FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

100-300 APO, 75-300 Big Beercan, DT 55-300 SAM

Page  123 4>
Author
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Online
Posts: 2361
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: 100-300 APO, 75-300 Big Beercan, DT 55-300 SAM
    Posted: 15 July 2016 at 01:42
A 70-210 F4.5-5.6 II and a 100-200 F4.5 thrown in the mix at the shorter focal lengths. I could have included some better options like the Sony DT 55-200 or Minolta AF 70-210 F4.

100 mm wide-open center


100 mm wide-open top left APS-C corner


100 mm wide-open bottom right APS-C corner


200 mm f/5.6 center


200 mm f/5.6 top left APS-C corner


200 mm f/5.6 bottom right APS-C corner



300 mm f/5.6 center


300 mm f/5.6 top left APS-C corner


300 mm f/5.6 bottom right APS-C corner


Edited by QuietOC - 15 July 2016 at 01:49
Sony A68 A77II A6000 A7II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8
 



Back to Top
dxqcanada View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 16 March 2008
Country: Canada
Location: Ontario
Status: Offline
Posts: 223
Post Options Post Options   Quote dxqcanada Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 July 2016 at 02:17
Hmm, good thing I picked up the DT 55-300mm
Sony A77mII, A57, Nex-6 | Minolta Maxxum 9000, Autocord | Canon P
.
http://oldcam.wordpress.com
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 9332
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 July 2016 at 06:50
Hmmm, I never tested my 100-300 APO this way, but I'm sure it will do better then this copy.

Did you use a tripod, SSS-off, manual focus? What was the focus distance?
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
Dunadan View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 09 November 2006
Country: Poland
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Posts: 1575
Post Options Post Options   Quote Dunadan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 July 2016 at 07:56
It's also surprising to see how well 75-300 performed. I'd guess rather bad 100-300 copy, or good 75-300 ;)
Jakub
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Online
Posts: 2361
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 July 2016 at 12:00
Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Hmmm, I never tested my 100-300 APO this way, but I'm sure it will do better then this copy.

Did you use a tripod, SSS-off, manual focus? What was the focus distance?


Yes, tripod, SSS off, manual focus. I used a IR remote to operate the shutter.

Fairly close focus distance, but I will do a longer test. I don't expect any change though.

Originally posted by Dunadan Dunadan wrote:

It's also surprising to see how well 75-300 performed. I'd guess rather bad 100-300 copy, or good 75-300 ;)

Maybe. I did have a worse copy of the 75-300. I tried a 100-300 APO D a month ago that performed the same, and that one I did also test at a much longer distance.

Edited by QuietOC - 15 July 2016 at 12:58
Sony A68 A77II A6000 A7II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8
Back to Top
TheEmrys View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 18 August 2012
Country: United States
Location: Northern CO
Status: Offline
Posts: 2103
Post Options Post Options   Quote TheEmrys Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 July 2016 at 14:09
I had had a bad copy of the APO, and this seems similar to it. I owned both the 55-300 and the 100-300 apo d, and they were awfully similar. To your 55-300 results.
a7II, a6000 - Sony 28/2, 21mm converter, 55/1.8, 16-70/4, Minolta 28-135, 100/2, 80-200 HS G, Minolta 100-300 APO D,MD 35-70/3.5, MC 50/1.4
 



Back to Top
Kaishi View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 December 2007
Country: United States
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 320
Post Options Post Options   Quote Kaishi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 July 2016 at 14:25
EDIT: I was half asleep when I first wrote this, so I'm going back to edit it for clarity.

First, I'll be on topic:

Great work on these comparisons. I appreciate you sharing. I have a few questions:

1) can we find copies of the newer 75-300, and the 70-300 G SSM (I/II, either) for you to test in the same manner?

2) What about accounting for lens calibration / micro adjustment? Have you calibrated these lenses on your test body?

Now, a little less on-topic, but some interesting observations:

I think it's neat to see the evolution of optical accuracy. For most of the history of 35mm film cameras, very few customers would be producing anything larger than 5" x 7" prints. As such, minor chromatic aberrations and lower optical resolution would be completely acceptable, noticeable only at cost-prohibitively large print sizes. Into the 1990s, even early digital cameras couldn't take full advantage of glass. It's only today that we can test those older lenses and perform such a details analysis of their performance characteristics.

I think we should be very aware of sample variation, and not be too quick to judge a whole family of lenses based on a single sample. This is one of the cool things about how LensRentals.com tests their equipment, where they track the variance between many samples, and the frequency of repairs. But we won't be able to gather than kind of data, nor have them test all the legacy glass in the world :( Would that we could, eh?

I imagine that a professional lens like the 300/2.8 would be bang on from its earliest incarnation forward, as would be necessary for the use of Teleconverters, combined with magazine-resolution (8" x 10" or larger) printing. At the price point, any customer purchasing that grade of lens would expect extreme performance.

Edited by Kaishi - 15 July 2016 at 15:08
α900/VG, α77ii/VG, A7rII/VG, AF 28-70 F2.8 G, 16-50 F2.8 SSM, Σ 105 F2.8 EX DG OS HSM MACRO, SP 150-600 F5-6.3 Di USD;Gallery
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Online
Posts: 2361
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 July 2016 at 15:00
Originally posted by Kaishi Kaishi wrote:

First, I'll be on topic:

can we find copies of the newer 75-300, and the 70-300 G SSM (I/II, either) for you to test in the same manner? What about accounting for lens calibration / micro adjustment? Have you calibrated these lenses on your test body?

I am interested in the 70-300G and Tamron 70-300 USD. At least they are lighter than the Big Beercan.

I am manually focusing with magnification, so calibration wouldn't have mattered.

Edited by QuietOC - 15 July 2016 at 15:05
Sony A68 A77II A6000 A7II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8
Back to Top
Kaishi View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 December 2007
Country: United States
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 320
Post Options Post Options   Quote Kaishi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 July 2016 at 15:11
Originally posted by QuietOC QuietOC wrote:

I am manually focusing with magnification, so calibration wouldn't have mattered.
Awesome! Great decision to achieve fair results.

I'm on the market for a good lens to cover 100-300 full-frame. Funny, I've had 4 different ones over the years but they're all since gone.
α900/VG, α77ii/VG, A7rII/VG, AF 28-70 F2.8 G, 16-50 F2.8 SSM, Σ 105 F2.8 EX DG OS HSM MACRO, SP 150-600 F5-6.3 Di USD;Gallery
Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14126
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 July 2016 at 18:36
Originally posted by Kaishi Kaishi wrote:

What about accounting for lens calibration / micro adjustment? Have you calibrated these lenses on your test body?

Optical performance testing always requires meticulous manual focusing. Testing done using AF tests the AF system instead.

I think we should be very aware of sample variation, and not be too quick to judge a whole family of lenses based on a single sample.

Correct. (Nor should all testing be confined to near-focus test charts.)
Back to Top
Matt View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 30 November 2005
Country: Netherlands
Location: Maastricht
Status: Offline
Posts: 571
Post Options Post Options   Quote Matt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 July 2016 at 20:18
Hmm, I was considering getting a Minolta 100-300 F4.5-5.6 D APO for my A77-II and A55. It is such a nice and compact lens to carry.
Back to Top
Kaishi View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 December 2007
Country: United States
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 320
Post Options Post Options   Quote Kaishi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 July 2016 at 20:49
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

Optical performance testing always requires meticulous manual focusing. Testing done using AF tests the AF system instead.

Correct. (Nor should all testing be confined to near-focus test charts.)
You're absolutely right :) I was way too tired to be thinking logically this morning. I'm just glad the OP is using MF.

Glad we agree, too. I like seeing these results even though they aren't statistically significant.
α900/VG, α77ii/VG, A7rII/VG, AF 28-70 F2.8 G, 16-50 F2.8 SSM, Σ 105 F2.8 EX DG OS HSM MACRO, SP 150-600 F5-6.3 Di USD;Gallery
Back to Top
keith_h View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 May 2006
Country: Australia
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Posts: 3053
Post Options Post Options   Quote keith_h Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 July 2016 at 12:36
I have a few of the MinO lenses and the 100-300D. I use them in circumstances where I am prepared for the possible trade off in image quality compare to current generation lenses. And yet all these great old lenses are capable of great images in the right situations.

I have some killer images taken with the 100-300D and the 28-85 with 100-300 hood is just superb on the a200 in the right conditions. I think that's important here,understanding the limitations and using the lenses accordingly.
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Online
Posts: 2361
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 July 2016 at 13:06
Here is my testing a year ago of my previous copy of the 100-300 APO along with the same DT 55-300, a 70-210 F4 (labelled "M210" and "BC"), and a DT 55-200 SAM. This is using a poorer print of the test chart.

100 mm wide-open center


100 mm wide-open top left


100 mm wide-open bottom right


200 mm f/5.6 center


200 mm f/5.6 top left


200 mm f/5.6 bottom right


Edited by QuietOC - 17 July 2016 at 14:24
Sony A68 A77II A6000 A7II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Lens Talk > A-mount lenses Page  123 4>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.078 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.