Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Which Minolta 200mm?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 4:30 pm    Post subject: Which Minolta 200mm? Reply with quote
Optically, which of these 200mm lenses would be the better buy?

Minolta 4.5/200 MC TELE ROKKOR or Minolta 4/200 MD TELE ROKKOR

Both lenses are in mint condition.

My heart tells me the MC but my head the MD! Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
always latest serie if possible, older are less good a few exception apply only, like 100mm PF 2.0

Last edited by Attila on Thu Sep 11, 2014 7:01 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Take a look at the tests here
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fartaphot.ch%2Fminolta-sr%2Fobjektive%2F176-minolta-200mm-f4&edit-text=

Original
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive/176-minolta-200mm-f4


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Maybe you should take a look here: http://artaphot.ch/sony-nex/altglas/338-nex-5n-und-minolta-200mm-teleobjektive


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Gerald wrote:
Maybe you should take a look here: http://artaphot.ch/sony-nex/altglas/338-nex-5n-und-minolta-200mm-teleobjektive


H'mm Interesting at the end :- "I know from a reliable eye witness that around 1980 Tamron was producing "original" lenses for Canon, Nikon, Minolta and Pentax in the same building. The MD 5.6/100-300mm might be one of them. " Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If the MD 200 f4 is the same optics as my MC 200 f4 then it is a great lens. The f4.5 will be a much smaller lens, but I am not familiar with it.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
according Artaphot ch there are two different MD 200mm f4.
I have the second one (I think) . It is a good lens.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 8:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:
Gerald wrote:
Maybe you should take a look here: http://artaphot.ch/sony-nex/altglas/338-nex-5n-und-minolta-200mm-teleobjektive


H'mm Interesting at the end :- "I know from a reliable eye witness that around 1980 Tamron was producing "original" lenses for Canon, Nikon, Minolta and Pentax in the same building. The MD 5.6/100-300mm might be one of them. " Rolling Eyes


And?

Many third party manufacturers have produced lenses for the major companies, today Tamron, Tokina and Cosina make lenses for the major companies, in the past, many others did too.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Excalibur wrote:
Gerald wrote:
Maybe you should take a look here: http://artaphot.ch/sony-nex/altglas/338-nex-5n-und-minolta-200mm-teleobjektive


H'mm Interesting at the end :- "I know from a reliable eye witness that around 1980 Tamron was producing "original" lenses for Canon, Nikon, Minolta and Pentax in the same building. The MD 5.6/100-300mm might be one of them. " Rolling Eyes


And?

Many third party manufacturers have produced lenses for the major companies, today Tamron, Tokina and Cosina make lenses for the major companies, in the past, many others did too.


Producing lenses In the same building? Did they produce 20,000 Nikon lenses, then 30,000 Pentax lenses or have it sectioned off for different makes and made them all at once, or the difference between different makes of lenses is less than we think IF using one production line......well I'm just curious Wink


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 11:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Having worked in Quality Control for a few engineering companies that supplied components to different manufacturers, mainly motor industry, I know that the different companies - buyers - had very different quality demands, even for a product that was shared with another manufacturer. At one company we just ran lines with minimum quality control then sorted the product, the good stuff went to one and the shite to another. ( I've never owned a Ford Rolling Eyes )


PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2014 12:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
memetph wrote:
according Artaphot ch there are two different MD 200mm f4.
I have the second one (I think) . It is a good lens.


I have recently purchased the first version MD 4/200. That German site was a big influence in me selecting this lens. I never considered the f/4.5. I wanted a good, sharp wide open lens. My initial tests indicate that it is a very nice lens, but not quite as sharp as I had hoped. My Series 1 3/200 is still sharper even though faster too. I did some side by side with my Topcor 5.6/200 and thought the Topcor was a little better overall, but Topcor had the advantage being at f/5.6 and that should be considered. The Rokkor had some red fringing and the Topcor had less.

Following are two sets of crops taken from different parts of the same shots.

Rokkor left side of image


Topcor left side of image


Rokkor center


Topcor center


And two Rokkor shots at f/4 while I was testing...



PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2014 6:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Swiss not german !
They did not test the second version which is lighter. Mine is sharp and contrasty. Its bokeh is not so nice as the 3.5 Takumar's one as I showed you on your thread.
I recently bought a MD 70/210 f4 . I shall compare the prime with the zoom when I'll have time.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2014 7:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:
Having worked in Quality Control for a few engineering companies that supplied components to different manufacturers, mainly motor industry, I know that the different companies - buyers - had very different quality demands, even for a product that was shared with another manufacturer. At one company we just ran lines with minimum quality control then sorted the product, the good stuff went to one and the shite to another. ( I've never owned a Ford Rolling Eyes )


An amusing reply when someone says\boasts "I have a Nikkor ****" and you reply "no you ain't it's a Tamron made lens" Wink Anyway I suppose who really cares as long as a lens gives excellent results.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2014 7:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excalibur wrote:
Lloydy wrote:
Having worked in Quality Control for a few engineering companies that supplied components to different manufacturers, mainly motor industry, I know that the different companies - buyers - had very different quality demands, even for a product that was shared with another manufacturer. At one company we just ran lines with minimum quality control then sorted the product, the good stuff went to one and the shite to another. ( I've never owned a Ford Rolling Eyes )


An amusing reply when someone says\boasts "I have a Nikkor ****" and you reply "no you ain't it's a Tamron made lens" Wink Anyway I suppose who really cares as long as a lens gives excellent results.


............ or "I have a Canon" .............. and it sports a Nikon made lens ...... Very Happy
See:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/htmls/nikon_canon.htm


PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2014 11:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Which Minolta 200mm?

the Minolta AF 2.8/200 APO G of course Laughing


PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2014 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Tedat wrote:
Which Minolta 200mm?

the Minolta AF 2.8/200 APO G of course Laughing


AF? What's that? MF rules, OK!!! Wink Smile


PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2014 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
DigiChromeEd wrote:
Tedat wrote:
Which Minolta 200mm?

the Minolta AF 2.8/200 APO G of course Laughing


AF? What's that? MF rules, OK!!! Wink Smile


AF? Boooooooo.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2014 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
you don't hav to use the AF.. you know? Wink


PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2014 8:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Didn't Igor post some shots with the manual Minolta 200 APO 2.8 a while back? I wasn't really familiar with the fact there was a Mino manual focus 200/2.8, but I was pretty blown away by his pics and looked it up later.

http://www.rokkorfiles.com/200mm.htm


PostPosted: Sat Sep 13, 2014 3:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kenetik wrote:
Didn't Igor post some shots with the manual Minolta 200 APO 2.8 a while back? I wasn't really familiar with the fact there was a Mino manual focus 200/2.8, but I was pretty blown away by his pics and looked it up later.

http://www.rokkorfiles.com/200mm.htm


I have this lens Smile, in a case and everything. Haven't used it yet, my MD-NEX adapter is broken haha. I need to buy a new adapter and check this lens out. It doesn't say APO, just Minolta 200 2.8


PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 6:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
the MD Tele Rokkor has a different design and afaik it's not a APO.. that's the one I was talking about:

http://www.photozone.de/sonyalphaff/660-minolta200f28

Sure it's a AF lens, but what a gem.. some years ago the german "Foto-Magazin" listed the Minolta AF 2.8/200mm APO G as one of the five best 35mm lenses at all kind and of all times. No idea if this is true and which the other 4 lenses are, but I can tell you it's my favorite tele (also have/had Vivitar Series 1 3/200 and Contax Sonnar 2.8/180).
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1