| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
connloyalist
Joined: 22 Jul 2020
Posts: 342
Location: the Netherlands
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2024 4:34 pm Post subject: Minolta MD 200mm 4.0 |
 |
|
connloyalist wrote:
Went to the zoo in Amersfoort today, first time I had been there. A nice zoo in the woods with some interesting places to take pictures. I brought my Olympus E-M1 MkII (micro four thirds, so 2x crop factor) and my Minolta 200mm f/4 MDII version (the second lighter weight MDII version). I unintentionally shot half the day wide open (f/4) in stead of one stop down as I usually do. But as it turns out I got more keepers from f/4 than from f/5.6, probably due to shutter speed. Everything was shot at ISO400. Converted from RAW to JPG "Fine" with no edits, this is as shot.
Somehow I always come back with a few really nice pictures from the Minolta 200mm (I have also have the MDIII version).
This one is my favorite of the day I think.
Regards, C. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10957
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2024 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
 Nice!
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX-A ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (151B), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doc Sharptail
Joined: 23 Nov 2020
Posts: 1162
Location: Winnipeg Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2024 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Doc Sharptail wrote:
That isn't bad at all for f4 or f5.6.
I try to go as low as possible with ISO.
Good bright daylight usually allows use of ISO 64 for me with most of my lenses.
For most of the 200mm lenses in my stable, I've found f8 to be optimal.
At times in heavy over-cast with a 200mm on white-tailed deer that are skittish, I'm forced to ISO 400.
The bodily movements of these deer can be quite jerky and rapid.
Nikkor 200mm A/i f4 at F8, ISO 400
One of my better wildlife photo's, taken right here in town.
Image is a crop.
I think the shutter speed had to be at least 1/250 sec (more likely 1/500 sec) to get this detail level.
Heavy overcast drove contrast quite low.
-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 |
|
|
connloyalist
Joined: 22 Jul 2020
Posts: 342
Location: the Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 17, 2024 9:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
connloyalist wrote:
| Doc Sharptail wrote: |
That isn't bad at all for f4 or f5.6.
|
This baboon was at f/4.
Regards, C. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Doc Sharptail
Joined: 23 Nov 2020
Posts: 1162
Location: Winnipeg Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 18, 2024 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Doc Sharptail wrote:
| connloyalist wrote: |
| Doc Sharptail wrote: |
That isn't bad at all for f4 or f5.6.
|
This baboon was at f/4.
Regards, C. |
That lens is definitely a keeper with wide open performance like that!
-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 |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3930
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 18, 2024 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
| Doc Sharptail wrote: |
That isn't bad at all for f4 or f5.6.
-D.S. |
... especially if one considers that the E-M1 is u4/3 and has 20 MP. Pixel desity corrsponds to 80 MP in Full Frame!!!
Several 4/200mm lenses from around 1980 are quite good (Canon nFD, Nikon AiS, Minolta MC-X and MD-I, Yashica ML-C, Mamiya Sekor E ...). Due to the combination of builit quality and performance I consider the Minolta MC-X to be the "best", but I don't know - for instance - the Zuiko 4/200 or the Pentax-A 4/200.
That said, the Pentax-M and the Konica AR 4/200m lenses are visibly weaker than the other lenses mentioned before.
Of course the Nikon AiS 2.8/180mm ED, let alone the Leica R 3.4/180mm APO are even better, but that's anoter class of lenses, for sure.
S
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
connloyalist
Joined: 22 Jul 2020
Posts: 342
Location: the Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 18, 2024 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
connloyalist wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
Several 4/200mm lenses from around 1980 are quite good (Canon nFD, Nikon AiS, Minolta MC-X and MD-I, Yashica ML-C, Mamiya Sekor E ...). Due to the combination of builit quality and performance I consider the Minolta MC-X to be the "best", but I don't know - for instance - the Zuiko 4/200 or the Pentax-A 4/200.
That said, the Pentax-M and the Konica AR 4/200m lenses are visibly weaker than the other lenses mentioned before.
Of course the Nikon AiS 2.8/180mm ED, let alone the Leica R 3.4/180mm APO are even better, but that's anoter class of lenses, for sure.
S |
My alternate "zoo" lens is the Canon nFD 200/4.0 which I have used for quite a few zoo trips. I recently acquired a Nikon AI 200/4 (not the AIS... is there a difference?) but haven't used it much yet. I also do like the Zuiko 200/4 but the Minolta and Canon are both about 100 grams lighter weight than the Zuiko or Nikon which for me is a relevant consideration when carrying it around all day (health issues, long story).
So I gather the Pentax-A and Pentax-M are not the same in terms of optical quality? I have a Pentax-M, but I guess I will have to find a Pentax-A 
Regards, C. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
