Douglas F Watt
Senior Member
From several sources including Dyxum, and M Karlsen, there are 3 versions of the Minolta 600mm/4.0:
o 1st APO version: slow auto focus, no AF stop button.
o 2nd APO version: fast auto focus, no AF stop button.
o The third APO HS/G – Series version: fast auto focus, AF stop button and ‘High Speed AF APO 600mm' decal. Not sure if the decal is only on the 3rd version or shared across versions 2/3.
I was fortunate to get an optically mint and cosmetically excellent 3rd version (APO HS G) off of EvilBay for modest money, and it is the subject of my review.
The true 'Bigma' with high value Opteka gimbal head (very similar to Wimberly for a lot less $) to create high-value super telephoto for wildlife shooting for total cost out of pocket for under $5K, including lens, tripod and head. Compare to $11-13K setups with newer Canikon or Sony 500-600 f4 SSM lenses (body not included in price). No real drop in image quality though despite the much lower costs.
Pros:
1) Sharpness. Sharp wide open, very, very sharp stopped down to f5+. Tack sharp at 5.6.
2) Incredible reach on APS-C, especially with 1.4 TC - essentially a small telescope, equivalent to 1260 mm on full frame, 900 mm without 1.4 TC.
3) Color and contrast are also superb, especially if stopped down just a bit
4) Value for the money – if you can put up with this somewhat noisy and slightly slower autofocus compared to newer SSM lenses from CaNikon and Sony, this lens delivers quite amazing value.
5) Built like a tank – probably would withstand a direct hit from a cruise missile.
6) Great focus limiter and focus lock buttons conveniently placed. Focus limiting really makes AF snappy, really mitigating one downside of older screw drive tech.
7) Creamy smooth bokeh at 4-5.6 (where you probably will do most of your shooting) with a razor thin depth of field, if that's what you're looking for, at f4. Sharper if stopped down just a bit.
8) Cachet value? Only if you value your image more than your back? If you can stretch for this, you will have instant street cred, even if you don't know the front end from the back end
9) With proper gimbal head, can be really manipulated easily despite its heft, and becomes a joy to aim.
Cons:
1) Since it's built like a tank, it weighs like one too. 12.5 lbs worth of back-breaking weight (and that doesn't include the hefty tripod and head you will need to handle the beast properly). Don't even think about skipping on the head or tripod - you will regret every penny you saved, and you must have a gimbal head. Also, porters, servants, and masochistic spouses/SOs become high value propositions for owners of this magnificent optic. Better yet, get one first before buying the lens .
2) Some vulnerability to chromatic aberrations especially wide open on bright edges esp, and particularly compared with newer lenses that have newer coatings.
3) noisy autofocus system that can hunt considerably, making focus limiting essential – and between the massive weight and the older autofocus system, birds in flight are a real challenge, but not undo-able. My technique may be the main problem!
4) Given the weight, a special gimbal type tripod head is essentially mandated as you don't want to risk your lens, or for that matter, your orthopedic health. I recommend the Opteka (essentially a clone of the $600 Wimberly unit - got one used on Amazon for $115).
5) Cost, and of course, directly related to that, ultra low WAF (wife acceptance factor). After all, you are spending more $ on a lens than you did on your first, second and possibly third vehicles for Pete's sake!!
Commentary/User Report:
This lens is unique, and although I'm just starting to use it, I can now more fully appreciate many of the thoughtful comments on Dyxum from other users of this magnificent optic. There's really nothing like it in the Sony Alpha mount world, and that includes even the Ferrari of Sony lenses, the $13K 500mm f4 SSM G. They are about equally sharp (by report), while the $13k Sony is faster focusing and a large 5 lbs lighter, but it's more than twice and almost three times the money, while the Minolta has just a bit more reach. We all agree there is almost no such thing as too much reach for those of us shooting wildlife. So optically, it's a draw (slightly more reach in the 600 f4 against better resistance to CA/flare for the 500 f4), but in terms of value for the $, it's no contest, unless the 5 lbs saved is worth the $8K to you.
If you're a wildlife photography junkie (that's me), and you've tried to get by with cheaper zoom lenses (including the high value Tamron 150-600), or even Sony's very good 70-400 G2 SSM, this lens will be a true revelation (both in positive as well as negative ways) the first time you shoot with something like this. It requires a lot more dedication to the craft and to your setup, and handholding beyond a very brief period is really not feasible (unless you are a weightlifter). In fact if you try to support the weight of the lens from the camera itself, you'll break your mount in half in less than 2 seconds. You have to be very careful even unpacking this lens because it's so heavy, and you better not be in a rush while you're shooting or while you're using it, or while you're setting it up, because rushing leads to mistakes and those lead to the lens going to ground, and corresponding amounts of massive grief. And while the lens is clearly a beast to transport, once you've shot wildlife with something like this you can never go back to slow zoom lenses, or anything less than this level of truly professional quality.
Unfortunately, these lenses are probably going to become very hard to get, but if there is an upside to the A Mount-is-Dead chatter, it may be that this talk is depressing the resale value and demand for these magnificent optics. There is a limited and indeed probably declining supply of them, and one in excellent condition is still worth approximately $5K (I was fortunate to get mine for significantly less, but that was a steal/deal). While this sounds like a backbreaking amount of money to go with the backbreaking weight, consider that the equivalent in the Nikon universe is twice that money ($9000), while Canon's equivalent 600 mm F4 is more than twice that ($11,000). Admittedly those lenses have SSM and newer coatings, but for the slight increase in vulnerability to flare and chromatic aberration while putting up with a screw drive AF (it's actually fairly fast and quite accurate), you get a roughly 50% or more cost-reduction. Seems like a good deal to me.
After shooting wildlife with compromise solutions, and then stepping up to this lens (the true 'Bigma' with all due respect to Sigma's puny girlie man 50-500 ), you can never go back. It's already become my favorite lens, and the best purchase in DP I've ever made. If you're serious about wildlife photography, you owe it to yourself to shoot with a lens like this. Buy one if you get the chance and can afford it.
You won't regret it, and you may finally see what you've been missing.
--
DFW
o 1st APO version: slow auto focus, no AF stop button.
o 2nd APO version: fast auto focus, no AF stop button.
o The third APO HS/G – Series version: fast auto focus, AF stop button and ‘High Speed AF APO 600mm' decal. Not sure if the decal is only on the 3rd version or shared across versions 2/3.
I was fortunate to get an optically mint and cosmetically excellent 3rd version (APO HS G) off of EvilBay for modest money, and it is the subject of my review.
The true 'Bigma' with high value Opteka gimbal head (very similar to Wimberly for a lot less $) to create high-value super telephoto for wildlife shooting for total cost out of pocket for under $5K, including lens, tripod and head. Compare to $11-13K setups with newer Canikon or Sony 500-600 f4 SSM lenses (body not included in price). No real drop in image quality though despite the much lower costs.
Pros:
1) Sharpness. Sharp wide open, very, very sharp stopped down to f5+. Tack sharp at 5.6.
2) Incredible reach on APS-C, especially with 1.4 TC - essentially a small telescope, equivalent to 1260 mm on full frame, 900 mm without 1.4 TC.
3) Color and contrast are also superb, especially if stopped down just a bit
4) Value for the money – if you can put up with this somewhat noisy and slightly slower autofocus compared to newer SSM lenses from CaNikon and Sony, this lens delivers quite amazing value.
5) Built like a tank – probably would withstand a direct hit from a cruise missile.
6) Great focus limiter and focus lock buttons conveniently placed. Focus limiting really makes AF snappy, really mitigating one downside of older screw drive tech.
7) Creamy smooth bokeh at 4-5.6 (where you probably will do most of your shooting) with a razor thin depth of field, if that's what you're looking for, at f4. Sharper if stopped down just a bit.
8) Cachet value? Only if you value your image more than your back? If you can stretch for this, you will have instant street cred, even if you don't know the front end from the back end
9) With proper gimbal head, can be really manipulated easily despite its heft, and becomes a joy to aim.
Cons:
1) Since it's built like a tank, it weighs like one too. 12.5 lbs worth of back-breaking weight (and that doesn't include the hefty tripod and head you will need to handle the beast properly). Don't even think about skipping on the head or tripod - you will regret every penny you saved, and you must have a gimbal head. Also, porters, servants, and masochistic spouses/SOs become high value propositions for owners of this magnificent optic. Better yet, get one first before buying the lens
.2) Some vulnerability to chromatic aberrations especially wide open on bright edges esp, and particularly compared with newer lenses that have newer coatings.
3) noisy autofocus system that can hunt considerably, making focus limiting essential – and between the massive weight and the older autofocus system, birds in flight are a real challenge, but not undo-able. My technique may be the main problem!
4) Given the weight, a special gimbal type tripod head is essentially mandated as you don't want to risk your lens, or for that matter, your orthopedic health. I recommend the Opteka (essentially a clone of the $600 Wimberly unit - got one used on Amazon for $115).
5) Cost, and of course, directly related to that, ultra low WAF (wife acceptance factor). After all, you are spending more $ on a lens than you did on your first, second and possibly third vehicles for Pete's sake!!
Commentary/User Report:
This lens is unique, and although I'm just starting to use it, I can now more fully appreciate many of the thoughtful comments on Dyxum from other users of this magnificent optic. There's really nothing like it in the Sony Alpha mount world, and that includes even the Ferrari of Sony lenses, the $13K 500mm f4 SSM G. They are about equally sharp (by report), while the $13k Sony is faster focusing and a large 5 lbs lighter, but it's more than twice and almost three times the money, while the Minolta has just a bit more reach. We all agree there is almost no such thing as too much reach for those of us shooting wildlife. So optically, it's a draw (slightly more reach in the 600 f4 against better resistance to CA/flare for the 500 f4), but in terms of value for the $, it's no contest, unless the 5 lbs saved is worth the $8K to you.
If you're a wildlife photography junkie (that's me), and you've tried to get by with cheaper zoom lenses (including the high value Tamron 150-600), or even Sony's very good 70-400 G2 SSM, this lens will be a true revelation (both in positive as well as negative ways) the first time you shoot with something like this. It requires a lot more dedication to the craft and to your setup, and handholding beyond a very brief period is really not feasible (unless you are a weightlifter). In fact if you try to support the weight of the lens from the camera itself, you'll break your mount in half in less than 2 seconds. You have to be very careful even unpacking this lens because it's so heavy, and you better not be in a rush while you're shooting or while you're using it, or while you're setting it up, because rushing leads to mistakes and those lead to the lens going to ground, and corresponding amounts of massive grief. And while the lens is clearly a beast to transport, once you've shot wildlife with something like this you can never go back to slow zoom lenses, or anything less than this level of truly professional quality.
Unfortunately, these lenses are probably going to become very hard to get, but if there is an upside to the A Mount-is-Dead chatter, it may be that this talk is depressing the resale value and demand for these magnificent optics. There is a limited and indeed probably declining supply of them, and one in excellent condition is still worth approximately $5K (I was fortunate to get mine for significantly less, but that was a steal/deal). While this sounds like a backbreaking amount of money to go with the backbreaking weight, consider that the equivalent in the Nikon universe is twice that money ($9000), while Canon's equivalent 600 mm F4 is more than twice that ($11,000). Admittedly those lenses have SSM and newer coatings, but for the slight increase in vulnerability to flare and chromatic aberration while putting up with a screw drive AF (it's actually fairly fast and quite accurate), you get a roughly 50% or more cost-reduction. Seems like a good deal to me.
After shooting wildlife with compromise solutions, and then stepping up to this lens (the true 'Bigma' with all due respect to Sigma's puny girlie man 50-500
), you can never go back. It's already become my favorite lens, and the best purchase in DP I've ever made. If you're serious about wildlife photography, you owe it to yourself to shoot with a lens like this. Buy one if you get the chance and can afford it.You won't regret it, and you may finally see what you've been missing.
--
DFW
Last edited:
