Minolta AF 80-200mm F2.8 APO A-mount lens review by QuietOC

reviewer#45712 date: Jun-2-2021
sharpness: 4
color: 4
build: 4
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I have experience with this lens
compared to:Tamron 28-200 RXD
Tokina AF 35-200 SD
Minolta MD 50-135 F3.5
Sigma 50-150 F2.8 EX DC HSM II
Sony DT 55-200 SAM
Vivitar 70-150 F3.8
Tamron 70-180 F2.8 VXD
Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX DG OS HSM
Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX DG APO
Sony FE 70-200 F4 G OSS
Canon EF 70-200 F4 L USM
Vivitar S1 70-210 F3.5 I & II
Minolta AF 70-210 F4
Minolta AF 70-210 F3.5-4.5
Tokina 80-200 F2.8 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
Minolta AF 200 F2.8 HS APO G
price paid:249 USD (used)
Internal zoom
Corner performance
Blunt, heavy weapon
negative:Size and weight
Extending/rotating front focus
Plastic focus ring
Non-removable tripod foot
1.8 meter minimum focus
comment:This was an eBay auction win and came with an Sigma 1.4X teleconverter. This was worn, dirty copy in poor condition. At least the glass was clear. Somehow the gold accent was completely missing from the groove ahead of the focus control. The white printing on the barrel was worn off in many spots. The metal barrel of the hood was bent and its edge very rough. The zoom and focus mechanisms were both stiff and uneven. I didn't feel like taking a risk using it as an AF lens and returned it. "JAPAN"

The hood bayonet doesn't extend or rotate, so the lens can seem like an internal focus design with the hood installed. This example came with an aluminum barreled hood like the other early telephoto zooms. The hood barrel was dented and the edge torn up.

The rough zoom and focus throws were combined with increasingly poor alignment at the long end of the zoom range. I suspect a less worn example would be better optically. Only considering this example I would have to rate the build rating as a 2. I will assume this particular copy is an outlier and give a 3 rating. It is not clear what this copy had to endure. Others may overestimate the build quality based on better cared for examples.

I am happy to have tried this lens, even with such a poor example. I am also happy to have a much lighter modern alternative that may or may not hold up as well.

rating summary

lens image
  • total reviews: 44
  • sharpness: 4.85
  • color: 4.89
  • build: 4.86
  • distortion: 4.82
  • flare control: 4.55
  • overall: 4.79
Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer
In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania