Minolta MD Tele Rokkor 200mm 1:4

[WNG555]

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

[aeropic]

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

[stevemark]

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

[WNG555]

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.

[tb_a]

Portrait of my dog with Ricoh GXR-M and MD 200mm/F4 fully open. Indirect flash was used:

#1

[Minolfan]

[tb_a]

[glaebhoerl]

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.

[Mir]

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

[tb_a]

[Eddie46]

I see a difference in Min. Aperture too.Shorter version has a Min. of 32?

[tb_a]

[tb_a]

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.-.

[lumens pixel]

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]

[stevemark]

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

[Doc Sharptail]

[kiddo]

[stevemark]

[MiguelATF]

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

[woodrim]

[caspert79]

Looks good indeed.

[MiguelATF]

[MiguelATF]

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.

[tb_a]

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.

[kiddo]

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.