View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
WNG555
Joined: 18 Dec 2014 Posts: 784 Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA
|
Posted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
WNG555 wrote:
One of my last acquisitions of 2015. An MD-I version with the shorter lens hood.
Most impressive I got to say. I wasn't expecting such a big improvement over their MC f/3.5 (all-metal version). That one was a disappointment and couldn't return a sharp image no matter what. Managed to return it and got a refund, suspecting it had to be defective. But reading here, it did lack resolution.
As Thomas initially stated, no fringing, no aberrations. A sharp f/4, especially stopped down.
I'd say it ties with my Olympus OM Zuiko MC 200-f/4. I think it's better than the f/4 Super and S-M-C Takumars.
Only my copy of the Konica Hexanon AR 200-f/3.5 is sharper.
DSC07025 by wNG 555, on Flickr
DSC07006c by wNG 555, on Flickr _________________ "The eyes are useless when the mind is blind."
Sony ILCE-6000, SELP1650, SEL1855, SEL55210, SEL5018. Sigma 19/30/60mm f2.8 EX DN Art.
Rokinon 8mm f3.5 Fish-Eye, 14mm f2.8 IF ED UMC. Samyang 12mm f2.8 ED AS NCS Fish-Eye.
And a bunch of Manual-Focus Lenses
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
aeropic
Joined: 24 Jul 2015 Posts: 34
|
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2016 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
aeropic wrote:
Here are two nice birds having settled in my garden.
They are shot handheld with my MD rokkor 200 F/4.(sony alpha 6000 - cropped)
I love this lens. Very compact for its focal !
Alain
_________________ Sony a6000
- rollei planar 50 1.8
- rolleinar 35 2.8, 105 2.8
- Chinon 50 1.7
- yashica 135 2.8
- Minolta rokkor MC 58 1.4, MD 200 4, MD 50 1.7
- HELIOS 44-2, 44-3, 44M, 44M4
- industar 22
- Jupiter 8
- Konica Hexanon AR 50 1.7 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4001 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Sat Jan 16, 2016 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
I've been testing quite a few 200mm primes on the Sony Alpha 7 II:
* Canon FD 2.8/200mm
* Canon new FD 2.8/200mm IF
* Canon new FD 4/200mm IF
* Canon new FD 4/200 Macro
* Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 2.8/180mm (around 1955)
* Minolta MD 2.8/200mm (both MD-II and MD-III)
* Minolta AF 2.8/200mm APO G HS
* Minolta MC 3.5/200mm (all three: MC-I, MC-II, and MC-X)
* Minolta MC 4/200mm
* Minolta MD 4/200mm (MD-I)
* Minolta MD 4/200mm (MD-II, smaller version)
* Minolta MC 4.5/200mm (all three: MC-I, MC-II, and MC-X)
* Konica Hexanon AR 3.5/200mm (later version)
* Konica Hexanon AR 4/200mm
* Konica Hexar 4/200mm
* Nikon Nikkor Ai 4/200mm
* Pentax-M 4/200mm
Not surprising, the Minolta AF 2.8/200mm APO G HS is clearly the best out of the bubch listed above. In terms of corner detail resolution and CAs, i would rate the Minolta MC-X/MD-I 4/200mm as second-best. The difference to other good 200mm lenses is, however, not that big. Lenses such as the Canon FD 2.8/200mm, the Nikkor Ai 4/200mm, and the MD-II 4/200mm are nearly equivalent.
The Hexanon AR 3.5/200mm isn't that convincing on Full Frame. While the center has lots of detail, the contrast wide open is rather low, and even lower in the corners. In addition we have quite strong CAs (yellow-blueish). The Hexanon renders similar to my CZJ Sonnar 2.8/180mm.
My Canon nFD 2.8/200 IF and my nFD 4/200 IF seem to have slightly inferior performance, compared to the FD 2.8/200 SSC.
The Minolta MD 2.8/200mm has stronger CA than its f4 counterpart. The lens is as good as the FD 2.8/200mm SSC, and slightly better than my nFD 2.8/200 IF.
I have taken a few images with the Nikkor 2.8/180mm (non ED) as well. It has a Sonnar-like rendering (yellow-blueish CAs, rather low contrast, but lots of details wide open). Sadly, i've never been shooting with the famous Nikkor ED 2.8/180mm.
I hope this information may be helpful.
Stephan _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
WNG555
Joined: 18 Dec 2014 Posts: 784 Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA
|
Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2016 3:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
WNG555 wrote:
Interesting results Stephen! Thanks for sharing.
As for the Hexanon AR f/3.5 EE, I didn't see the yellow-blue CA nor the softness, but I was using a Sony APS-C, which could go to explain why.
Here's a SOOC jpeg only resized to fit here. Its full-sized photo shows finer detail of the palm's hair strands than any other of my lenses.
_________________ "The eyes are useless when the mind is blind."
Sony ILCE-6000, SELP1650, SEL1855, SEL55210, SEL5018. Sigma 19/30/60mm f2.8 EX DN Art.
Rokinon 8mm f3.5 Fish-Eye, 14mm f2.8 IF ED UMC. Samyang 12mm f2.8 ED AS NCS Fish-Eye.
And a bunch of Manual-Focus Lenses
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
Portrait of my dog with Ricoh GXR-M and MD 200mm/F4 fully open. Indirect flash was used:
#1
_________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Minolfan
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 3439 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Minolfan wrote:
tb_a wrote: |
Portrait of my dog with Ricoh GXR-M and MD 200mm/F4 fully open. |
Very nice dog portrait!
I only have the 200mm 4.5 MD; I didn't yet use it for a portrait of my dog. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
Minolfan wrote: |
Very nice dog portrait!
I only have the 200mm 4.5 MD; I didn't yet use it for a portrait of my dog. |
Thank you!
You should try it. Gives you a comfortable distance; i.e. no distraction for the dog. _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
glaebhoerl
Joined: 03 May 2014 Posts: 100 Location: Hungary
|
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
glaebhoerl wrote:
stevemark, if you remember: how was the performance of the Pentax-M relative to the others? If I remember correctly it's one of the smaller/lighter 200/4s around. _________________ use: 40/1.4 Zuiko; 50/1.4 Takumar; 85/2 Rokkor; 105/2.5 Nikkor; 200/5 Zuiko.
have: Lens Turbo II; 20/2.8 Flektogon; "25/1.4 APS-C"; 28/2.8 Industar; 35/1.8 Rokkor; 35-70/3.5 Rokkor; 50/1.4 Prakticar; 50/1.7 Zenitar-M; 50/1.8 Pancolar; 50/2 Jupiter; 55/2.8 Industar; 57/1.4 Hexanon; 58/1.8 RE.Auto-Topcor; 58/2 Helios; 100/2.8 Zuiko; 135/2.8 Pentacon, Yashica ML; 135/3.5 Pentax-M, Rokkor, Fujinon; 180/5.6 Sigma; 200/5.6 Tele-Takumar.
want: 12/2 Samyang; 20/4 Pentax-M; 24/2.8 Zuiko; 28/3.5 Pentax; 35/2.4 Prakticar; 35/3.5 Takumar; 50/1.5 Sonnar; 58/2 Small Biotar; 75/1.8 Fujinon-TV; 100/3.5 Canon (LTM); 135/2.5 Takumar; 135/3.5 Prakticar.
in my dreams: 80/1.8 Prakticar; 90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit-M; 180/4 APO-Lanthar; 250/5.6 Rokkor.
reviews flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mir
Joined: 07 Feb 2011 Posts: 979 Location: Montreal, Canada
Expire: 2017-09-30
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2017 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mir wrote:
I have the smallest version, 10 waffles row, 400gr, and the tapered DOF scale
and like it !
http://forum.mflenses.com/minolta-md-tele-rokkor-4-200-t72794,highlight,%2Bminolta.html _________________ "Obsta principiis, finem respice"
"There is a fine line between hobby and mental illness"
MISC: Tamron SP 35-80 (01A), Auto Chinon Tomioka 1.4/55, Tokina AT-X 2.5/90, Tamron SP 5,6/300 (54B)
ZEISS: WG Distagon 2.8/25, WG Distagon 2.8/35 HFT, WG Planar HFT 1.4/50, Ultron 1.8/50, WG Sonnar 2.8/85, WG Sonnar HFT 2.8/135
VOIGTLÄNDER : Ultron Aspherical 1.8/21, Ultron 2/28, Nokton Aspherical 1.2/35, Nokton Classic 1.4/40, Nokton Aspherical 1.5/50, Color-Heliar 2.5/75
MINOLTA: MD 3.5/35-70 Macro, MD 1.2/50, MC Rokkor-X 1.2/58, MD Macro 3.5/50
LEITZ: SUMMICRON-R 2/35 (II), SUMMICRON-R 2/50 (II), TELE ELMARIT-M 2,8/90 (Thin)
CANON RF: 2.8/28, 2/35, 1.2/50, 1.4/50, Serenar 1.8/50, 2/85, 2/100, 3.5/100
LTM : FUJINON L 2/5cm, CHIYODA KOGAKU SUPER ROKKOR 1.8/5cm, CHIYOKO SUPER ROKKOR C 2/5cm, TOKYO KOGAKU Topcor-S 2/5cm, Nippon Kogaku NIKKOR-H.C 2/5cm, KMZ Jupiter-8 2/5cm
DKL : VOIGTLÄNDER SKOPAREX 3,4/35, SEPTON 2/50, DYNAREX 3,4/90, SUPER-DYNAREX 4/135, Scheiner-Kreuznach Retina-Xenon 1,9/50
And a small Minolta AF set: 2.8/20, 1.4/35, 1.4/50, 2/100, 4.5/100-200
@we3fotography
@7plus_pictures
@_whats.that.car_ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2017 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
Mir wrote: |
I have the smallest version, 10 waffles row, 400gr, and the tapered DOF scale
and like it ! |
Mine is exactly the same version: It's the 2nd generation of MD II from 1980. One of the best MD lenses ever. _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Eddie46
Joined: 05 Dec 2016 Posts: 135 Location: cardiff,UK
|
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2017 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Eddie46 wrote:
I see a difference in Min. Aperture too.Shorter version has a Min. of 32? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2017 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
Eddie46 wrote: |
I see a difference in Min. Aperture too.Shorter version has a Min. of 32? |
That is no unique feature of the short version. Also the longer MD I and II versions have smallest aperture of 32.
Please refer to Dennis Lohmann's list of all Minolta SR lenses here: http://minolta.eazypix.de/lenses/ _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
Test shot with real roses with my Sony A7R II. Fully open at F4 with Sony HVL-F58AM flash against the ceiling.
100% crop:
IMHO also on high resolution FF camera an excellent performer.
Nothing wrong with this lens.
IIRC I've bought it NEW in 1981 for something like EUR 140.-. _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019 Posts: 880
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
Posted: Sat Mar 02, 2019 8:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
The only other 200mm lens I have is a soviet Jupiter 21M that is perfect if you can avoid flare. The Minolta MD 200 F4 is very close to my eyes with a better flare control. It is also half the weight...
[img]Paris by lumens pixel, sur Flickr[/img] _________________ Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4001 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2022 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
Here are three samples of the Minolta Tele Rokkor 4/200mm, along with its predecessor, the MC-X 4.5/200mm:
From left to right: MC-X 4.5/200mm, MC-X 4/200mm, MD-I 4/200mm, MD-II 4/200mm
Sadly, I've never ever seen a MD-III 4/200mm here in Switzerland. When the MD-III series was launched, Minolta wasn't considered "professional" any more here in Switzerland, and by far most people would buy the MD-III 4.5/75-200mm or 4/70-210mm zooms. If someone was considering a 200mm Minolta prime back then, it would be faster f2.8 version ...
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Doc Sharptail
Joined: 23 Nov 2020 Posts: 1189 Location: Winnipeg Canada
|
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2022 3:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Doc Sharptail wrote:
lumens pixel wrote: |
The only other 200mm lens I have is a soviet Jupiter 21M that is perfect if you can avoid flare. The Minolta MD 200 F4 is very close to my eyes with a better flare control. It is also half the weight...
Paris...
|
-D.S. _________________
D-810, F2, FTN.
35mm f2 O.C. nikkor
50 f2 H nikkor, 50 f 1.4 AI-s, 135 f3.5 Q,
50 f2 K nikkor 2x, 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 A/I-s, 35-105 3.5-4.5 A/I-s, 200mm f4 Micro A/I, partial list.
"Ain't no half-way" -S.R.V.
"Oh Yeah... Alright" -Paul Simon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kiddo
Joined: 29 Jun 2018 Posts: 1264
|
Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2022 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kiddo wrote:
stevemark wrote: |
Here are three samples of the Minolta Tele Rokkor 4/200mm, along with its predecessor, the MC-X 4.5/200mm:
From left to right: MC-X 4.5/200mm, MC-X 4/200mm, MD-I 4/200mm, MD-II 4/200mm
Sadly, I've never ever seen a MD-III 4/200mm here in Switzerland. When the MD-III series was launched, Minolta wasn't considered "professional" any more here in Switzerland, and by far most people would buy the MD-III 4.5/75-200mm or 4/70-210mm zooms. If someone was considering a 200mm Minolta prime back then, it would be faster f2.8 version ...
S |
Hi Stevemark,
I'm still looking for the 75-150 rokkor, but is very hard to find ,so , is there any 75-200 that would get same sharpness in the FL? Don't really care about weight , but if possible, not much CA, thanks |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4001 Location: Switzerland
|
Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2022 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
kiddo wrote: |
Hi Stevemark,
I'm still looking for the 75-150 rokkor, but is very hard to find ,so , is there any 75-200 that would get same sharpness in the FL? Don't really care about weight , but if possible, not much CA, thanks |
It's a pity I didn't know it since a few weeks ago there was one for sale here in Switzerland, around CHF 60.-- or so.
Anyway, you may find a (preliminary) answer here on the 70-150mm thread:
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1564888.html#1564888
S _________________ www.artaphot.ch |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MiguelATF
Joined: 16 Oct 2022 Posts: 7 Location: Oregon, USA, Planet Earth
|
Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2022 10:52 pm Post subject: such a cool lens |
|
|
MiguelATF wrote:
I realize this is a relatively ancient thread, but as a new forum member, I'm just chiming in to say how cool these 200mm FD f/4 Rokkors look. I spent a decade or two back in the analog days shooting Pentax glass - both M42 Takumars on my old Spotmatics, and then SMC Pentax lenses on my MX's - and these Rokkors seem equal to or better than any of the old Pentax smallish telephotos I occasionally used.
These days much of my photography is done with some nifty micro four thirds cameras (which often rather remind me of the feel of my ancient Pentaxes) - and after reading this thread (and some others) I'm considering trying to track down an f/4 MD Rokkor 200mm to use on my (Olympus) E-M5.3
I'm wondering if any has suggestions or advice - either regarding the quirks of using them via an adapter (I'm leaning towards the K&F-to-M43) -- but also just where the heck one can find decent used copies these days?
Any thoughts or suggestions would be deeply appreciated.
Cheers from Oregon!
Miguel |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2022 3:01 pm Post subject: Re: such a cool lens |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
MiguelATF wrote: |
I realize this is a relatively ancient thread, but as a new forum member, I'm just chiming in to say how cool these 200mm FD f/4 Rokkors look. I spent a decade or two back in the analog days shooting Pentax glass - both M42 Takumars on my old Spotmatics, and then SMC Pentax lenses on my MX's - and these Rokkors seem equal to or better than any of the old Pentax smallish telephotos I occasionally used.
These days much of my photography is done with some nifty micro four thirds cameras (which often rather remind me of the feel of my ancient Pentaxes) - and after reading this thread (and some others) I'm considering trying to track down an f/4 MD Rokkor 200mm to use on my (Olympus) E-M5.3
I'm wondering if any has suggestions or advice - either regarding the quirks of using them via an adapter (I'm leaning towards the K&F-to-M43) -- but also just where the heck one can find decent used copies these days?
Any thoughts or suggestions would be deeply appreciated.
Cheers from Oregon!
Miguel |
Last first. I had no trouble finding both 135mm and 200mm Rokkors on eBay. I did target a particular older 135mm and was fortunate to find it in mint condition.
Over the past few months, I have given an Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II a try. I have no intention of replacing my Sony FF A7 II, but wanted to see if the 2x field of view coupled with greater pixel density would give me better images than cropping my FF to the same degree. The answer is mixed, so I won't go into that now. I did find that some lenses didn't perform as well on the Oly, but I also found that the two Rokkors seemed to perform exceptionally well. They weren't the lenses I had in mind for the greater reach I was after, but the 200mm giving me double the reach has been good. To sum it up, I do recommend the Rokkor 4/200 for use with M43.
_________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 3202 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2022 3:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
Looks good indeed. _________________ For Sale:
Techart Pro LM-EA7
Minolta MD 24mm f/2.8
Steinheil Auto D Tele Quinar 135mm f/2.8 (Exa)
ISCO Isconar 100mm f/4 (Exa)
Steinheil Cassarit 50mm f/2.8 M39 (Paxette) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MiguelATF
Joined: 16 Oct 2022 Posts: 7 Location: Oregon, USA, Planet Earth
|
Posted: Tue Oct 18, 2022 8:27 pm Post subject: Re: such a cool lens |
|
|
MiguelATF wrote:
woodrim wrote: |
... To sum it up, I do recommend the Rokkor 4/200 for use with M43. |
Thanks for the reply, Woodrim, and for posting the sample image. It looks very nice to me.
My brief update: after considerable searching, I've found what I believe to be an MD-II copy of the lens - that is, the lighter-weight version - for an extremely reasonable price, from a seller on fleabay who is not a photographer (but rather who just sells assorted old or used stuff). Which means there is no guarantee that the lens will even work, via an adapter, on my Olympus M43 camera (an E-M5.3) --- but I'm optimistic it will.
When the lens arrives, and after I can get a few shots with it, I'll post an update here. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MiguelATF
Joined: 16 Oct 2022 Posts: 7 Location: Oregon, USA, Planet Earth
|
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2022 9:22 pm Post subject: My newly acquired MD-II 200mm Rokkor |
|
|
MiguelATF wrote:
I found this lightly used MD-II (the lighter weight version of the lens) from a seller on eBay and it appears to be in excellent shape. Will be using it on my Olympus E-M5iii - and hope to post a few samples here soon.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010 Posts: 3678 Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
I have the same lens and have tested it with my Panasonic Lumix GX80 also in combination with the Zhongyi Lens Turbo II.
This results in almost a 300 mm lens (FF FOV equivalence) with the speed of F2.8 on MFT, already usable wide open. Comparable original MFT lenses this fast would be far more expensive.
Maybe you should consider that as well. _________________ Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kiddo
Joined: 29 Jun 2018 Posts: 1264
|
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
kiddo wrote:
I've found the 75-200 f4.5. Version very cheap , I'm looking for a good zoom in this range , but unfortunately cannot find enough info comparing it with primes or other versions of the rokkor. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|