Minolta AF 200mm F2.8 G APO HS A-mount lens reviews
 awa54#45749 date: Aug-27-2021 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Mino 100-300/3.5-5.6 APO Mino 100-200/4.5 |
| price paid: | $450 USD |
| positive: | Battleship build with moderate weight Awesome built in hood Versatile focus limiter (though it will puzzle many users the first time they use it) Focus hold button (I use for DOF preview) Fast, positive focus even in low light Sharp, contrasty, Minolta colors, great bokeh and overall image feel (as expected) Very little IQ reduction with 1.4x teleconverter (2x OK too) |
| negative: | Quirky focus limiter (can be mis-adjusted without this fact being obvious) Under-damped manual focus ring Sliding focus ring cover isn't the best design Paint doesn't hold up to abuse "The Sticker" |
| comment: | Lots of people here love this lens, I love this lens too, but even so it has faults, especially compared to newer designs. First the picky stuff: I'm not a fan of the focus ring cover, it doesn't fully retract and the latch is not very positive, plus it doesn't actually seal dust out, just discourages it slightly. In terms of absolute chromatic aberration, this lens gets very close to being apochromatic, but doesn't quite make it there, as there are traces of all the chromatic artifacts present in many images, though very minor compared to non-APO optics (and less than many third party "LD/APO" designs). However these artifacts are usually only visible when pixel peeping; I recently printed a shot from this lens (shot w/ a900) at 20"x30" and even at that size you would be hard pressed to spot any color fringing. My example came to me in battered, but optically excellent condition, the biggest casualty of the heavy use it had received was the paint, which has been scraped, or flaked off in many places, revealing raw aluminum underneath... if the barrel metal had been etched, sandblasted, or primed before painting, I doubt that this would have been as big an issue. The standard Maxxum black finish also seems to hold up much better than the "G" white on this lens. Now the raves: As has been said many times before, this lens has a great balance of attributes that add up to a really versatile package. The reach is enough for close range nature shots (extended slightly with the excellent 1.4x TC), aperture is big enough for use in dawn/dusk, sharpness is excellent in the center even wide open, colors, contrast and flare are all well controlled and it hardly ever misses focus, even in poor light. Like several other top of the line Maxxum era lenses it renders a 3D quality to many images that isn't common to see until you get into medium format photography. This in combination with the harmonious color, contrast and bokeh make it an excellent portraiture lens as well, especially for those of us who aren't bold enough to get in close for those great street/people shots. The focus limiting system in this series of lenses is great, if used correctly. It allows you to create an adjustable limit between MFD *or* INF and a selected mid point, while I have never needed this, due to the fast focus traverse on the a900, it was probably a life saver when shooting with a film body that had just a few sensor points and slower screw drive. If you set it incorrectly you can lock the lens out of MFD or INF focus though... If you have an A-mount body, you should eventually get this lens! |
; 36MP| marco3099@freenet.de#45709 date: May-26-2021 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | SEL85f14 |
| price paid: | 600 |
| positive: | sharp handling hood Filtersize Wight |
| negative: | Focus Speed Manual Focus |
| comment: | I've been using the lens for about two weeks. It's small and light enough to always have with you. It's a shame that something is no longer built today. The lens cannot be compared with anything. it's like a giant mini-tele. |
| QuietOC#45700 date: May-7-2021 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 3.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Tokina AF 35-200 SD Sony DT 55-200 SAM Tamron 70-180 F2.8 VXD Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Sigma AF 70-200 F2.8 EX DG APO Quantaray 70-210 F2.8 Vivitar S1 70-210 F3.5 I & II Minolta AF 70-210 F3.5-4.5 Sony FE 70-200 F4 G OSS Canon EF 70-200 F4 L USM Minolta AF 70-210 F4 Tokina 80-200 AT-X Pro Vivitar 85-205 F3.8 Minolta AF 100-200 F4.5 Minolta AF 135 F2.8 Canon EF 135 F2.8 Softfocus Canon EF 200 F2.8 L USM Minolta AF 200 F2.8 APO G |
| price paid: | 400 USD (used) |
| positive: | Internal focus Maintains focal length Locking built-in hood |
| negative: | Alignment/variation Heavy CA Focus shift Plastic sticker on hood Warm color cast Focus noise Focus breathing Mild pincushion distortion Weight Peeling paint Awkward focus control Straight aperture blades No tripod foot Lack of Lens Compensation |
| comment: | I've been wanting to try higher end Minolta lenses and this one of the most highly regarded ones. I've been using the similar Canon EF 200 F2.8 L USM for the last year and have been fairly impressed with it. This Minolta cost me $100 more than my copy of the Canon. It looked to be in good shape with original caps and only a few small paint chips. "MAXXUM" is missing from the front trim so it was originally from a foreign market. "JAPAN" Unfortunately this copy had an alignment issue that effects both the center and the right side of images. I don't see any obvious damage that could have caused the misalignment. I tried an even nicer looking early copy that had better alignment, but still had a lot of color fringing. There also seems to be some focus shift, and unfortunately Sony hasn't implemented stopped down focusing for A-mount lenses. APO seems to be a empty marketing by Minolta along with the gold accents. It has much worse CA than the Canon L prime which causes significant degradation to image quality. The Canon is a later design with an additional lens element and is still being sold new. The Tamron 70-180 F2.8 VXD is much sharper at 180 mm. The built-in hood is the nicest one I've used except for that sticker on it. It locks in place, is flocked, and has a nice rubber bumper. Comparing directly with the Canon either the better hood and/or superior coatings gave better contrast in some backlit situations. The substantial hood may add considerable mass to the end of the lens. I would prefer a lighter lens with more durable finish. The sliding range limiter is an interesting design borrowed from the more expensive 300 F2.8. It also allows an infinity calibration, though you lose the calibration if you use the limiter for any other purpose. There are marks to indicate where infinity should be. The focus throw is short making manual focus difficult. The internal focus is very low resistance like the 135 F2.8. The aluminum focus ring cover might be protecting fragile gearing. That cover is somewhat poorly implemented. Strangely it doesn't retract fully but covers the front of the focus grip when opened and doesn't lock open at all. It does lock closed but not solidly like the hood. It does seem somewhat quieter focusing than the 300 F4. It doesn't seem any quicker to focus than the non-HS version. An overvalued but decent old prime very similar to the 135 F2.8 "Pocket Rocket." These may be better with other subjects where their high amount of chromatic aberration isn't so distracting. |
| GlassEye#45592 date: Sep-22-2020 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 70-200 f/2.8. |
| price paid: | 250 USD + Trade-in |
| positive: | Very sharp. Quick AF. Compact enough to carry around all day. Built-in lens hood that 'locks' when extended. Focus hold button. |
| negative: | Not SSM. Hood does not 'lock' in closed position. Manual focus is tricky, very sensitive. |
| comment: | I had the Tamron 70-200, but I was never happy with it. So I was able to trade it (+some cash) for this Mino 200. I'm glad I did. This lens is in a whole different league. Solid, all-metal build, so sharp! Very light and small for its focal length. Quick focus, but it is barely audible. |
| lassethomasson#44148 date: Oct-20-2018 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta AF 80-200/2.8 AF Sony FE 70 210/4 Beer Can Big Beer Can Contax 100-300 Contax 80-200 |
| price paid: | $400 |
| positive: | Sharpness Size and weight Build Colors Contrast Handling AF |
| negative: | Coatings are not up to modern standards. Some longitudinal CA. |
| comment: | Hype about legacy lenses should be taken with a lot of grains of salt. This is one of the exceptions. A true gem of a lens. Hard to understand that Sony didn't make a modern version, with updated coatings. The could charge like $2000 and no one would complain. It easily compares to modern lenses. As sharp from corner to corner from f/2.8 to f/8. A little less contrast in the far corners on f/2.8 but that is gone by f/4. Great for landscapes but it really shine for portraits with amazing sharpness and outstanding bokeh. AF is fast and precise and eye-AF works as it should on the A99II. It has some longitudinal CA on larger apertures, as expected from a fast tele, but it's still fairly well controlled. It's probably the price to pay for the amazing bokeh. But beware if you want to use it with the LA-EA4 adapter on FE mount. I tried it on the A7R3 and never got the AF to be reliable enough. |
| sarapata1#26535 date: Mar-27-2016 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 70-300mm USD Beercan Minolta 100mm F2 |
| price paid: | 670 EUR |
| positive: | sharp pleasant colors nice bokeh great build quick focusing focus limiter |
| negative: | some CA wide open |
| comment: | all the great stuff you have ever read about this lens is pure truth. period. my lens doesn`t have any white paint separation or paint chips |
| JimD#16333 date: Aug-10-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 28-135mm F4-4.5, Minolta 35-105mm F3.5-4.5, Minolta 100-200mm F4.5, Minolta 75-300mm F4.5-5.6, Sony 18-250 F3.5-6.3., Vivitar Series 1 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 |
| price paid: | R7000 (+/- $700) |
| positive: | Size, sharpness, ease of use. |
| negative: | I haven't found anything yet |
| comment: | First point: I haven't had it long, but I have used it in varied conditions: over water with high contrast, outdoor portrait, outdoor floral close-up, and indoors. Second point: this is my first venture into fixed length beyond 50mm, and all the comparison lenses are zooms- definitely comparing apples with oranges. Having said that, there are some decent lenses there, but the white lenses' IQ is noticeably better than most of them, and particularly the Vivitar, which shouldn't even be on the same page (except that it's also painted white!). Colours are Minolta, i.e. not much different to some of the other lenses, but it's the sharpness that sets it apart. CA has been raised by some reviewers, but I couldn't elicit any fringing on a series of yacht shots which certainly would have given me some purple edges on the 75-300mm, and maybe even on my Sony 18-250mm. Talking of which, I'm really going to miss that range, but I have a feeling that I'm going to have to be a lot more active; the Sony will be giving up quite a lot of camera time to the new kid (OK, the old kid) on the block! I don't know if I am lucky, but while my copy has certainly been used quite a bit and shows some wear- a few small scuffs, and some shiny aluminium showing, particularly on the chequered hood grip, there is no sign of the flaking or peeling that other reviewers have experienced. One final comment: I thought I had cured my lens lust, but it was only in remission. It is very rare to find one of these on auction here in SA, so I had to jump in. But how do you hide a white lens from your wife? |
| Rex#12167 date: Mar-8-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 70-200G / 70-400G / 300G SSM |
| price paid: | 700 euro |
| positive: | Very compact light lens. AF speed as fast as the 300G SSM. Compatible with teleconverters 1.4X & 2.0X. Compatible with AF Range on A77II & A99 Lens hood permanently on lens and very easy to slide back for storage. I wish they could build also the new lens hood like. this |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | I wish Sony could build this lens again with SSM but then we will complain about the price 2500~3000 euro I think. This lens on A77II is AF speed demon. You can add the 1.4X & 2.0X teleconverter with little loss of image quality This lens is a bargain for what you pay and what you get |
| Ovas#12015 date: Nov-1-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | MINOLTA 100-200 f4.5. |
| price paid: | 650$ |
| positive: | tack sharp all over. |
| negative: | nothing |
| comment: | This is an incredable sharp and good lens. Proffesional quality and gives stunning picktures with the A99. R E C O M M E N D E D |
| bull drinkwater#11972 date: Sep-5-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | my only other "G" lens, the 70-200mm apo "G" hs |
| price paid: | $1200.00 usd |
| positive: | sharp x10, light, handy, sharp, good color, |
| negative: | i'd have to be an ingrate and a nitpicker to find anything negative. |
| comment: | with my a-550,a850, and even my a-200 i'm in fat city even on my a-200 with the 1.4x or 2.0x tc it will blow you away. it proves that the glass is the thing.. |
| bobbyg50#11895 date: Jul-8-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta Macro 50 RS Tamron 90 Macro Big Beercan |
| price paid: | 885 USD |
| positive: | Minolta colors High Speed Sharp |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | My first G lens. I am simply amazed at the quality I am getting straight from my A900. This lens balances well on my camera and has above average speed. High recommended. |
| waldo_posth#11806 date: May-3-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony CZ Planar 85mm F1.4 ZA Sony CZ Sonnar 135mm F1.8 ZA Contax CZ Tele-Tessar 200mm F4 Minolta AF 300mm F4 APO HS |
| price paid: | Euro 800 (mint) |
| positive: | - exceptional flare control - sharpness - color (Minolta colors!) - AF speed - rather lightweight |
| negative: | - the lens hood mechanism (fixed/screw on) is a bit awkward |
| comment: | This is an exceptional lens. In terms of sharpness (from F/2,8 on), AF speed and color (Minolta colors!) there is still no other prime that is better at this focal length. I am particularly impressed by the lens' ability to control flare. It shows only very little CA wide open. There is a Minolta APO tele converter 1,4x that makes it a 280mm lens - and this combo provides the same level of IQ (whereas the Minolta APO tele converter 2x has to be used very carefully to achieve optimal results). Since it is rather lightweight I deem it to be the best possible tele lens (plus converters) to supplement a standard zoom and an UWA on a hiking trip. |
| Mark_k#11768 date: Apr-15-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 70-200f2.8, Canon 200f2.8 |
| price paid: | 1000 |
| positive: | Sharpness. light weight |
| negative: | Noisy focusing, loosen back pack |
| comment: | The sharpest lens ever until I have two ZA prime lenses |
| berlin steve#11762 date: Apr-13-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Nearest I have would be 70-210 Beercan or 80-400 Tokina ATX |
| price paid: | a good price =o) |
| positive: | +Sharp +Fast Focusing +Looks good on all camera bodies +IQ |
| negative: | -Spare parts hard to find- try not to break it, or it will be an expensive brick! -Limited use due fixed focal length -So that forces you to think about G zooms -And lens lust becomes G-Lust... even more expensive! |
| comment: | Fast and Sharp- you'll be judging just about all lenses you try out with the IQ this can pull, and with a speed that is hard to top on screw focus lenses. This has got to be one of the best lenses of all time. Mine has tatty barrel. Forget cosmetics, you'd be hard pushed to find a used one that hasn't got flaky paint. I am generally very happy with the two zooms I have that cover the 200mm length. But they cannot produce 3D pop shot after shot. In fact, I only have two lenses which give 3D pop almost effortlessly. The excellent 135mm 2.8, and this. Shooting a rugby game yesterday using 10 shot bursts on the A77, and leaving camera on continuous focus, I was surprised how many in focus shots there were. From 200 shots, I only had a handful that were unusable photos. I don't think the beercan or the 80-400 could have kept up with the action. I bought mine for a great price! The usual going rate is a bit steep if you'd only use 200mm occassionally. For a little more money you can get a 70 or 80-200mm G zooms. But if 200mm is your focal length, this is the dogs b*ll*cks. Even with a Kenko 1.4 pro 300 TC added, this is still an amazing beast! I just don't understand why Sony don't make one. Now I want more G glass! |
| Capetown#11618 date: Jan-17-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 70-200 G SSM (exellent copy) |
| price paid: | 700 Euro |
| positive: | Excellent build quality Smaller than expected and light Outstanding Resolution from f2.8-f11 Very nice Bokeh Minolta liquid colors Fast AF Teleconverter compatibel |
| negative: | Negative? |
| comment: | I use the Sony 70-200 G for four years. Most of the photos are taken in the 200 mm focal lengh. My personal opinion is that the Sony 70-200 G is to heavy to carry around all the time. I sold the Sony and go for the Minolta 200 G HS. A friend of mine ask me ...are you nuts? You switch from a modern lens to a 25 years old prime without SSM and modern coatings? The Minolta 200 G HS is mutch smaller and lighter than the Sony. The optical performance is outstanding in every point. The aperture f2.8 or f8.0 have an influence, but not in case of sharpness, it's only the deep of field :-) The colors are so rich and typical Minolta and the bokeh is a dream! This lens is ready for the next generation of A-Mount sensors 36 mp without AA filter or 50mp... A real Masterpiece from Minolta and one of the best lenses ever produced! Edit 2019: Todays EBAY Prices are 500-700 Euros. |
| Camprooster#11529 date: Dec-7-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tokina 17mm f3.5 AT-X Pro Minolta 35mm f2 Sony CZ 50mm f1.4 Planar Minolta 85mm f1.4 RS Minolta 100mm f2.8 Sony CZ 135mm f1.8 Sonnar T Minolta 400mm f4.5 HS |
| price paid: | 975.00 |
| positive: | Sharp, Color, Bokeh, very user friendly |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | Light, Sharp and fast with excellent color and bokeh, works perfect with 1.4 apo tele converter if needed, with its range, speed and quality it makes it great for low light indoor events or for larger wildlife photos outdoors, I also use as a portrait lens at 15 to 20 feet. (Its amazing what this lens does for just $1,000.00) |
| JakobProgsch#11222 date: Jun-30-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 70-200/2.8 G SSM |
| price paid: | 450 CHF (used) |
| positive: | sharp reasonably sized still good quality with 2x converter built in hood |
| negative: | lens hood doesn't lock in retracted position |
| comment: | A great lens which I often take over the 70-200 for its more compact size. |
| gooseb#11185 date: Jun-9-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 2.8 300mm APO Minolta 1.4 85mm G Minolta 4 70-210mm |
| price paid: | 1000 USD MINT |
| positive: | Manual focus limiter Sharpest lens Built in Hood BOKEH, BOKEH, BOKEH |
| negative: | White in color |
| comment: | Did I say this was a sharp lens...WOW! Doesn't disapoint in portraits and indoor sports. Rocket fast focusing when you spent time to set the manual limiter. I wish all lenses had manual limiters!!! This lens is built like a TANK! |
| joestealthmode#10814 date: Jan-4-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta Beercan 70-210 f/4 Sony 85mm f/1.4 ZA Sony 300mm f/4.5-5.6 G SSM |
| price paid: | 1100 USD (used) |
| positive: | Smaller than expected Built-in lens hood Fast focus Built in 1989! |
| negative: | Vignette apparent from f/2.8-f/4 Back-focus issues Chromatic Aberration wide open through f/4 |
| comment: | I got this lens on a whim as it was one I have heard a lot about and most of the reviews are positive. I have used this lens on the A99, A77, and A900. Mounted on all three, this lens just looks like it belongs. It is smaller than I expected it to be. with the built-in hood retracted, it is only about 2 inches longer than my 85mm f/1.4 ZA fully-extended. With the hood on, it is only about an inch longer than the 85mm f/1.4 ZA with its hood on. The barrel of the 200mm lens is skinnier until it reaches the hood. Right off the bat I could tell my copy backfocused on the A99. It was difficult to calibrate but I was able to get much closer after a -10 AF Micro Adjustment. I found I get better results on my A99 if I use DMF with this lens, and peaking cranks on when it releases focus, so I don't really see an issue with any back-focusing. This copy has a heavy, yet pleasing vignette at f/2.8 and it is apparent through f/4 and disappears completely at f/5.6. The hood does not appear to help or hinder the vignette. The color reproduction is nothing short of outstanding and lives up to the hype. Wide open, this lens is fairly sharp but really shines at f/4 and beyond. This lens has CA issues wide open and through f/4 which is unrivaled by any of the lenses I have used so far in high contrast situations. Most of the time the CA is fixable using Lightroom, but the largest purple band I've experienced to date. A polarizer seems to help in the situations I experience CA in, but it may be placebo. The focus ring is hidden with a little door on the side panel, which is different. On the A77 the lens has a good reach and the vignette isn't as apparent at f/2.8 and clears up around f/3.5. On the A900, the lens just works. Nothing special and over the top. |
| jonatanmelin#10014 date: Mar-9-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 70-200 2,8 APO Tamron 70-200 2,8 Minolta 80-200 HS APO G Zeiss 135 Sonnar Minolta 85 1,4 GD |
| price paid: | 700 Euro |
| positive: | Small, Light, SHARP, Contrast, COLOUR fast Af with limiter |
| negative: | Long CA @ f/2,8 |
| comment: | Really nice little gem 8) Small and light for it´s FL. And it really is as sharp as u could ever wish for. It equals to the Zeiss 135 1,8 in pure resolution! One drawback though, and that is the long CA thats pretty pronounced at larger apertures (2,8-4) and some loss of contrast in some situations. That´s nitpicking though, because it´s no big deal to fix it with some PP afterwards. Have´nt tryed it with any of the dedicated TC´s, but it´s suposed to corperate pretty nice with the Minota 1,4 TC i´ve heard 8) There´s lot of lenses out there that for sure is compareable in terms of sharpnes etc, but i cant imagine there´s lots that can compete in the same size-class! And come on, the lens is about 25 years old!!! And it really is tiny! And small and light and sharp and white and good and ABSOLUTELY AMAZING!!! Maybe it could cross my mind to trade it for a Sony 70-200 if i could have one fore the same money, but i have´nt tried the Sony yet so i really cant tell if it would be worth it.... The Sony have the benefit to be a lot more flexible with shorter MFD and offcorse the zoomability... But for now it´s the absolutely best 200mm lens i´ve tried to date! The above mentioned zoomlenses have not been nearly as sharp at 200! |
| lifeispixels#9960 date: Feb-21-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 1200 USD used, mint |
| positive: | - Perfect lens. No need to adjust anything in post processing. - sharp at f2.8. Breathtaking at f4. - focus is very accurate, although not as speed demon as SSM but very close |
| negative: | - strong CA at f2.8 since it's not designed for digital - hood does not lock when not extended in use position. - hard to find one in mint condition without paint chips, scratches. |
| comment: | Absolutely the king of 200mm! When I first tried this lens, I thought it's not so sharp at f2.8 but I was wrong! My copy actually back focuses quite a lot and need -10 micro adjustment in the cameras. So check your copy carefully before concluding that it's not sharp. The lens reaches breathtaking level when stopped down to f4. I'm always stunned when I pixel peep at f4. I can clearly see every hair and pore on the model's skin. Every imperfection is brutally shown by its extreme sharpness and contrast. Works particularly well with flash. Skin tone it delivers is amazing and I couldn't believe this is from a 20 years old lens! CA can be strong in some situations at f2.8 but completely gone at f4. Vignette is also strong wide open. The colors of this lens are the particular reason I chose over the CZ 135 f1.8 ZA. It's a classic Minolta style. Although the tones are not as warm as Minolta 100 f2. Both lens complement each other very well and deliver consistent results. I paired this lens with Sony 1.4x and 2.0x APO converters and surprised how quick the lens can focus at with 1.4x. With 2.0x, it's respectfully quick for 400mm. It can hunt in some situation so using the focus limiter knob together with 2.0x is recommended. With TCs, I need to stop down a few stops and extremely pleased by the resolution it can deliver. My copy is completely mint and no sign of wear on the white paint. I'm sure if one is not too rough, the paint's going to be fine. Truly the greatest/ most enjoyable to use of all my Minolta AF arsenals. Followed distantly by the Minolta 100f2. I will never sell this one no matter how much offered. See my photos with Minolta 200mm f2.8 APO G HS on my Flickr collection at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lifeispixels/collections/72157628204412995/ |
| Kilkry#9608 date: Nov-18-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Beercan (same focal length) |
| price paid: | 700e incl. shipping |
| positive: | +Sharp at f/2.8 +Relatively small and portable +Very quick AF +Well built (minus the paint) +Built-in fold-down hood is very practical |
| negative: | -Focus isn't always spot on(could be that it isn't on entirely friendly terms with my A580) -Some purple fringing at f/2.8 -White paint is pretty and chips easily |
| comment: | Generally: It looks neat, it's portable, when it focuses right* it produces sharpness at f/2.8 equal to the beercan (at 200mm) at f/8. I have found no central sharpness increase by stopping down, though purple fringing tends to go away. Besides the sharpness the bokeh is good, as is the whole general rendition. With TCs: With the Minolta original 1.4x tc there is no significant drop in AF speed, and image quality at f/5.6 (max f/4) is very good, but of course the bokeh is not as good as at f/2.8. Using the original 2.0x tc the AF is, unless presented with a very contrasty target, pretty hopeless(with the A580). Still, images at 100% are better than those from the 1.4x tc upscaled to equal size. Flare..I don't know, I usually don't mind flare so much. *Focus speed is streets ahead of the beercan but not always accurate. It's not a consistant front- or backfocus issue and it doesn't appear to matter if the target is a bird in flight or a brick wall(gods know the beercan has little chance to track BIF). I think it isn't anything to do with this particular specimen, but rather just like Munger says about the 300 f/4 == 'Slightly faster than the Sony 70-400 but not quite as accurate' == 22 year old lens design. Plus, the previous owner is a respected dyxum member who didn't mention having any issues with it, and I seldom express my self in a positive way if I don't have to :P Overall though, I definitely like it. |
| glefebvre#9514 date: Oct-20-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 70-200 f/2.8 SSM Min 75-300 - big bear can CZ 135 f/1.8 Sig 170-500 |
| price paid: | 899 USD (new) |
| positive: | Compact, light, fast focusing, sharp |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | This is a great lens. Compact, light and fast focusing on all of the film and digital cameras that I have. Focusing is very accurate = more keeps. Very sharp lens even wide open. Stop it down to f/5.6 or f/8 and it's tack sharp. Great focus limiter which helps this lens focus even faster. Has a built in hood so you'll never loose it. Works very well with 1.4x and 2.0x Min TC and retain AF with both TC's. It has the normal "Minolta colors" which I find to be more pleasing then the colors of the CZ 135 but about the same as the Min 70-200 SSM. This is a great complement to my Min 300 f/4 and Min 400 f/4.5 lenses. This is a keeper, one lens I will never get part with. |
| fhaizal#8903 date: Apr-10-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 70-300ssmG |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Sharp |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | The best lens from Minolta |
| Depth of Field#8841 date: Mar-28-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Excellent sharpness. Great minolta colors Fast focussing on the A700 Light |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | Sold my sony 70-200 and bought this little baby. Sharpness is a little better than the sony and easier to carry around all day because of the weight. Problem is that i have do more footwork. Have no problems with the paint, there are only a few marks on it. Now i have try to find a 1.4 converter or the 2.0. This one stays. |
| N.Terrell#8579 date: Jan-27-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 300 Can |
| positive: | Everything |
| negative: | Nothing |
| comment: | This lens made even me the bonehead into a brilliant photographer. This is a lens unmatched by anything else I have ever used. A travesty to have sold it off, but my wedding was more important. |
| Apocalypse_later#8051 date: Oct-5-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 70-300G Tokina 28-80 2.8 Tamron 35-105 2.8 Sony 50 1.4 Minolta 135 2.8 Tamron 17-50 2.8 Beercan |
| price paid: | 500€ |
| positive: | Very good AF, great sharpness, great build. Light and small. Nice bokeh. Very good with tc 1.4x and even 2x. |
| negative: | You can´t buy it new and it´snt very cheap usually. Hood can´t be locked when retracted. Weak white paint. Purple fringing at 2.8 in thin objects with hard back light. |
| comment: | Fantastic lens, great with teleconverters, great sharpness, good bokeh, build, AF, flare control... Great. My best lens, really a "black leg" as we say in Spain. |
| dumbasadoorknob#7923 date: Sep-2-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 70300G Min 70-210/4 Min 100-400 |
| price paid: | usd 840 used |
| positive: | Perfect clarity Minolta colors Light Small |
| negative: | Poor white paint Funny focus cover |
| comment: | This is a wonderful lens, and makes a really fine combination with a 1.4x TC too. It is "sharp" -- meaning it focusses perfectly, and the image has clearly defined edges -- but it also produces excellent background blur, three dimensional subjects and a soft feeling in a living subject that is tangible. I keep opening the focus cover while holding the lens, which is annoyingly bad design. My specimen came with the really annoying flaking white paint condition -- so I carefully scraped the white paint off with a wooden spatula, and then painted the resulting grey and silver monstrosity black --and it is a far nicer lens to carry than the white one! Try it, you'll like it. The white paint issue is a build defect. The hood is really effective, and the lens is a tidy size and weight. I'll never part with it, and enjoy every image it produces -- but I now like my "new" and black 100-400 as much. In Southern California, the slowness of the zoom is not much of a disadvantage. But still the 200/2.8 is better for really valuable pictures that one doesn't want to leave behind. And with the size of the A900 image, cropping the 200/2.8 is always an option. |
| Bahudda#7760 date: Jul-30-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Zeiss - 135mm f1.8 ZA Min - 100mm f2.0 Can - 200mm f2.8 L Min - 35mm f2.0 Sony - 35mm f1.4 G Sony - 50mm f1.4 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Light weight, sharp, color and contrast |
| negative: | Didn't get one sooner |
| comment: | This lens takes off where the 100f2 stops. It is a true contender to the Zeiss 135f1.8. It renders an image much like the 100f2 and has the richness of color of the 35f2. It is easily as sharp as the Canon 200f2.8L. The bokeh from this lens is smooth and buttery yet richer in color than the 135ZA. This lens has a shorter MFD than its Canon equivalent. It also handles CA better wide open. I held on to my Canon gear because of the 200L and now I can move on with no regrets due to the 200G. If you are into prime lenses and need a clean fast and wonderful 200mm then I recommend this lens without reservations. PS - Thanks hooni. |
| vutrungphong#7721 date: Jul-24-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 70-200G Min 80-200G CZ16-80 Beercan Min 50 1,7 |
| price paid: | 775euro used |
| positive: | -Sharpness: super, sharp wide open. (sharper than 70-200G) -bokeh: butter creamy -Contrast: super -Color saturation : super -Weight: when you compare this with a 80-200G or 70-200G, it 's a biiigggg difference. Hand-hold is sooooo pleasing. -Build: you know this lens would serve you, your son, and your grandson. This lens match so well with the 1,4x and 2x dedicated converter that I forget about the 70-400G. |
| negative: | -Purple Fringing at F2,8 when it comes to extrem situation (black text on white background in sunny day) -noisy, everyone hears you focusing. - the paint fall out easily |
| comment: | I own this lens 2-3 years. Sold it, and then buy it again. I do lots of wildlife photos. Tried it with Min TC 1,4x and 2x, I'm suprised with the results, especially with the 1,4x on: the quality stay the same as with out. So with this combo I would give up the flexibility of the 70-400. With this choice, I have actually an amazing 200G f2,8, a super 300G f4, and a so-so-ok 400 f5,6. |
rating summary
- total reviews: 81
- sharpness: 4.96
- color: 4.98
- build: 4.80
- distortion: 4.95
- flare control: 4.88
- overall: 4.91
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login