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

Minolta MD Tele Rokkor 200mm 1:4
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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


PostPosted: Sat Jan 16, 2016 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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




PostPosted: Sat Jan 16, 2016 8:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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


PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2016 3:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.



PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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

#1


PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2017 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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


PostPosted: Sat Jan 07, 2017 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.


PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2017 3:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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


PostPosted: Sun Jan 08, 2017 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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/


PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.-.