FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Minolta 80-200 G sharpness?

Page  12>
Author
Tarantula Guy View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: 13 November 2016
Country: United States
Location: Alvin, TX
Status: Offline
Posts: 8
Post Options Post Options   Quote Tarantula Guy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Minolta 80-200 G sharpness?
    Posted: 12 February 2018 at 17:22
Hi everyone


I was wondering, how sharp is the Minolta 80-200 G wide open? Is it sharper than the Sony 70-200 2.8 (some places I've read imply that)? I've read some place (this forum mainly) that says it is razor sharp wide open and other that say its soft wide open. I bring all this up because I recently shot a basketball game with the 70-210 f4 (Beercan) and found it just wasn't enough fast enough. I need a 70-200 2.8 that I can shoot wide open without losing lots of detail. For the money, what the sharpest 70-200 2.8 for a-mount? Also are the Tamron and Sigma offerings better? How much slower is the AF on the old Tamron compared to the Minolta?

P.S Some sample pics would be nice

Edited by Tarantula Guy - 12 February 2018 at 17:26
 



Back to Top
arrow34 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 04 April 2013
Country: United States
Location: MI
Status: Offline
Posts: 85
Post Options Post Options   Quote arrow34 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2018 at 17:52
I had the same questions you did... I read and read and read. It was a hard decision. A lost of the reviews in the lens database have great reviews on each lens. I also read from kurt and a few other lens reviewers that have been around.

I almost bought this one. .tamron

I ended up buying(last week)a sony 70-200 2.8 ssm version 1 sony . IT was only a bit more then the Minolta 80-200 apo. I also was on the fence with the Tamron and Sigma offerings(the older ones with screw drive, no focus limiter, no os) I almost went tamron, but decided the last time I went more economical, I got screwed (I bought a tokina 80-200 f2.8) and it had very hard to see haze on a much older lens.

The sony is arriving today and I am going to try it out. I updated my walk around lens last year to a sony Zeiss 24-70 and was very happy with the upgrade. I am hoping that it will be the same with the 70-200
Sony A99, Tokina 28-70, Minolta 17-35, 24-50 f4, 28 f2, 50 f1.4, 35-105, 28-105, 70-210, 100-200, 100-300. Samyang 35 1.4
Back to Top
stiuskr View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Joined: 01 September 2006
Country: United States
Location: West Virginia
Status: Offline
Posts: 10934
Post Options Post Options   Quote stiuskr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2018 at 18:01
Rob Suits Jr.
a99M2 a99 a77 a700 KM7D|Min24/2.8 Min35/2 So50/1.4 So50/2.8 Min85/1.4G Tam90/2.8 Tam180/3.5|Tam17-50 CZ24-70G2 KM28-75D So70-200G1 So70-300G So70-400G1| SonyF60 AD200R2
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 2042
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2018 at 18:02
I don't think you can expect a x-200 F2.8 zoom to be very sharp wide-open, but you might find a copy that is decent at one end or the other. Here is Roger Circala of Lens Rentals experience.

Minolta definitely seems to me to have been at the top of their lens making game in the 1980's. So, I expect their 80-200 to be a bit better on average.

Edited by QuietOC - 12 February 2018 at 18:10
A68 30M 35 50 60M 16-50 16-80 18-55 18-70 18-135 55-200 55-300
A6000 LA-EA1 6.5 16 20 30 50 60 16-50 18-55 55-210
600si: 20 24 28 50 100M 135 24-85 24-105 28-105 35-70 35-105 70-210 75-300 100-200
Back to Top
Photosopher View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Knowledgebase Contributor

Joined: 13 June 2010
Country: United States
Location: St. Louis Mo
Status: Offline
Posts: 4056
Post Options Post Options   Quote Photosopher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2018 at 18:11
I've shot both lenses (and others) extensively for years.

Between 80-160mm(ish), the Minolta is equal sharpness to the Sony AMount 70-200/G across the frame.

The closer to 200mm, the Sony is progressively sharper on the outer portions. They are still equal sharpness in the central 1/3 of the full frame.

The Minolta gets softer everywhere by comparison to the Sony at closer focus distances, towards the tele end. This could be handy for close head shots... if you're into that. It's certainly not bad, and can have the effect of sharp eyes in the central portion of head shot, with softer edges. It's nice. But full length full frame vertical body shots on the Minolta at 200mm will be softer on the edges (where the head is), than the Sony A. Still not bad though. Best keep it around 150mm-ish for sharpest full length edges where face lands on vertical shot.

The Sony CA has less anomalies.
_____

The differences between the Mino and Sony are noted at the extremes, 200mm borders, closest focus tele.

Likewise, the difference between the Sony A and Sony EMount 70-200GM are similar as described between the Mino and Sony A. The GM is sharper/contrastier at closest focus tele and 200mm borders. At 180mm, they are virtually identical performance. The EMount GM has less sensor reflection (none) for direct sun shots than any of the others. The Sony 70-400/G is a more modern lens, and combined with 135/1.8, may accommodate better for what an f2.8 tele zoom does alone.
Back to Top
Tarantula Guy View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: 13 November 2016
Country: United States
Location: Alvin, TX
Status: Offline
Posts: 8
Post Options Post Options   Quote Tarantula Guy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2018 at 19:14
If you guys are saying that Minolta is not as sharp as the Sony, than I just save for the Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD, because Tony Northrup says (other people too) that the Tamron is sharper than the Sony G (and a lot cheaper)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P80BpSQIIto
 



Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 8665
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2018 at 19:33
Are you okay with the 70-210/4 Beercan wide open? If you do, the 80-200/2.8 and all the other ones mentioned here are plenty sharp as the Beercan is not sharp wide open, nowhere near sharp imho.

What do you mean exactly by fast enough? If it is AF, the same thing goes as the Beercan is not a fast focussing lens.

(the beercan has other qualities, but sharpness and AF speed are not among them.
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Offline
Posts: 24651
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2018 at 19:36
Irrespective of what you do make sure you test before you buy or have a good return policy. I think the differences between all the lens reviews/tests you can find on the internet are for a significant part also a function of sample variation, and not only the inherent quality of the lens design.
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, see here
Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 13882
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2018 at 19:43
Originally posted by Tarantula Guy Tarantula Guy wrote:

... how sharp is the Minolta 80-200 G wide open? Is it sharper than the Sony 70-200 2.8 (some places I've read imply that)?

Are you aware that there is also an essentially identical Minolta version of the 70-200? Just sayin' you don't have to consider only the Sony version.
Back to Top
Tarantula Guy View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: 13 November 2016
Country: United States
Location: Alvin, TX
Status: Offline
Posts: 8
Post Options Post Options   Quote Tarantula Guy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2018 at 20:02
I mean more light
Back to Top
Photosopher View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Knowledgebase Contributor

Joined: 13 June 2010
Country: United States
Location: St. Louis Mo
Status: Offline
Posts: 4056
Post Options Post Options   Quote Photosopher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 February 2018 at 20:21
Originally posted by Tarantula Guy Tarantula Guy wrote:

If you guys are saying that Minolta is not as sharp as the Sony, than I just save for the Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD, because Tony Northrup says...


With respect, I'm always suspect how detailed reviewers get with their micro AF adjustment before making claims. With the Tamron, you will only get center AF point micro adjustment. With the Sony, not only do you get center adjustment for both wide and tele ends, but you'll also get wide and tele adjustments for all four corners separately. EDIT: On a99II body only.

I find this level of adjustment a bit overkill, as a good center adjustment for wide and tele get me close enough in the corners. But if your lens is slightly decentered, then it could be valuable.

Also don't discount the native Sony lens too fast because your AF selection points available on a99II are greatly reduced with anything else than the Sony G1 or G2. Only for stills though. Video AF area is reduced size to the same area that all other lenses have available.

If shooting primarily APS-C, then I wouldn't worry about the additional AF selector area available with full frame.
_____

Back to Tony, and sharpness claims. He's very thorough, and I admire him. But sometimes people will perform micro AF adjustment indoors at night with tungsten light with a sharp edged object. They might not be very thorough in their method. I find that doesn't match up the next day outdoors with daylight balance and organic subject. The Sony AMount 70-200/2.8 G1 and G2 are so sharp that I often wonder if I really need the ZA135/1.8. Having said that, I'm sure the Tamron is very sharp too. Perhaps sharper even. But sharpness is never been my main concern for a lens in its totality. If you absolutely need absolute undisputed 200mm sharpness, then consider the Minolta 200mm 2.8 APO. CA and sharpness about the same as the ZA135/1.8. Probably get it with a Mino 100/2 for about the same price as the zooms.

Edited by Photosopher - 12 February 2018 at 20:25
Back to Top
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 2906
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 February 2018 at 09:18
I've tried to assess lens peformance before buying many times by reading web reviews, and I've come to the sad conclusion that most sharpness reviews are hardly worth reading, let alone relying on.

I've read countless non-expert reviews of tele lenses the users claim are very sharp, and then illustrate with pictures that are clearly not sharp at all. Then otehrs try a lens which is widely accepted to be sharp and claim it is rubbish.
I conclude that although lenses certainly do differ, most blog writers are not capable of testing lens sharpness to any useful degree, and their findings (on this topic) are essentially just noise.

I'm a big fan of Roger Cicalla.
I also use the lens blur charts on SLRgear a lot, but it is clear that even here there is enormous variation between lenses, and according to test methods, and that some of my lenses perform quite differently to the ones on SLRgear.

To pick just one example other than the ones already mentioned, most lenses have a degree of field curvature at some focal distances, which often goes away at other distances. If you check a lens on a flat chart at 2-3m, field curvature can sometimes make the corners really soft when they do not appear so at infinity. Sometimes the reverse can be true, and sometimes performance at 30m can be very different from 300m.
EDIT: see here

Then there's axial CA which confuses a lot of people. Photographing bare tree branches in winter can show up axial and lateral CA very well and distinguish it from actual softness. Then there's flare, vignetting, and loss of contrast, all of which can come and go in different scenes.

And do we really need to check the corners at 100% crop? Apart from giving us a nice warm feeling that our lens is better than we need it to be?

So, I understand why you want to know, but I wish you the best of luck finding out!

Edited by Miranda F - 13 February 2018 at 10:11
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A58, 5d, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras . . .
Back to Top
Matt View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 30 November 2005
Country: Netherlands
Location: Maastricht
Status: Offline
Posts: 543
Post Options Post Options   Quote Matt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 February 2018 at 15:59
Have a look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgWkqO7zlMk
Back to Top
stiuskr View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group

Joined: 01 September 2006
Country: United States
Location: West Virginia
Status: Offline
Posts: 10934
Post Options Post Options   Quote stiuskr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 February 2018 at 17:48
Originally posted by Matt Matt wrote:

Have a look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgWkqO7zlMk


At the 2:40 mark they do a direct comparison between the Sony 70200G2 and Minolta 80200G with an a99II.
Rob Suits Jr.
a99M2 a99 a77 a700 KM7D|Min24/2.8 Min35/2 So50/1.4 So50/2.8 Min85/1.4G Tam90/2.8 Tam180/3.5|Tam17-50 CZ24-70G2 KM28-75D So70-200G1 So70-300G So70-400G1| SonyF60 AD200R2
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Lens Talk > A-mount lenses Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.