4:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mir wrote:
I've decided to build a Minolta AF set....

I've gathered 2.8/20, 2.8/24 and 1.4/50...


Added this one today :



Still looking for a hood.... Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2015 5:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Congrats Wink