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

Minolta MD Tele Rokkor 2.8/200mm
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 9:10 am    Post subject: Minolta MD Tele Rokkor 2.8/200mm Reply with quote
Shots from two hikes in the Lloyd Stage Nature Center, taken with a Sony A7II.



Bambi



Says who?



The victor.



Hey, what happened to the picnic?



If I don't move he won't see me. If I don't move he won't see me. If I don't move he won't see me.



Do you have any idea just how hard it is to get a doe to smile for her portrait?


PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 12:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1 Nice ones Steve.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kryss wrote:
Like 1 Nice ones Steve.


Thank you.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 20, 2017 8:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very nice indeed


PostPosted: Wed Sep 20, 2017 8:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
vlousada wrote:
Very nice indeed


Thank you.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 20, 2017 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1


PostPosted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I also have the MD 200 2.8. It is in my frequent user bin marked EXCELLENT NFS.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1 Excellent pictures, excellent lens


PostPosted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 3:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Exellent photos!

I have a comment and a question about this lens's performance.

Comment: I own the Canon FD equivalent, the New FD 200mm f/2.8. It's a great lens, but one has to be careful how it's used beccause of chromatic aberrations. I discovered with the lens I bought back in the 80s that with high contrast subjects, such as hard lines against a bright background, that CA was a real problem, especially green and magenta fringes. These were problems I saw on film images. I recently re-acquired this lens and have used it some with my Sony NEX 7. It shows some purple fringing with these same sorts of subjects, but not too bad. This has always been my chief complaint against an otherwise great lens.

I looked closely at your photos, especially your 2nd and 3rd shots. I would expect to find CA fringing with my Canon lens in these two images. But it appears that your MD lens is exhibiting none whatsoever. So I'm wondering, have you removed evidence of CA in these images, or are they pretty much as shot from the camera? If the latter, then I'll have to admit this is an extraordinary lens.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 8:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
Exellent photos!

I have a comment and a question about this lens's performance.

Comment: I own the Canon FD equivalent, the New FD 200mm f/2.8. It's a great lens, but one has to be careful how it's used beccause of chromatic aberrations. I discovered with the lens I bought back in the 80s that with high contrast subjects, such as hard lines against a bright background, that CA was a real problem, especially green and magenta fringes. These were problems I saw on film images. I recently re-acquired this lens and have used it some with my Sony NEX 7. It shows some purple fringing with these same sorts of subjects, but not too bad. This has always been my chief complaint against an otherwise great lens.

I looked closely at your photos, especially your 2nd and 3rd shots. I would expect to find CA fringing with my Canon lens in these two images. But it appears that your MD lens is exhibiting none whatsoever. So I'm wondering, have you removed evidence of CA in these images, or are they pretty much as shot from the camera? If the latter, then I'll have to admit this is an extraordinary lens.


I do own and use quite many 200mm lenses, among them the Minolta MD-II and MD-III 2.8/200mm, as well as the Canon FD 2.8/200mm and nFD 2.8/200mm IF. All of them have their CAs, and basically they play in the sam league (loook at their construction ... all with LD glass, but NOT with ED/AD/UD, let alone Fluorite). The Canon nFD 2.8/200mm IF is easier to focus than the rest, but it generally has a bit lower performance. None of them can compete with the MF and AF 2.8/180mm ED Nikkors or the Minolta AF 2.8/200mm APO. Concerning CAs, the Minolta Tele Rokkor MC-X 4/200mm is in between these two groups (the later, smaller MD-II is not as good!).

The newest version of the Carl Zeiss Sonnar 2.8/180mm does have as much CAs as the other vintage (non-ED) 2.8/200mm lenses, but their color is blueish / yellow (Minolta and Canon are reddish-green).

The nFD 4/80-200mm has nearly no CAs (comparable to the MinAF 2.8/200mm and certainly better than the Sony AL 2.80-200mm G). However, at f=200mm its other aberrations and are much stronger than those of the MinAF 2.8/200mm.

Stephan


PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
Exellent photos!

I have a comment and a question about this lens's performance.

Comment: I own the Canon FD equivalent, the New FD 200mm f/2.8. It's a great lens, but one has to be careful how it's used beccause of chromatic aberrations. I discovered with the lens I bought back in the 80s that with high contrast subjects, such as hard lines against a bright background, that CA was a real problem, especially green and magenta fringes. These were problems I saw on film images. I recently re-acquired this lens and have used it some with my Sony NEX 7. It shows some purple fringing with these same sorts of subjects, but not too bad. This has always been my chief complaint against an otherwise great lens.

I looked closely at your photos, especially your 2nd and 3rd shots. I would expect to find CA fringing with my Canon lens in these two images. But it appears that your MD lens is exhibiting none whatsoever. So I'm wondering, have you removed evidence of CA in these images, or are they pretty much as shot from the camera? If the latter, then I'll have to admit this is an extraordinary lens.


Sad to admit, there is some minor CA with this lens. My normal routine is to check the CA box in the lens correction section of Lightroom. (The correction is for the MC 4.5/200 but works well enough on my lens.)

The CA becomes serious when I shoot the lens with the Minolta 300-S 2X extender.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2017 8:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1


PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2017 4:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:

I do own and use quite many 200mm lenses, among them the Minolta MD-II and MD-III 2.8/200mm, as well as the Canon FD 2.8/200mm and nFD 2.8/200mm IF. All of them have their CAs, and basically they play in the sam league (loook at their construction ... all with LD glass, but NOT with ED/AD/UD, let alone Fluorite). The Canon nFD 2.8/200mm IF is easier to focus than the rest, but it generally has a bit lower performance. None of them can compete with the MF and AF 2.8/180mm ED Nikkors or the Minolta AF 2.8/200mm APO. Concerning CAs, the Minolta Tele Rokkor MC-X 4/200mm is in between these two groups (the later, smaller MD-II is not as good!).

The nFD 4/80-200mm has nearly no CAs (comparable to the MinAF 2.8/200mm and certainly better than the Sony AL 2.80-200mm G). However, at f=200mm its other aberrations and are much stronger than those of the MinAF 2.8/200mm.


I neglected to mention that the particular Canon 200/2.8 I own is the last of them, the nFD 200/2.8 IF. I've always liked the speed at which one can focus the lens with its IF. I haven't had the opportunity to test it directly against other 200mm focal length lenses -- until now. Well, now, I have the opportunity -- I just haven't done it yet. I suspect that my lowly little Canon nFD 200mm f/4 IF will give it a really good run for the money. A lens that can be found on eBay for less than a fifth of what the vaunted 200/2.8 IF sells for. Having that extra stop of speed really introduces a host of complications.

A few years ago, I was jonesing bad for a Nikon 180mm f/2.8 ED to replace the one I sold a couple of decades ago. It was such an outstanding performer, I was just never able to get it out of my head. I came real close to pulling the trigger on one that was on eBay, but as part of the process of doing my due diligence, I was checking out the Modern Photography lens tests over at adaptall-2.com in which it was being compared to the Tamron 180/2.5 LDIF. There was something about the Nikon's MP tests that seemed familiar, but I wasn't able to put my finger on it. Finally, I hit on it. Adaptall-2.com also had the MP tests for the Tamron 80-200mm f/2.8 LD. They were comparing it to the Tokina 80-200/2.8 SD and it was clearly the better lens. But anyway, I finally figured out what was bugging me. The test numbers for the Tamron 80-200/2.8 LD at 200mm and the Nikon 180/2.8 ED were virtually identical. I was taken aback by the close similarities. (Don't take my word for it, go over to adaptall-2.com and see for yourself.)

So, armed with this additional bit of information, I expanded my search to include the Tamron 80-200/2.8 LD. Well, given that it usually sold for more than the Nikon back then -- when you could find one -- I didn't hold out much hope. But then I ran across one at KEH. One of their infamous BGN listings. It was said to be very clean except the focusing collar slipped a bit. And for that, it got reduced to BGN. At a rather substantial savings. Over $100 less than what I would have had to pay for the Nikkor. So I bought it. And, truth be told, I haven't been disappointed. This Tamron zoom is a big, heavy lens, but thankfully it has a nice feature that the Nikkor lacks -- a tripod mount.

With regard to CA, I've found the big Tamron's to be very well controlled. And what little that does appear, it can easily be handled in post production. Sharpness is excellent, I've found. Here's the lens, followed by a couple of examples. The camera I used for the photos was my old 10.1mp Canon XS (1000D):

Mounted to a tripod with the very necessary tripod adapter:


A shot of some roses with the Tamron 80-200:


And a 100% crop of the point of focus:


PostPosted: Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I recognize that ballhead - a Slik Porfessional made in Japan all metal model... I have one and it's a tank.

In regards to the 200mm, I had the Nikkor ED ais 180mm f2.8 and it was about as great as a lens could get. The only thing I didn't care for about it was the weight and size of it and the backwards focus and aperture compared to all my other Minolta lenses that I shoot with my Fuji XT-1.

So out of curiosity sake, I found a great deal on a Minolta Rokkor MD 200mm f2.8 and bought it. It's a bit lighter and quite a bit more stealth in diameter compared to the Nikkor 180mm.

I found to be about 90% of the quality of the Nikkor 180mm. Sharpness is just about equal, the purple fringing which is nonexistent with the Nikkor but is present with the Minolta; though really not too bad imo.

What was really surprising was how excellent the 200mm f2.8 Minolta worked with the Minolta 300s 2x teleconverter. Absolutely NO drop in image quality either in the center or edge to edge. Makes for a really compact 400mm f5.6 equiv. In fact, I also owned a Nikkor 300mm EDif ais f4.5 lens and had been very impressed with it. But the minolta + 2x combo just blew it away in terms of overall quality even taking into account the increased magnification.

Added bonus - that combo focuses to the same 6' mfd the 200mm alone does, offering some cool creative options.

Love the 200mm Minolta - great lens.

JT


PostPosted: Fri Sep 29, 2017 9:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Jtrcy wrote:

...
In regards to the 200mm, I had the Nikkor ED ais 180mm f2.8 and it was about as great as a lens could get.
...
So out of curiosity sake, I found a great deal on a Minolta Rokkor MD 200mm f2.8 and bought it. It's a bit lighter and quite a bit more stealth in diameter compared to the Nikkor 180mm.

I found to be about 90% of the quality of the Nikkor 180mm. Sharpness is just about equal, the purple fringing which is nonexistent with the Nikkor but is present with the Minolta; though really not too bad imo.
...
Love the 200mm Minolta - great lens.

JT


Wait until you get to know the Minolta AF 2.8/200mm lens.

Minolta MD 2.8/200mm: Two large LD lenses (Abbe number of 70)
Nikkor 2.8/180mm ED: One large ED lens (Abbe number 81.9)
Minolta AF 2.8/200mm APO: Two large AD lenses (Abbe number 84)

The Minolta is really well corrected. Not only the CAs, but all other aberrations as well...

Stephan
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1